Personality Cafe banner

Was this thread helpful?


  • Total voters
    14
  • Poll closed .
541 - 547 of 547 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,600 Posts
:)) ooo didn't want to disturb you and the weekend chick.

I do agree about your internal and external focus being different for introverts and extroverts, for extroverts the persona is what you see is what you get, the ego but as I have posted previously though introvert's ego is -influenced by- the collective unconscious, which is a separate and totally different matter than what could be explained by functions but partially archetypes. Jung's model have the functions on on the -ego- part of the whole self. Thus, I believe making an attempt to explain -unconscious- via Jung's ego functions is problematic. It is not an opposing force either, it -influences- the ego.
The collective unconscious and the unconscious that Jung uses are two separate things. The collective unconscious was something metaphysical that has no real place in the scientific nor psychological community.

The id, as described in socionics, is the individuals strong unconscious base. "unconscious" does not, in any field of psychology, refer to the person "not being conscious." The unconscious is constantly present. If you are actively doing/thinking something, this is your conscious. If it is something that is automated or being done/processed without your effort, it is your unconscious. For extroverts, their unconscious takes care of their subjective processes in the world. For the introvert, the unconscious takes care of their objective processes in the world. Your id is constantly on, and it is what people can objectively, verifiably see about you. For instance, my inner Fi/Ne that I constantly think about, other people cannot verify this, only take my word for it. My unconscious Ni/Fe, people can verify that I move rhythmically and wistfully and that I do not have much emotional expression. Likewise, for you, they can not verify your usage of Ni/Fe in your conscious, as they do not know how you really feel or dream. However, they can verifiably see you connecting with people closely and abstaining from Ne.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,974 Posts
The collective unconscious and the unconscious that Jung uses are two separate things. The collective unconscious was something metaphysical that has no real place in the scientific nor psychological community.

The id, as described in socionics, is the individuals strong unconscious base. "unconscious" does not, in any field of psychology, refer to the person "not being conscious." The unconscious is constantly present. If you are actively doing/thinking something, this is your conscious. If it is something that is automated or being done/processed without your effort, it is your unconscious. For extroverts, their unconscious takes care of their subjective processes in the world. For the introvert, the unconscious takes care of their objective processes in the world. Your id is constantly on, and it is what people can objectively, verifiably see about you. For instance, my inner Fi/Ne that I constantly think about, other people cannot verify this, only take my word for it. My unconscious Ni/Fe, people can verify that I move rhythmically and wistfully and that I do not have much emotional expression. Likewise, for you, they can not verify your usage of Ni/Fe in your conscious, as they do not know how you really feel or dream. However, they can verifiably see you connecting with people closely and abstaining from Ne.
Yes but my most developed functions -should be- my ego and having my id and ego just the opposite does not make sense, Jung's suggestion is not scientific perhaps but socionics seem like they just use it anyway and his functions reserved for ego too and try to patch that part. It just doesn't make sense to be of one function and act just the opposite, at the end of the day and on a good day, Fi and Fe will have an impact on the other as if it is the same, like caring, like being a good listener. However on the edge side, I don't think Fi comes up by pushing Fe, it just does not make sense, sure if you have one preference over other, you will devalue the other but they are not correlated like I am gonna do this because I want the opposite.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,600 Posts
@nichya

"Yes but my most developed functions -should be- my ego and having my id and ego just the opposite does not make sense"
? No. Id is as developed and strong as ego, ego is just valued more than id.

"It just doesn't make sense to be of one function and act just the opposite"
Mind and body are separate, as are conscious and unconscious. "Act" you are using from an extroverts perspective. As an introvert, your valued"act" is what goes on inside your mind. What you don't value is what is going on outside your mind, which is handled by your id, so you can continue to "do" what you love, Ni-Fe.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,974 Posts
@nichya

"Yes but my most developed functions -should be- my ego and having my id and ego just the opposite does not make sense"
? No. Id is as developed and strong as ego, ego is just valued more than id.

"It just doesn't make sense to be of one function and act just the opposite"
Mind and body are separate, as are conscious and unconscious. "Act" you are using from an extroverts perspective. As an introvert, your valued"act" is what goes on inside your mind. What you don't value is what is going on outside your mind, which is handled by your id, so you can continue to "do" what you love, Ni-Fe.
I agree with every point, strongest ones and all (although I do think my ego should still be higher) Do I love Ni Fe? In what way? I spend tremendous time pushing people away and turning down invites, I am feeling so good about being left alone actually, most of my friends are gone for summer. I do like to go out, concerts and all, travel alone or if I want to do some activity that requires others I do organize it but I don't know, I never really need that human contact, unless it is of course the ideal image in my head. Sondering about people's lives is more of a Fi+Ne working together thing. I really can't relate, I don't think I use Ni in the most basic Jungian sense of -detached- imagery to explain things. It is crazy talk :p also that makes everyone indistinguishable
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,600 Posts
@nichya
Well, socionics and Jung aren't the same. Though socionics is based upon Jung's works, they do differ and contradict on instances. Ni would you be daydreaming in the classical sense.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,974 Posts
@nichya
Well, socionics and Jung aren't the same. Though socionics is based upon Jung's works, they do differ and contradict on instances. Ni would you be daydreaming in the classical sense.
yes but we keep referring to Jung, so that is my man :p It doesn't tell neither are accurate. Ni couldn't be far from daydreaming because in Jungian sense Ni is detached, passive observation, it is just perceiving an imagery and understanding things through it, where daydreaming is an -active- process, is not detached and is a continued process. Well of course Ni can also use imagery and that is what makes them creative writers, their style is more like creating elaborate systems and worlds, I have though noticed socionics use imagery and being able to create imaginary worlds as Ni but that is not precise.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,600 Posts
@nichya

I think in the West, we lack behaviors present for the strength of each element. Ni as your Leading will be able to do things that Ni as Role or Mobilizing will not do.
 
541 - 547 of 547 Posts
Top