Ti/Se by Jung

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Ti/Se by Jung

Post by Erbse on Sat Feb 11, 2012 5:38 am

The Introverted Thinking Type

Just as Darwin might possibly represent the normal extraverted thinking type, so we might point to Kant as a counter-example of the normal introverted thinking type. The former speaks with facts; the latter appeals to the subjective factor. Darwin ranges over the wide fields of objective facts, while Kant restricts himself to a critique of knowledge in general. But suppose a Cuvier be contrasted with a Nietzsche: the antithesis becomes even sharper.

The introverted thinking type is characterized by a priority of the thinking I have just described. Like his [p. 485] extraverted parallel, he is decisively influenced by ideas; these, however, have their origin, not in the objective data but in the subjective foundation. Like the extravert, he too will follow his ideas, but in the reverse direction: inwardly not outwardly. Intensity is his aim, not extensity. In these fundamental characters he differs markedly, indeed quite unmistakably from his extraverted parallel. Like every introverted type, he is almost completely lacking in that which distinguishes his counter type, namely, the intensive relatedness to the object. In the case of a human object, the man has a distinct feeling that he matters only in a negative way, i.e., in milder instances he is merely conscious of being superfluous, but with a more extreme type he feels himself warded off as something definitely disturbing. This negative relation to the object-indifference, and even aversion-characterizes every introvert; it also makes a description of the introverted type in general extremely difficult. With him, everything tends to disappear and get concealed. His judgment appears cold, obstinate, arbitrary, and inconsiderate, simply because he is related less to the object than the subject. One can feel nothing in it that might possibly confer a higher value upon the object; it always seems to go beyond the object, leaving behind it a flavour of a certain subjective superiority. Courtesy, amiability, and friendliness may be present, but often with a particular quality suggesting a certain uneasiness, which betrays an ulterior aim, namely, the disarming of an opponent, who must at all costs be pacified and set at ease lest he prove a disturbing- element. In no sense, of course, is he an opponent, but, if at all sensitive, he will feel somewhat repelled, perhaps even depreciated. Invariably the object has to submit to a certain neglect; in worse cases it is even surrounded with quite unnecessary measures of precaution. Thus it happens that this type tends to [p. 486]

disappear behind a cloud of misunderstanding, which only thickens the more he attempts to assume, by way of compensation and with the help of his inferior functions, a certain mask of urbanity, which often presents a most vivid contrast to his real nature. Although in the extension of his world of ideas he shrinks from no risk, however daring, and never even considers the possibility that such a world might also be dangerous, revolutionary, heretical, and wounding to feeling, he is none the less a prey to the liveliest anxiety, should it ever chance to become objectively real. That goes against the grain. When the time comes for him to transplant his ideas into the world, his is by no means the air of an anxious mother solicitous for her children's welfare; he merely exposes them, and is often extremely annoyed when they fail to thrive on their own account. The decided lack he usually displays in practical ability, and his aversion from any sort of re[accent]clame assist in this attitude. If to his eyes his product appears subjectively correct and true, it must also be so in practice, and others have simply got to bow to its truth. Hardly ever will he go out of his way to win anyone's appreciation of it, especially if it be anyone of influence. And, when he brings himself to do so, he is usually so extremely maladroit that he merely achieves the opposite of his purpose. In his own special province, there are usually awkward experiences with his colleagues, since he never knows how to win their favour; as a rule he only succeeds in showing them how entirely superfluous they are to him. In the pursuit of his ideas he is generally stubborn, head-strong, and quite unamenable to influence. His suggestibility to personal influences is in strange contrast to this. An object has only to be recognized as apparently innocuous for such a type to become extremely accessible to really inferior elements. They lay hold of him from the [p. 487] unconscious. He lets himself be brutalized and exploited in the most ignominious way, if only he can be left undisturbed in the pursuit of his ideas. He simply does not see when he is being plundered behind his back and wronged in practical ways: this is because his relation to the object is such a secondary matter that lie is left without a guide in the purely objective valuation of his product. In thinking out his problems to the utmost of his ability, he also complicates them, and constantly becomes entangled in every possible scruple. However clear to himself the inner structure of his thoughts may be, he is not in the least clear where and how they link up with the world of reality. Only with difficulty can he persuade himself to admit that what is clear to him may not be equally clear to everyone. His style is usually loaded and complicated by all sorts of accessories, qualifications, saving clauses, doubts, etc., which spring from his exacting scrupulousness. His work goes slowly and with difficulty. Either he is taciturn or he falls among people who cannot understand him; whereupon he proceeds to gather further proof of the unfathomable stupidity of man. If he should ever chance to be understood, he is credulously liable to overestimate. Ambitious women have only to understand how advantage may be taken of his uncritical attitude towards the object to make an easy prey of him; or he may develop into a misanthropic bachelor with a childlike heart. Then, too, his outward appearance is often gauche, as if he were painfully anxious to escape observation; or he may show a remarkable unconcern, an almost childlike naivete. In his own particular field of work he provokes violent contradiction, with which he has no notion how to deal, unless by chance he is seduced by his primitive affects into biting and fruitless polemics. By his wider circle he is counted inconsiderate and domineering. But the [p. 488] better one knows him, the more favourable one's judgment becomes, and his nearest friends are well aware how to value his intimacy. To people who judge him from afar he appears prickly, inaccessible, haughty; frequently he may even seem soured as a result of his anti-social prejudices. He has little influence as a personal teacher, since the mentality of his pupils is strange to him. Besides, teaching has, at bottom, little interest for him, except when it accidentally provides him with a theoretical problem. He is a poor teacher, because while teaching his thought is engaged with the actual material, and will not be satisfied with its mere presentation.

With the intensification of his type, his convictions become all the more rigid and unbending. Foreign influences are eliminated; he becomes more unsympathetic to his peripheral world, and therefore more dependent upon his intimates. His expression becomes more personal and inconsiderate and his ideas more profound, but they can no longer be adequately expressed in the material at hand. This lack is replaced by emotivity and susceptibility. The foreign influence, brusquely declined from without, reaches him from within, from the side of the unconscious, and he is obliged to collect evidence against it and against things in general which to outsiders seems quite superfluous. Through the subjectification of consciousness occasioned by his defective relationship to the object, what secretly concerns his own person now seems to him of chief importance. And he begins to confound his subjective truth with his own person. Not that he will attempt to press anyone personally with his convictions, but he will break out with venomous and personal retorts against every criticism, however just. Thus in every respect his isolation gradually increases. His originally fertilizing ideas become destructive, because poisoned by a kind of sediment of bitterness. His struggle against the influences emanating [p. 489] from the unconscious increases with his external isolation, until gradually this begins to cripple him. A still greater isolation must surely protect him from the unconscious influences, but as a rule this only takes him deeper into the conflict which is destroying him within.

The thinking of the introverted type is positive and synthetic in the development of those ideas which in ever increasing measure approach the eternal validity of the primordial images. But, when their connection with objective experience begins to fade, they become mythological and untrue for the present situation. Hence this thinking holds value only for its contemporaries, just so long as it also stands in visible and understandable connection with the known facts of the time. But, when thinking becomes mythological, its irrelevancy grows until finally it gets lost in itself. The relatively unconscious functions of feeling, intuition, and sensation, which counterbalance introverted thinking, are inferior in quality and have a primitive, extraverted character, to which all the troublesome objective influences this type is subject to must be ascribed. The various measures of self-defence, the curious protective obstacles with which such people are wont to surround themselves, are sufficiently familiar, and I may, therefore, spare myself a description of them. They all serve as a defence against 'magical' influences; a vague dread of the other sex also belongs to this category.

The Extraverted Sensation Type

No other human type can equal the extraverted sensation-type in realism. His sense for objective facts is extraordinarily developed. His life is an accumulation of actual experience with concrete objects, and the more pronounced he is, the less use does he make of his experience. In certain cases the events of his life hardly deserve [p. 458] the name 'experience'. He knows no better use for this sensed 'experience' than to make it serve as a guide to fresh sensations; anything in the least 'new' that comes within his circle of interest is forthwith turned to a sensational account and is made to serve this end. In so far as one is disposed to regard a highly developed sense for sheer actuality as very reasonable, will such men be esteemed rational. In reality, however, this is by no means the case, since they are equally subject to the sensation of irrational, chance happenings, as they are to rational behaviour.

