The MBTI has never been an attempt to rectify Jung's definitions in any way so if they don't line up, it is pointless to pretend that it wasn't a mistake and two entirely separate theories. Unless the point is not to be right but to win a debate on the internet and play the intellectual. So every time I quote Jung to back up my claims you lots vanish into thin air.
MBTI doesn't have to rectify Jung, because it's based on it, and it's free to make slight changes or expanding on it. Same as Socionics. Same as 16 personalities expand on the Assertive vs Turbulent types.
I have been made to understand (not by you) that I jumped into an argument I didn't fully understand (because I didn't read the previous messages). I mentioned that could be the case in my first messages in this argument. I'm still concerned about you using Jung to back up your claim about MBTI when they are clearly different. You, and your friend, keep pointing to the fact that you've explained this thoroughly in other messages but you're tired of explaining yourself. Understandable. You can make outlandish generalizations, that's ok too. Not everything I say is right, I don't deeply understand any of these theories and I've never read beyond the shallow info available online. I've never read any research regarding this.
But if I wasn't in intellectually lazy mode, I wouldn't be here. I'd be reading on astrophysics and cosmology. So, thanks but no thanks. I understand well enough about these theories to know they don't deserve my time for more in-depth research.
If you want to enlighten me though, show me the light, my DM is always open.
Plus I didn't say you were mentally ill, I only wondered because I was [
pretending to be] seeing so many inconsistencies (some of which your friend explained to me in private) which were caused because I missed a lot of your other messages and a link in your signature(?)
You're still wrong though, with your absolute statements and generalizations. Talking about MBTI. About Jung, I don't know. MBTI E and I do measure shit. They measure how much you prefer Introversion vs Extroversion. Percentage-wise. And your statement that Ni is not capable of understanding Ne. In MBTI. I don't know about Jung but Ni dom is a better match for Ne dom than Ne is, in MBTI, research says. Also, you say Introverted feelers (do you mean the MBTI INFPs and INFJs, or Jung introverted feelers, the Js?) and Ni (INTJs?) are not capable of logic. You're wrong about those statements about MBTI (again, I don't need you to use Jung to back up your statement on MBTI, use what MBTI says instead, even if wrong and incomplete).
I think you hit your limit and instead of adapting yourself to the situation and explain yourself better, you're being defensive, acting thereby as introverts are supposed to act. According to Jung. You got defensive by accusing me of
pretending to see your inconsistencies because I hinted at you being mentally ill.
We all have it all in us, what shows more depends on preferences, what's more normally used, and developed, and the situation we find ourselves in. Saying you'll not bother explaining yourself to anyone that's not Ne dom... A certain Ni or even Si or Se dom can understand your logic and perspective better than a certain Ne dom. If you're not capable of understanding this, well you have a long way to go when it comes to human functioning.