This is a discussion on Carl Jung's Enneagram Type within the Enneagram Personality Theory Forum forums, part of the Personality Type Forums category; He's popularly typed as a 9w1 (Riso-Hudson & Enneagram Institute & Ocean Moonshine) + sx/sp (Typewatch), but I've seen a ...
He's popularly typed as a 9w1 (Riso-Hudson & Enneagram Institute & Ocean Moonshine) + sx/sp (Typewatch), but I've seen a few other places that speculated him as a 5w4 as well.
Could any of you who know more of him than I do enlighten me as to why he's popularly typed as a 9, rather than a 5?
I don't really know what more to say about this. Looking forward to everyone's answers.
9w1? That's strange.Originally Posted by Kayness
Ok, let's check wikiquote:
The bigger the crowd, the more negligible the individual.There is no coming to consciousness without pain.No psychic value can disappear without being replaced by another of equivalent intensity.We are so captivated by and entangled in our subjective consciousness that we have forgotten the age-old fact that God speaks chiefly through dreams and visions.If, for instance, I determine the weight of each stone in a bed of pebbles and get an average weight of 145 grams, this tells me very little about the real nature of the pebbles. Anyone who thought, on the basis of these findings, that he could pick up a pebbles of 145 grams at the first try would be in for a serious disappointment. Indeed, it might well happen that however long he searched he would not find a single pebble weighing exactly 145 grams.This whole creation is essentially subjective, and the dream is the theater where the dreamer is at once scene, actor, prompter, stage manager, author, audience, and critic.As far as we can discern, the sole purpose of human existence is to kindle a light in the darkness of mere being....yes, I think he was a 5w4.Ah, these good, efficient, healthy-minded people, they always remind me of those optimistic tadpoles who bask in a puddle in the sun, in the shallowest of waters, crowding together and amiably wriggling their tails, totally unaware that the next morning the puddle will have dried up and left them stranded.
5w4 seem ok, possibly NiTeFiSe
Can you explain your reasoning here? How do these quotes that you posted make Jung a 5w4?
Did I write anywhere that they "make" him a 5w4? I get that vibe from the quotes, that's all. And since he's long dead, we can't be sure what type he was anyway.
You re-posted several of Jung's quotes and then said "yes, I think he was a 5w4" as if his type could just be inferred from those statements. But there is actually no reasoning behind your "thinking" that he was a 5w4, just a vibe?
@aconite
What about those quotes gives you a five vibe?
Hum , i don't know. I didn't get a 5w4 from those quotes either. Those quotes could have been said by a number of the ENNG types. I'll be checking back, interesting :)
Using your mind is solely attributed to 5's.
Of course. I'm not denying the possibility that he could have been a 9w1, or in fact anything else. The only person who could have known for sure was Jung himself.
Just out of curiosity, was there an explanation provided, or was Jung just listed as an example?
I haven't read any of Jung's books; they might provide a better insight on what he wanted/valued. If anyone has (especially Memories, Dreams, Reflections), I'd be glad to read their opinion.
My initial impression on what Jung said about himself and the world: he strikes me as deeply inquisitive (which is not solely a 5 attribute, but would fit 5's idea of omniscience), favouring individuality and autonomy, being interested in anything archetypical, symbolic (again, an interest sometimes associated with 4/5, but not exclusive to these types) and his deep dedication to the areas he was interested in the most. Also, the fact that he disliked being considered a mystic and preferred being seen as a man of science. He believed that individuation can be achieved through ego-consciousness; I realise that it doesn't necessarily mean he was an ego type (4, 5, 9), but I think it's worth considering.
I think I can see the source of the confusion: I didn't pick those specific quotes just to prove a point; a copy-paste of an entire wikiquote site would be unnecessary, so I chose the quotes that stood out and, in my opinion, reflected how he thought and preferred to explain his point of view. I think I should've been more specific about that.
This article implies that Jung used both Ti and Ni:
and later, a hypothesis that certain enneatypes attract/invite what the authors call "the pure types":Although one camp argues that he was an INTP (ie, Jungian IT) and the other argues that he was INTJ (Jungian IN), both remain unaware - because they are caught up in MBTI assumptions - of the fact that Jung was, ironically, himself a 'pure' type. A person who had introverted thinking and introverted intuition as his first two functions (with the former as dominant at some points in his career, and the latter dominant at other times), Jung was one 'pure' or 'extreme' type who not only lived 'effectively', but also made an extremely significant contribution.
I don't think that switching from Ti-dom into Ni-dom is possible, though. Did Jung say whether he considered himself an introvert or an extravert (since he coined the terms)? I'm inclined to think he was introverted, but I'm curious if he ever confirmed that.For example, the 'pure type' that is uniquely associated with zone Five is the INT -which has dominant introverted thinking and auxiliary introverted intuition.
Posting Permissions
64Thanks
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks