# 16 types (and 48 subtypes) based on Jung's Psychological Types



## Ocean Helm (Aug 25, 2016)

The purpose of this post is to introduce an alternate notation for typing people using Jung's _Psychological Types_ without attaching MBTI baggage to Jung or Jung baggage to MBTI. MBTI is primarily a 4 factor model, consisting of 4 preferences (often referred to as "letters" or "dichotomies") which were inspired by Jung but ultimately deviate a great deal from Jung's work.

I'm a fairly lazy person. That is why I refer to a @reckful post which explains how Jung looked at function attitudes: http://personalitycafe.com/cognitive-functions/298194-jung-attitude-auxiliary.html#post9293218

*The bottom line is:*
One's conscious functions are balanced by one's unconscious functions of an opposite attitude.
One's conscious functions are pointed in the same direction, which is incompatible with the Myers model and the Grant stack.

There is also no such thing as a "dom-tert loop". One can have a conscious tertiary function, and in the notation below these people are considered "tertiary subtype", however these people are not bypassing their auxiliary function. Instead they consciously use both their auxiliary and tertiary function. However, most cases of people who identify with "dom-tert loop" in the Grant stack will simply be using their conscious primary and auxiliary functions. For example, people who identify with "Ni-Ti loop" will usually just be INT or ITN. The typical form of the INT described below is Ni-Ti-Fe-Se in the 8 function attitude notation used for Myers and Grant stacks.

I am not using the same 8 function notation in these Jung stacks, because it betrays Jung's focus on the conscious and unconscious by putting the focus on function attitudes instead. Thus a typical INT with the stack of N-T[F-S] will have Introverted Thinking and Extraverted Feeling because they are introverts and Thinking is conscious and Feeling is unconscious.

This is just meant as a post to sort of get a discussion rolling, and more complete explanations can come in the future as I address concerns and hopefully refine the post a bit.

*Key:*
Red = Extraverted atittude
Blue = Introverted attitude
Outside brackets = Conscious functions
[Inside brackets] = Unconscious functions

*ETN - Extraverted Thinking (with auxiliary Intuition)*
Typical form (ETN-2): T-N[S-F]
Primary subtype (ETN-1): T[N-S-F]
Tertiary subtype (ETN-3): T-N-S[F]

*ETS - Extraverted Thinking (with auxiliary Sensation)*
Typical form (ETS-2): T-S[N-F]
Primary subtype (ETS-1): T[S-N-F]
Tertiary subtype (ETS-3): T-S-N[F]

*EFN - Extraverted Feeling (with auxiliary Intuition)*
Typical form (EFN-2): F-N[S-T]
Primary subtype (EFN-1): F[N-S-T]
Tertiary subtype (EFN-3): F-N-S[T]

*EFS - Extraverted Feeling (with auxiliary Sensation)*
Typical form (EFS-2): F-S[N-T]
Primary subtype (EFS-1): F[S-N-T]
Tertiary subtype (EFS-3): F-S-N[T]

*ENT - Extraverted Intuition (with auxiliary Thinking)*
Typical form (ENT-2): N-T[F-S]
Primary subtype (ENT-1): N[T-F-S]
Tertiary subtype (ENT-3): N-T-F

*ENF - Extraverted Intuition (with auxiliary Feeling)*
Typical form (ENF-2): N-F[T-S]
Primary subtype (ENF-1): N[F-T-S]
Tertiary subtype (ENF-3): N-F-T

*EST - Extraverted Sensation (with auxiliary Thinking)*
Typical form (EST-2): S-T[F-N]
Primary subtype (EST-1): S[T-F-N]
Tertiary subtype (EST-3): S-T-F[N]

*ESF - Extraverted Sensation (with auxiliary Feeling)*
Typical form (ESF-2): S-F[T-N]
Primary subtype (ESF-1): S[F-T-N]
Tertiary subtype (ESF-3): S-F-T[N]

*ITN - Introverted Thinking (with auxiliary Intuition)*
Typical form (ITN-2): T-N[S-F]
Primary subtype (ITN-1): T[N-S-F]
Tertiary subtype (ITN-3): T-N-S[F]

*ITS - Introverted Thinking (with auxiliary Sensation)*
Typical form (ITS-2): T-S[N-F]
Primary subtype (ITS-1): T[S-N-F]
Tertiary subtype (ITS-3): T-S-N[F]

*IFN - Introverted Feeling (with auxiliary Intuition)*
Typical form (IFN-2): F-N[S-T]
Primary subtype (IFN-1): F[N-S-T]
Tertiary subtype (IFN-3): F-N-S[T]

*IFS - Introverted Feeling (with auxiliary Sensation)*
Typical form (IFS-2): F-S[N-T]
Primary subtype (IFS-1): F[S-N-T]
Tertiary subtype (IFS-3): F-S-N[T]

*INT - Introverted Intuition (with auxiliary Thinking)*
Typical form (INT-2): N-T[F-S]
Primary subtype (INT-1): N[T-F-S]
Tertiary subtype (INT-3): N-T-F

*INF - Introverted Intuition (with auxiliary Feeling)*
Typical form (INF-2): N-F[T-S]
Primary subtype (INF-1): N[F-T-S]
Tertiary subtype (INF-3): N-F-T

*IST - Introverted Sensation (with auxiliary Thinking)*
Typical form (IST-2): S-T[F-N]
Primary subtype (IST-1): S[T-F-N]
Tertiary subtype (IST-3): S-T-F[N]

*ISF - Introverted Sensation (with auxiliary Feeling)*
Typical form (ISF-2): S-F[T-N]
Primary subtype (ISF-1): S[F-T-N]
Tertiary subtype (ISF-3): S-F-T[N]

As you can see the first letter in the code refers to Extraversion/Introversion and then the next two letters are the primary and auxiliary functions, respectively. It's similar to Socionics letters but puts E/I first (which Jung attached the highest importance to) and uses Jung's names. The subtypes are coded with the number of conscious functions.


----------



## brightflashes (Oct 27, 2015)

Thanks for this post. It helps to have everything spelled out with a color code, too, so I love the presentation as well. I often speak of Jungian theory as a precursor of MBTI and try to highlight that it's very different, but many people don't realize that the attitude of the aux function was something that Jung sort of flip flopped about a bit. I know at first, he believed that an Introvert would have 3 introverted functions, the one they were strongest in first and one extroverted function which was the opposite of the strongest function. 

Later, he revised his ideas to some extent and I do know he was at least present with Myers/Briggs, Von-Franz in the brainstorm and hammering out process of the (currently known) MBTI, although I don't think he was around for the final edit. 

Based on MBTI, I'm a clear INTJ.

Based on Jung, I'm an INF-3 as I *know* I have strong Ni and Fi or, a close second, INT-3.

Sometimes people ask if I prefer the Jungian model or the MBTI model. I usually say Jungian as I do, but I wonder what they usually think of when they think of Jungian typology because - so far that I have seen here at least - most people don't talk about it much. 

Now I'm excited to know that there's at least one other person here on the forum that also knows this stuff!


----------



## reckful (Jun 19, 2012)

brightflashes said:


> many people don't realize that the attitude of the aux function was something that Jung sort of flip flopped about a bit. I know at first, he believed that an Introvert would have 3 introverted functions, the one they were strongest in first and one extroverted function which was the opposite of the strongest function.
> 
> Later, he revised his ideas to some extent and I do know he was at least present with Myers/Briggs, Von-Franz in the brainstorm and hammering out process of the (currently known) MBTI, although I don't think he was around for the final edit.


Much to your chagrin, virtually everything I've quoted is incorrect.

If you're interested, you can get straightened out by reading this post.


----------



## brightflashes (Oct 27, 2015)

reckful said:


> Much to your chagrin, virtually everything I've quoted is incorrect.


I don't know how to respond to this because I'm taking my information out of physical books that he wrote at different times in his life which he flip-flops on whether or not the Aux function is in the same attitude as the dom or in the opposite attitude of the dom. The very first known record of him talking about typology described a type that, if introverted, would have 3 introverted functions, comprised of the dominant function followed by two others and the extraverted function was the last one. 

I also know that he has revised his ideas several times and even changed the type he identified as in response to his theory changing (he originally identified as an ISTP). 

I don't want to argue with you, but I know my Jungian history very well and I'm certain of this progression. Unless you can point out a concrete example of him saying otherwise, I don't believe in revisionist History in this case. Will check out your post, though.

Also, I abhor when people tell me how I'm feeling. I don't experience embarrassment very often, so, your message didn't come to "my chagrin" at all. I found it amusing, though.

- - - - - - - - - - - -

Edit: I'm impressed with your overview of his expressed opinions in Psychological Types and also that you found that interview. However, he spoke of typology in his books before Psychological Types was published and it is from these references I'm basing my statements on. 

You did jog my memory in Jung's phase where he put the dom functions (for introverts) as two introverted functions and the inferior/unconscious functions as extroverted functions. So I didn't include that in my post. But then, I wasn't going for over-all comprehension. I was just going for a basic, generalized communication.