Such a type -- the majority arc men apparently -- does not, of course, believe himself to be 'subject' to sensation. He would be much more inclined to ridicule this view as altogether inconclusive, since, from his standpoint, sensation is the concrete manifestation of life -- it is simply the fulness [sic] of actual living. His aim is concrete enjoyment, and his morality is similarly orientated. For true enjoyment has its own special morality, its own moderation and lawfulness, its own unselfishness and devotedness. It by no means follows that he is just sensual or gross, for he may differentiate his sensation to the finest pitch of æsthetic purity without being the least unfaithful, even in his most abstract sensations, to his principle of objective sensation. Wulfen's Cicerone des r¨cksichtlosen Lebensgenusses is the unvarnished confession of a type of this sort. From this point of view the book seems to me worth reading.

Upon the lower levels this is the man of tangible reality, with little tendency either for reflection or commanding purpose. To sense the object, to have and if possible to enjoy sensations, is his constant motive. He is by no means unlovable; on the contrary, he frequently has a charming and lively capacity for enjoyment; he is sometimes a jolly fellow, and often a refined æsthete. [p. 459]

In the former case, the great problems of life hinge upon a good or indifferent dinner; in the latter, they are questions of good taste. When he 'senses', everything essential has been said and done. Nothing can be more than concrete and actual; conjectures that transcend or go beyond the concrete are only permitted on condition that they enhance sensation. This need not be in any way a pleasurable reinforcement, since this type is not a common voluptuary; he merely desires the strongest sensation, and this, by his very nature, he can receive only from without. What comes from within seems to him morbid and objectionable. In so far as lie thinks and feels, he always reduces down to objective foundations, i.e. to influences coming from the object, quite unperturbed by the most violent departures from logic. Tangible reality, under any conditions, makes him breathe again. In this respect he is unexpectedly credulous. He will, without hesitation, relate an obvious psychogenic symptom to the falling barometer, while the existence of a psychic conflict seems to him a fantastic abnormality. His love is incontestably rooted in the manifest attractions of the object. In so far as he is normal, he is conspicuously adjusted to positive reality -- conspicuously, because his adjustment is always visible. His ideal is the actual; in this respect he is considerate. He has no ideals related to ideas -- he has, therefore, no sort of ground for maintaining a hostile attitude towards the reality of things and facts. This expresses itself in all the externals of his life. He dresses well, according to his circumstances ; he keeps a good table for his friends, who are either made comfortable or at least given to understand that his fastidious taste is obliged to impose certain claims upon his entourage. He even convinces one that certain sacrifices are decidedly worth while for the sake of style.

But the more sensation predominates, so that the [p. 460] sensing subject disappears behind the sensation, the more unsatisfactory does this type become. Either he develops into a crude pleasure-seeker or he becomes an unscrupulous, designing sybarite. Although the object is entirely indispensable to him, yet, as something existing in and through itself, it is none the less depreciated. It is ruthlessly violated and essentially ignored, since now its sole use is to stimulate sensation. The hold upon the object is pushed to the utmost limit. The unconscious is, accordingly, forced out of its me[accent]tier as a compensatory function and driven into open opposition. But, above all, the repressed intuitions begin to assert themselves in the form of projections upon the object. The strangest conjectures arise; in the case of a sexual object, jealous phantasies and anxiety-states play a great role. More acute cases develop every sort of phobia, and especially compulsive symptoms. The pathological contents have a remarkable air of unreality, with a frequent moral or religious colouring. A pettifogging captiousness often develops, or an absurdly scrupulous morality coupled with a primitive, superstitious and 'magical' religiosity, harking back to abstruse rites. All these things have their source in the repressed inferior functions, which, in such cases, stand in harsh opposition to the conscious standpoint; they wear, in fact, an aspect that is all the more striking because they appear to rest upon the most absurd suppositions, in complete contrast to the conscious sense of reality. The whole culture of thought and feeling seems, in this second personality, to be twisted into a morbid primitiveness; reason is hair-splitting sophistry -- morality is dreary moralizing and palpable Pharisaism -- religion is absurd superstition -- intuition, the noblest of human gifts, is a mere personal subtlety, a sniffing into every corner; instead of searching the horizon, it recedes to the narrowest gauge of human meanness. [p. 461]

