วีดีโอ

Sorry to burst your bubble But she flubbed with the letters in her type She is an Intj. But it is still nice to also see a decent TJ woman and mom. By the way, she says it on her site as well as her Twitter and I bet on one of her youtube.

Thank you Eric for pointing this video to me! Much appreciated! 🙏🏻🙂

I think for Jung it was more about the relative value or priority placed on subject or object: “Now, when orientation by the object predominates in such a way that decisions and actions are determined not by subjective views but by objective conditions, we speak of an extraverted attitude. When this is habitual, we speak of an extraverted type. If a man thinks, feels, acts, and actually lives in a way that is directly correlated with the objective conditions and their demands, he is extraverted. His life makes it perfectly clear that it is the object and not this subjective view that plays the determining role in his consciousness. Naturally he has subjective views too, but their determining value is less than that of the objective conditions.” C.G. Jung CW6 para. 563.

@@personalityparts Yes, he's basically saying that people will differ in how much they adjust themselves to real life circumstances, or stubbornly hold true to something. And there are problems with that initial framing as somehow the most essential part that equally applies across Thinking, Feeling, Intuition and Sensation. It's already a conflation of different concepts: stubbornness vs. flexibility, but also deriving cognition from something external or internal to the person. It partially works for Thinking and Feeling, and I emphasise partially because it fails to account for phenomena like authentic self-expression, and the transferability of ideology. It creates ridiculous versions of human beings for Introverted Sensation especially, and is so vague in Intuition that people give it a free pass. Either way, it's clear to me that your video is not restricted to what Jung said. I think that's a good thing.

​@@WorldSocionics I didn't write the video script to be fair, if I had it wouldn't even be about I/E as abstract ideas anyway. I can't see stubbornness mentioned in the quote above, but different people could likely be equally stubborn about either subjective or objective perception/judgement. Jung above is just describing where this predominating factor appears to reside, from a first person perspective. Inner is something within that person's subjective experience. Outer is something external which presumably people could collectively experience. Of course the whole thing is problematic in that there is no pure experience of the 'thing in itself', though Jung goes into that in his theory of esse in anima, which is similar to some other philosophies about reality always being an interpretive fusion of the two. I agree Jung's Si description is strange, and a more straightforward concept related to explicit memory seems to fit more with people's experience IMO. Taken that way, of course a memory is a very personal subjective thing, only that person can experience that memory as it arises in the 'inner' subjective experience. Nobody else can access your personal memory, so that fact is in effect is the practical boundary between subject and object. The interesting thing is that neuroscience is starting to blur that boundary and there are things we can know about people's subjective experience using technology.

@@personalityparts That's interesting. How would you have described it instead? I think I/E kind of is forced to be abstract because it is trying to describe 8 very different types on each side, and set behaviours like socialising often just don't work very well. Well, what I mean is Jung's drawing of a dichotomy between the extroverted 'politician' and the introverted 'saint'. To be saintly in his description is to cling on to what you have framed in terms of Introverted Perception or Judgement, regardless of input from other people or the present circumstances. That implies a certain stubbornness. In contrast, to be more like the 'politician' is to lose your sense of self and consistency in meeting either pragmatic or popular demands. I don't think Si being memory works. At best, Si describes a certain kind of very concrete, sensory memory, and other types are better at remembering other things. However, I note you said 'explicit' memory, and while that would work for Sensation vs. Intuition, there is a different problem: there is NO evidence I have seen or anyone else has gathered to suggest that Se types are any less likely to remember past 'explicit' concrete experiences. Instead, I'd say that every cognitive function reaches into memory equally, and that Si is something else that can be remembered, but equally can be experienced in the present moment. The need to make it about memory is an attempt to reconcile Jung's confusing description, rather than stating that it was just wrong. The problem here is that Se is defined too broadly, and essentially takes on ALL aspects of sensation in the present, while Si is supposed to handle all sensation of the past. Let's drop time as the key distinguisher. It's not even consistent, it's not as if Fi is the remembered form of Fe, or Ti is the remembered form of Te, or Ni is the remembered form of Ne. Instead, I'd say that the key way of splitting Sensation into two parts is first saying what Sensation is, which is our interaction with what is real, vivaciously felt and concrete. Then, it's identifying the two salient attitudes towards that real, concrete thing. That is whether to 1) acquire, conquer and dominate one's physical surroundings, or 2) refine, balance and harmonise one's physical surroundings. I'm sceptical of what Neuroscience is going to bring to this field. I'm also hopeful. I'm hopeful because I agree there is a lot of potential. I am sceptical because I have some idea about how very complicated it is, how the brain eludes easy categorisation, and I know that the most well known promoter of type and neuroscience has refused so far (and it's been a very long time, so there isn't really any excuse left) to publish anything peer reviewed or remotely reproducible, and blocks people who are critical of that fact.

@@WorldSocionics My thoughts on I/E and basic functions as abstractions are another topic for another day, which I'm sharing at conferences. Sure all these 8 processes can be remembered in some way, our values, thoughts etc. But closest I can come to for Si overall so far is episodic memory more specifically. For you as an Ne type (inferior Si), how is it going accessing the episodic memory of the moment you read Jung relating introverts to saints? I'm wondering where it is from as it doesn't appear to be in CW6. For five years I've also been proposing Ni as essentially an experience of implicit memory too. From BAPT 2017 onwards. [*** EDIT: it was actually BAPT 2018, hence my poor memory proving the point] I'm not denying you your different opinion of these things, but we have to beg to differ. In time through a PhD I aim to test all these hypotheses. Either way we will see and I'm open to what it uncovers. For neuroscience I was talking generally about research on neural correlates of experience, nothing specific about Dario or type. I hope too that he publishes in journals, but unless his experiments went through an academic institution and ethics board in advance then it may not be that simple.