Speaking of Which...

Saru Inc

Saru Inc

Schrödinger's Pussy
Donor
MBTI
ENFJ
Enneagram
3w4
hi guys.



So I'ma be getting some PTO like crazy coming up next week, and since I can't get TV for a while Ima get a book. I really enjoy the JCF, but I will admit I am not the most knowledgeable on it. So instead of just random googled links to explain what JCF is etc. etc. etc., what are some good books that describe? I believe Arbygil mentioned Lenore? I read some articles of Jung but, frankly I already knew most of that stuff. (Most of that stuff meaning it was all pretty basic). I think one of the key things I'm looking for, is a book that really goes into detail on how the function interact, and how you can tell *easily?* which function comes before what, (like Si Te and Te Si etc.) rather than just definitions of what they are.


thank you much.
 
saru said:
hi guys.



So I'ma be getting some PTO like crazy coming up next week, and since I can't get TV for a while Ima get a book. I really enjoy the JCF, but I will admit I am not the most knowledgeable on it. So instead of just random googled links to explain what JCF is etc. etc. etc., what are some good books that describe? I believe Arbygil mentioned Lenore? I read some articles of Jung but, frankly I already knew most of that stuff. (Most of that stuff meaning it was all pretty basic). I think one of the key things I'm looking for, is a book that really goes into detail on how the function interact, and how you can tell *easily?* which function comes before what, (like Si Te and Te Si etc.) rather than just definitions of what they are.


thank you much.
Click to expand...


pto_wide_a500092_446x235.jpg


???
 
Leonore Thompson (Bentz) has an interview here: http://www.personalitypathways.com/thomson/index.html which begins to explain Jung Cognitive Function (JCF). Really, all JCF is Jung's original theories before MBTI took Jung's theories and created a behavioral model, based on the cognitive model. MBTI is more the behavior and JCF is more what you're thinking. But it's extremely difficult to observe thoughts in action.

The assumption with MBTI is how we behave comes from what we're thinking - which can be true, sometimes...but we all know how we can behave differently from who we truly are, or how we can "cover up" who we are based on one situation or another.

Thompsons' Exegesis is located here, but that wiki can be a bit of a rough read, in my opinion.
 
saru said:
hi guys.



So I'ma be getting some PTO like crazy coming up next week, and since I can't get TV for a while Ima get a book. I really enjoy the JCF, but I will admit I am not the most knowledgeable on it. So instead of just random googled links to explain what JCF is etc. etc. etc., what are some good books that describe? I believe Arbygil mentioned Lenore? I read some articles of Jung but, frankly I already knew most of that stuff. (Most of that stuff meaning it was all pretty basic). I think one of the key things I'm looking for, is a book that really goes into detail on how the function interact, and how you can tell *easily?* which function comes before what, (like Si Te and Te Si etc.) rather than just definitions of what they are.


thank you much.
Click to expand...

Jung
 
(Most of that stuff meaning it was all pretty basic).

No. AS IN IT WAS A FRICKEN SUMMARY.


wow. i'm saying it was a brief review of his stuff limited to like a few paragraphs each. good grief. way to extrapolate.
 
[ame="http://www.amazon.com/Personality-Type-Jung-Hudson-Books/dp/0877739870"]Amazon.com: Personality Type (Jung on the Hudson Books) (9780877739876): Lenore Thomson: Books[/ame]

[ame="http://www.amazon.com/Jungs-Function-Attitudes-Explained-Henry-Thompson/dp/188727801X"]Amazon.com: Jung's Function-Attitudes Explained (9781887278010): Henry L. Thompson: Books[/ame]

[ame="http://www.amazon.com/Was-That-Really-Me-Personality/dp/0891061703"]Amazon.com: Was That Really Me?: How Everyday Stress Brings Out Our Hidden Personality (9780891061700): Naomi L. Quenk: Books[/ame]
 
Thanks for starting this thread, Saru. I am wondering if anyone has read this:

[ame="http://www.amazon.com/Lectures-Jungs-Typology-Seminar-Hillman/dp/088214104X"]Amazon.com: Lectures on Jung's Typology (Seminar Series) (9780882141046): James Hillman, Von Marie-Louise Franz: Books[/ame]
 
Jungian Trip said:
Don't you think that, in addition to reading a primary source, one might also be able to glean pertinent information from secondary sources? Also, since cognitive sciences and technological advancements in that field have radically evolved, could not someone else also carry further what Jung started?

I agree with the supposition that reading Jung first is important, but I don't see the need to stop with Jung. Just as I don't see the need to stop with Plato since platonic and neo-platonic philosophy continues today.
Click to expand...

Yes! That is exactly what one SHOULD do. Read the primary source and use forums, internet articles, etc. as secondary sources.

I
 
Read Jung. Form your own opinion. It's a poor student that doesn't surpass their teacher.

To metaphor: 'We can't listen to Einstein because he has expanded on Newton, Newton is the only true source of knowledge.'
 
Limit said:
Yes! That is exactly what one SHOULD do. Read the primary source and use forums, internet articles, etc. as secondary sources.

I
Click to expand...
 
[MENTION=3465]Limit[/MENTION] INFJs prefer sugar over vinegar, sweetness. ;) We won't hear anything you are saying, & will probably do the exact opposite just to spite you. I love you, though. Don't hate me. :)
 
I would also suggest that you take Jung slow and don't be afraid to look up words. Jung's writing is a bit archaic if you don't have a well developed vocabulary. The writing style can be hard to muddle through if you aren't familiar with writing from the 20's and 30's period. I think that is why people gravitate away from the acutal writings to more modern interpretation. However, there is quite a bit of interesting things to be gleaned from the master (so to speak). I still haven't read it all and can only take him in bits and pieces but find his words amazing.
 
Limit said:
Yea. I’m always amazed when people tell me that Keirsey’s books changed their life. I thought it was uhm...a very underwhelming book.
QUOTE]


Haha. One of my former bosses told me to read Keirsey saying that it "Changed his life." I just nodded and smiled.

EDIT: I'm not trying to be pretentious. Each person works according to their own level. But I find the way people interpret things to be highly interesting. Take Stephen King for example. Some people find him to be nothing more than fan-fiction while others can't get enough of his works. I've defended his honor before Literary Theory majors with occasional success. Though I wouldn't say he's changed my life.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
NDN NT said:
I would also suggest that you take Jung slow and don't be afraid to look up words. Jung's writing is a bit archaic if you don't have a well developed vocabulary. The writing style can be hard to muddle through if you aren't familiar with writing from the 20's and 30's period. I think that is why people gravitate away from the acutal writings to more modern interpretation. However, there is quite a bit of interesting things to be gleaned from the master (so to speak). I still haven't read it all and can only take him in bits and pieces but find his words amazing.
Click to expand...

I agree. I would not state that it’s archaic; however, it can be extremely difficult to read. It can be even worse if you haven’t read anything on Analytical Psychology. If you don’t know what HE means by unconscious, and you read it from a Freudian, Addler, or even possibly a completely ignorant perspective, then you won’t comprehend what he’s really trying to state. You can’t just pick up Psychological Types, read that, and say, “I’m done!”

It’s a daunting task.

I recommend his analytical psychology lectures. Preferably the 1935s one since they he has progress a lot more in his work. He is explaining it to students, rather than writing out his ideas.
 
*laughs* I would argue that to the fast food generation, Jung would seem archaic! Now if you regularly read stuff from earlier works of literature ala Homer, no he doesn't seem archaic.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top