The specially compulsive character of the neurotic symptoms represent the unconscious counterweight to the laisser aller morality of a purely sensational attitude, which, from the standpoint of rational judgment, accepts without discrimination, everything that happens. Although this lack of basic principles in the sensation-type does not argue an absolute lawlessness and lack of restraint, it at least deprives him of the quite essential restraining power of judgment. Rational judgment represents a conscious coercion, which the rational type appears to impose upon himself of his own free will. This compulsion overtakes the sensation-type from the unconscious. Moreover, the rational type's link to the object, from the very existence of a judgment, never means such an unconditioned relation as that which the sensation-type has with the object. When his attitude reaches an abnormal one-sidedness, he is in danger of falling just as deeply into the arms of the unconscious as he consciously clings to the object. When he becomes neurotic, he is much harder to treat in the rational way, because the functions to which the physician must appeal are in a relatively undifferentiated state; hence little or no trust can be placed in them. Special means of bringing emotional pressure to bear are often needed to make him at all conscious.

These are the original texts by Jung - Please note that Se, much like Ti, is portrayed as if they were the dominant function, meaning here is no explanation to be found as to how the two work together in a tandem. However, most INTP's / ISTP's should find it easy to identify themselves with the Ti description, assuming they're introspected enough as it were.

This may also clears some issues for those in doubt of whether or not they're ESTP or ISTP.
avatar
Erbse
Lumberjack

Call Sign : Umweltverschmutzung
Join date : 2012-02-01

Back to top Go down

Re: Ti/Se by Jung

Post by dogwoodlover on Sat May 12, 2012 4:59 pm

It's funny how divorced this description of Ti is from most, popular ISTP descriptions.

This sort of character comes across quite strongly in INTP descriptions, however.

Granted, it's very extreme and caricatured.

dogwoodlover
Construction Worker

Join date : 2012-04-07

Back to top Go down

Re: Ti/Se by Jung

Post by Thinkist on Tue May 15, 2012 4:13 pm

Probably because of Dr. Keirsey, who drove an iron curtain between ISTPs and INTPs. Keirsey thinks that behaviorally the ISTP is much more like the ISFP, ESTP, or even ESFP than the INTP, but that is incorrect. I'd even go to length to say that ISTPs and ENTPs behave more similarly than ISTP and ESFP.




Thinkist
Crane Operator

Call Sign : Ti-bag
Join date : 2012-02-11
Motto : Think about it.

Back to top Go down

Re: Ti/Se by Jung

Post by dogwoodlover on Tue May 15, 2012 11:05 pm

Ahhh, Kiersey. I loathed that man for years.

I believe he came from a behaviorist background, a school of thought that is averse to the sort of "inside the black box" thinking that drove Jung (i.e. his "cognitive functions"). Kiersey is, almost outright, an anti-functions guy. His descriptions and understandings of types are derived mostly from surface behaviors.

This has much to do with his associations of ESTPs and ISTPs as being fraternal, while the INTP is considered alien. On the surface, yeah, I'd sure as heck look a lot more like an ESTP, and probably socialize with them much more easily. But in so far as how my brain works? the way I think? I'd definitely be in bed with the INTP.

Today, I appreciate his work on temperaments much more than I used to, mostly for its utility in deciding a person's type. It can be very helpful in that respect, as I've pegged several friends for their appropriate types, almost off-the-bat using the temperaments, after having spent years vaguely unsure about what type they were.

dogwoodlover
Construction Worker

Join date : 2012-04-07

Back to top Go down

Re: Ti/Se by Jung

Post by DJ Arendee on Wed May 16, 2012 1:16 am

So kiersey is the one who makes the surface observations?

This is the reason I'm probably not an ENTP even though I match some of the functions sometimes... the way my lunch travels with me around the house: mt dew in the bathroom, hot dogs left on the engine block of my car I was working on, ketchup left on the patio table... I tend to walk back and forth across the house taking a bite out of every cookie (task) I am to accomplish as if I were a CPU. (does this make me Ne or Se dom?)

As for temperaments, I scored Theorizer, then Improvisor, then Stabilizer then catalyst. Whatever that means.

This is what I've learned from socionics, is the mbti forums and descriptions are extremely shallow. ISTP's should appear more like ISTJ's and INTJ's because they have rigid stubborn system forming Ti judging as their primary function, and aggressive Se as their secondary.
avatar
DJ Arendee
Space Shuttle Captain

Join date : 2012-01-31
Age : 47
Location : USA
Motto : Eat My Ass

Back to top Go down

Re: Ti/Se by Jung

Post by _Mike_ on Wed May 16, 2012 3:52 am

DJ Arendee wrote:I tend to walk back and forth across the house taking a bite out of every cookie (task) I am to accomplish as if I were a CPU. (does this make me Ne or Se dom?)
It doesn't necessarily make you either; I do the same, and I'm clearly Ti-dom. You'll find that many INTPs work in the same way, as do many Fi users. It bugs the hell out of Te-doms, though, which isn't a bad thing in my book.

DJ Arendee wrote:
This is what I've learned from socionics, is the mbti forums and descriptions are extremely shallow. ISTP's should appear more like ISTJ's and INTJ's because they have rigid stubborn system forming Ti judging as their primary function, and aggressive Se as their secondary.
Based on my experience of I*TJs, I don't agree. We are stubborn, yes, and highly realistic. But we're individualistic in a way that few I*TJs seem to find acceptable for real-world use (even though they themselves are individualistic in other ways) - and that comes straight from the difference between Te and Ti, from my understanding of it.
avatar
_Mike_
Garbage Man

Join date : 2012-04-04
Age : 35
Location : Sweden
Job/hobbies : Troubleshooter

Back to top Go down

Re: Ti/Se by Jung

Post by Erbse on Wed May 16, 2012 4:39 am

dogwoodlover wrote:It's funny how divorced this description of Ti is from most, popular ISTP descriptions.

This sort of character comes across quite strongly in INTP descriptions, however.

Granted, it's very extreme and caricatured.

Well, it is Ti in a nutshell, and in its extreme. I must say though, for me personally, I resonate a lot with what he describes Ti to be. Ti inevitably remains Ti, so Ti is the same, for INTP and ISTP, except that Ti gets fed with different information (Se/Ne and Ni / Si). Thus ISTP's and INTP's share the same quality in their thinking pattern and analysis skills as far as (de)constructing frameworks / principles are concerned.

Of course that heavily clashes with Keirsey, as ISTP are 'The Mechanics' and INTP are 'The Intellectuals' - although one shouldn't try to mix Keirsey and MBTI - they may use the same letter codes but otherwise have nothing in common.

avatar
Erbse
Lumberjack

Call Sign : Umweltverschmutzung
Join date : 2012-02-01

Back to top Go down

Re: Ti/Se by Jung

Post by DJ Arendee on Wed May 16, 2012 4:58 am

so is percafe based on kiersey?

edit: oh shit it is.
avatar
DJ Arendee
Space Shuttle Captain

Join date : 2012-01-31
Age : 47
Location : USA
Motto : Eat My Ass

Back to top Go down

Re: Ti/Se by Jung

Post by Erbse on Wed May 16, 2012 5:02 am

DJ Arendee wrote:so is percafe based on kiersey?

edit: oh shit it is.

PerC is first and foremost based on idioticy, shallowness and plain ignorance.

Keirsey only comes second.
avatar
Erbse
Lumberjack

Call Sign : Umweltverschmutzung
Join date : 2012-02-01

Back to top Go down

Re: Ti/Se by Jung

Post by Thinkist on Thu May 17, 2012 1:57 pm

DJ Arendee wrote:so is percafe based on kiersey?

edit: oh shit it is.

So is Typology Central. Luckily, Personality nation uses different temperaments: EJ, EP, IJ, and IP.