----------



## reckful (Jun 19, 2012)

brightflashes said:


> The very first known record of him talking about typology described a type that, if introverted, would have 3 introverted functions, comprised of the dominant function followed by two others and the extraverted function was the last one.
> ...
> I don't want to argue with you, but I know my Jungian history very well and I'm certain of this progression. Unless you can point out a concrete example of him saying otherwise, I don't believe in revisionist History in this case. Will check out your post, though.


If you "know your Jungian history very well" and are "certain of this progression," why can't you point us to the source and quote the relevant passage?

I quoted my relevant passages in that linked post (as you noted), and I'd be surprised if you can point me to a source earlier than Psychological Types where Jung described a four-function stack. He noted at the start of PT that his previous writings hadn't included T and F as separate functions (because he thought T/F was just aspects of I/E).


----------



## brightflashes (Oct 27, 2015)

I tried to send you a PM, but you're not receiving them. I won't go into much more detail than this: It's present in his transcribed lectures. Here are relevant publications:

The Red Book
The Psychology of the Unconscious (in which he describes a 9th cognitive function, the transcendental function)
There was a book he wrote about Mental disorders which was like the psychologies of mental disease or something to that effect.
Von Franz wrote of the incarnations of his typology in The Feminine in Fairy Tales, which tells about a system he designed (gone over in the previously mentioned books) which reflects these early ideas of psychological type.

He later revisited these theories in

Man and his Symbols
Essays he wrote on Active Imagination (though I believe some of these came before Psychological Types)
and a few others, sprinkled here and there.

There are some recently released essays which I have yet to read. Perhaps I could find a contradiction there?

Anyway, now that I've spelled out where one can look for these other ideas, I'm no longer going to comment on this unless someone wants to talk to me about it in PM. I have a rule not to engage in disputes on public forums, but I'm fine one-on-one.



reckful said:


> why can't you point us to the source and quote the relevant passage?.


I don't understand why you insist on defining people as certain things (like I can't provide references) without actually knowing. It's very confusing for me. I cannot point out specific passages because some of these books I received as part of coursework and no longer have available (though I do have my notes). However, I can point "us"/you to the sources.


----------



## hornpipe2 (Nov 3, 2015)

reckful said:


> If you "know your Jungian history very well" and are "certain of this progression," why can't you point us to the source and quote the relevant passage?


After a quick search...



Jung said:


> The transcendent function does not proceed without aim and purpose, but leads to the revelation of the essential man. It is in the first place a purely natural process, which may in some cases pursue its course without the knowledge or assistance of the individual, and can sometimes forcible accomplish itself in the face of opposition. *The meaning and purpose of the process is the realization, in all its aspects, of the personality originally hidden away in the embryonic germ-plasm*; the production and unfolding of the original, potential wholeness.


(Source - Jung on the Transcendent Function - Jungian Center for the Spiritual Sciences)

Psychological Types was printed in 1923.


----------



## reckful (Jun 19, 2012)

brightflashes said:


> I tried to send you a PM, but you're not receiving them. I won't go into much more detail than this: It's present in his transcribed lectures. Here are relevant publications:
> 
> The Red Book
> The Psychology of the Unconscious (in which he describes a 9th cognitive function, the transcendental function)
> ...


I'd also be interested to hear how (as you said in post #2) you "know" that Jung was "present with Myers/Briggs, Von-Franz in the brainstorm and hammering out process of the (currently known) MBTI" — cuz just so you also "know," I'm quite confident that that's nonsense.

And I think your New Year's resolutions for 2018 should include trying to get better at (1) not pretending you know things you don't, and (2) admitting when you make a mistake.


----------



## reckful (Jun 19, 2012)

hornpipe2 said:


> After a quick search...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I was talking about the "progression" brightflashes had referred to in Jung's function stack (and the associated auxiliary attitude). She said he wrote about a pre-PT stack with two middle functions with the same attitude as the dom, and only the inferior in the opposite direction.


----------



## DavidSaravia (Dec 16, 2017)

Oh! That can also be the option!


----------



## Rouskyrie (Jul 20, 2016)

Ocean Helm said:


> The purpose of this post is to introduce an alternate notation for typing people using Jung's _Psychological Types_ without attaching MBTI baggage to Jung or Jung baggage to MBTI. MBTI is primarily a 4 factor model, consisting of 4 preferences (often referred to as "letters" or "dichotomies") which were inspired by Jung but ultimately deviate a great deal from Jung's work.
> 
> I'm a fairly lazy person. That is why I refer to a @reckful post which explains how Jung looked at function attitudes: http://personalitycafe.com/cognitive-functions/298194-jung-attitude-auxiliary.html#post9293218
> 
> ...




According to this, I'd be ITN-1.


----------



## tanstaafl28 (Sep 10, 2012)

I'm fascinated. Seems like a proper simplification.


----------