I also figured out the cognitive function order for the 16 types according to Keirsey:

ESTJ: Te Si Se Fi; Ti Ne Ni Fe
ESFJ: Fe Si Se Ti; Fi Ne Ni Te
ESTP: Se Ti Fe Si; Ni Te Fi Ne
ESFP: Se Fi Te Si; Ni Fe Ti Ne
ISTJ: Si Te Fi Se; Ne Ti Fe Ni
ISFJ: Si Fe Ti Se; Ne Fi Te Ni
ISTP: Ti Se Si Fe; Te Ni Ne Fi
ISFP: Fi Se Si Te; Fe Ni Ne Ti
ENTJ: Te Ni Ne Fi; Ti Se Si Fe
ENTP: Ne Ti Fe Ni; Si Te Fi Se
ENFJ: Fe Ni Ne Ti; Fi Se Si Te
ENFP: Ne Fi Te Ni; Si Fe Ti Se
INTJ: Ni Te Fi Ne; Se Ti Fe Si
INTP: Ti Ne Ni Fe; Te Si Se Fi
INFJ: Ni Fe Ti Ne; Se Fi Te Si
INFP: Fi Ne Ni Te; Fe Si Se Ti

So if ISTP-ENFJ, for example, is suposedly a terrible match according to Keirsey and ISTP-ESFJ is, the cognitive functions should work out.

Thinkist
Crane Operator

Call Sign : Ti-bag
Join date : 2012-02-11
Motto : Think about it.

Back to top Go down

Re: Ti/Se by Jung

Post by DJ Arendee on Thu May 17, 2012 2:01 pm

I'm gonna go ahead and cry wolf here but I'm almost an ENTP now btw
avatar
DJ Arendee
Space Shuttle Captain

Join date : 2012-01-31
Age : 47
Location : USA
Motto : Eat My Ass

Back to top Go down

Re: Ti/Se by Jung

Post by Thinkist on Thu May 17, 2012 2:05 pm

DJ Arendee wrote:This is the reason I'm probably not an ENTP even though I match some of the functions sometimes... the way my lunch travels with me around the house: mt dew in the bathroom, hot dogs left on the engine block of my car I was working on, ketchup left on the patio table... I tend to walk back and forth across the house taking a bite out of every cookie (task) I am to accomplish as if I were a CPU. (does this make me Ne or Se dom?)

Don't judge by that to tell you whether you use Ne or Se, as that's just a P thing in general. Think about this: ENTPs are much like INTPs in that they have a streak of ingenuity that STPs seem to lack. They also are much more philosophical and prone to writing walls of text, being the iNutitives that they are. STPs, on the other hand, usually appreciate a sense of succinctity.

I'm not entirely sure I see ENTP in you, DJ. Try going back to ESTP or ISTP (or even IXTP... how is it that you decided that you're not introverted anymore again?).


Thinkist
Crane Operator

Call Sign : Ti-bag
Join date : 2012-02-11
Motto : Think about it.

Back to top Go down

Re: Ti/Se by Jung

Post by DJ Arendee on Thu May 17, 2012 2:09 pm

Ne and Se have nothing to do with sports or action, simply the method of calculation involved. If you visit the ENTP forum you'll find a lot of gymnasts, free runners, athletes etc. The only thing really making me think Se is because I have excellent hand-eye coordination and do plenty of sports. But I'm not the most graceful person.

Just yesterday I put fish on top of the oven, pre-heated the oven, then went to bed without eating or turning off the oven. And this isn't uncommon either. Going to the naval academy and having an INTP brother has helped me learn how to meditate and focus on my objectives, so when this behavior starts to arise I usually have to give myself some quiet time and put my goals into my phone before I forget them. My droid runs my life. I have like, 40 alarms set. I'm amazed I survive in life.
avatar
DJ Arendee
Space Shuttle Captain

Join date : 2012-01-31
Age : 47
Location : USA
Motto : Eat My Ass

Back to top Go down

Re: Ti/Se by Jung

Post by dogwoodlover on Thu May 17, 2012 6:39 pm

That's all plenty ESTP.

You're not the Ne type IMO. I've seen a lot of Ne and know a lot of ENPs, and it doesn't come across with you much at all.

The EPs I know in general all tend to be walking messes, in varying degrees. Every one of them loses their keys daily, shit is spread everywhere, always forget appointments and deadlines, yada yada

That's really more superficial, however. More symptom/correlation rather than cause.

dogwoodlover
Construction Worker

Join date : 2012-04-07

Back to top Go down

Re: Ti/Se by Jung

Post by dogwoodlover on Thu May 17, 2012 6:47 pm

DJ Arendee wrote:So kiersey is the one who makes the surface observations?

This is the reason I'm probably not an ENTP even though I match some of the functions sometimes... the way my lunch travels with me around the house: mt dew in the bathroom, hot dogs left on the engine block of my car I was working on, ketchup left on the patio table... I tend to walk back and forth across the house taking a bite out of every cookie (task) I am to accomplish as if I were a CPU. (does this make me Ne or Se dom?)

As for temperaments, I scored Theorizer, then Improvisor, then Stabilizer then catalyst. Whatever that means.

This is what I've learned from socionics, is the mbti forums and descriptions are extremely shallow. ISTP's should appear more like ISTJ's and INTJ's because they have rigid stubborn system forming Ti judging as their primary function, and aggressive Se as their secondary.


Kiersey is known for not really being that big on the Jungian functions--he's much more interested in the four-quadrant temperaments, which he thinks have been identified throughout history in various ways and by different names.


So far as the quip about MBTI being shallow... well, yes, sort of. MBTI and Kiersey tend to be rather surface-level and vague. The Jungians, though, tend to be much more in-depth. Lenore is a great example of this. She wrote a phenomenal book called "Personality Type: An Owner's Manual" Best book on Jung's psychological types I've ever read. Vastly more in-depth than any crud you'd read on a INTJf or wherever.

Also, Naomi Quenk's Was That Really Me? for interesting thoughts on the Inferior function (which, for me, was crucial in identifying as ISTP rather than INTJ) I can send it to anyone if they want it.


[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

dogwoodlover
Construction Worker

Join date : 2012-04-07

Back to top Go down

Re: Ti/Se by Jung

Post by DJ Arendee on Fri May 18, 2012 1:52 am

there's so much to read. mah gawd.
avatar
DJ Arendee
Space Shuttle Captain

Join date : 2012-01-31
Age : 47
Location : USA
Motto : Eat My Ass

Back to top Go down

Re: Ti/Se by Jung

Post by Thinkist on Sat May 19, 2012 4:23 am

DJ Arendee wrote:there's so much to read. mah gawd.

Maybe that'll nudge you back in the direction of ESTP....


Thinkist
Crane Operator

Call Sign : Ti-bag
Join date : 2012-02-11
Motto : Think about it.

Back to top Go down

Re: Ti/Se by Jung

Post by dogwoodlover on Sat May 19, 2012 9:10 pm

I want to read Psychological Types, which is an actual like 500 page book, and not just those short little descriptions that Jung put together.

It just looks so long and dreary though. I got like a couple chapters into it a while ago and just had to drop it because it was trudging on so badly

dogwoodlover
Construction Worker

Join date : 2012-04-07

Back to top Go down

Re: Ti/Se by Jung

Post by DJ Arendee on Sat May 19, 2012 9:15 pm

Erbse, where did you find this, and what does it say about Ne/Ti?
avatar
DJ Arendee
Space Shuttle Captain

Join date : 2012-01-31
Age : 47
Location : USA
Motto : Eat My Ass

Back to top Go down

Re: Ti/Se by Jung

Post by dogwoodlover on Sat May 19, 2012 9:57 pm

The excerpt is from the last portion of Jung's Psychological Types


[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

dogwoodlover
Construction Worker

Join date : 2012-04-07

Back to top Go down

Re: Ti/Se by Jung

Post by Erbse on Sun May 20, 2012 4:27 am

Yep that's the site. It's almost literally translated, as I've only read the German text.

Anyway, a few hundred pages into the book I had to skip to the end chapter, dealing with any longer regarding Darwin / Schiller / Nietzsche was just too much to take eventually - I just didn't see the point anymore.
avatar
Erbse
Lumberjack

Call Sign : Umweltverschmutzung
Join date : 2012-02-01

Back to top Go down

Re: Ti/Se by Jung

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum