All psychological typologies can be divided into two large groups: those that classify acquired mental qualities, and those that consider innate qualities. Here there is a fundamental divide between what a person can change and what he will have to put up with for the rest of his days. Most existing typologies belong to the first group - they describe rather types of behavior or, if you like, types of established character, and there are only a few typologies from the second group. In this article we will talk about one of them - the most interesting and most valuable in practical application - the theory of psychological types by Carl Jung .
In order to immediately cut off possible questions here, it must be said that Jung himself did not assert with one hundred percent certainty that the types he proposed were indeed innate human properties. He was generally extremely careful in such matters.
On the other hand, he gave such a comment on this matter that the psychological type of a child can be traced from the first years of his life, when the pressure of upbringing is not yet so great as to form any pronounced character traits.
In general, if we approach this issue with scientific rigor, the innateness of the type has not been proven, but from a practical point of view this idea can still be accepted, since numerous real observations show two points - firstly, the type really manifests itself very early, and in -secondly, the type does not change throughout life. With age and maturation, the type may smooth out, but fundamentally a person remains what he was - an introvert or an extrovert .
And since everyone will now begin to try on types for themselves, here is another guideline - you cannot be both an introvert and an extrovert mixed together. It doesn't happen that way. At our core, we always belong to one or the other, but in certain areas of life we may well demonstrate qualities of the opposite type, so there is indeed room for confusion here. We'll figure out.
[[Continued - introverts and extroverts]]
((Which type do you belong to?))
Jung formulated his theory for quite a long time and painstakingly - this is not a phony sensation, which the public is so greedy for, but fundamental scientific research, carried out according to all the rules and with all rigor. So before you dismiss it as saying that there are a lot of smart theoretical psychologists, take into account the fact that Jung occupies the same place in the world of psychology as Einstein occupies the same place in the world of physics. Jung did not study the “science of psychology” - he created it.
So, to personality types , almost the thickest of all that he has written. It is called not very original: “Psychological types.” There he provides a lot of justification for his concept, relying on examples from the history of art, philosophy, mythology and even biology.
I won’t recommend reading it - it will be too difficult to master it without prior moral and intellectual preparation. But if you want to get acquainted with the original source, you can read the last section devoted to the description of specific types. It is easier to read - almost like a horoscope, only in scientific language.
The main line in proving the existence of two basic personality types comes down to the fact that at all times and in all cultures one can trace the presence of these two types - opposite and at the same time complementary to each other (I will not list specific examples, inquisitive minds themselves can easily find them in specified book).
One of the most obvious analogies here is the Eastern principle of the unity of the two principles “Yin” and “Yang”. Introverts are more “Yin”, extroverts are more “Yang”. I say rather, because in every person both are present, but in different proportions - the question is the predominance of one or the other.
That is, we can say that the introversion-extroversion scale is not a contrast of black and white, but a smooth gradient from one to the other. The Yin-Yang symbol, where one thing flows into another, is exactly about this. Black and white, hot and cold, good and evil - all this is known exclusively in contrast with its opposite. The same is true with psychological types.
And one more introductory point. Since psychological type is determined by the degree of distance from the midpoint, it should be noted that one can be more or less introverted, more or less extroverted.
That is, for example, two introverts can be introverts to different degrees. This will be important when you start to have questions about what happens when two people of the same type enter into communication (and relationships), but more on that later.
Jung's personality types
If we consider Jung's theory in all its details, then, of course, everything is somewhat more complicated. The division into introverts and extroverts is obviously not enough. Two pronounced introverts may be completely different in the way they view and interact with the world. It’s the same with extroverts - they are different.
In this regard, Jung introduces an additional concept - primary mental function. There are four of them in total, and they are also divided into pairs of opposites: feeling and thinking, sensation and intuition. Thus, the type is determined by two main coordinates - inward (introversion) or outward (extroversion) and the mental function that predominates in it.
Accordingly, such combinations are obtained as, for example, intuitive-introvert (Jung), thinking extrovert (Freud), feeling introvert (Melanie from Gone with the Wind), feeling extrovert (Scarlett from the same place), and so on. Some types are more common, some less common.
There are some other nuances in Jung’s theory - a secondary function, the division into rational and irrational, suppressed function, and so on, but we won’t dive into such jungle - it will only be of interest to maniac psychologists. Now let's focus on the most important thing.
About the authors.
Robert Frager
(Robert Frager) received his PhD in social psychology from Harvard University, where he taught and was an assistant to Erik Erikson. He has taught psychology at the University of California at Berkeley and Santa Cruz and is the founder and first president of the Institute of Transpersonal Psychology. He also served as president of the Association for Transpersonal Psychology. The author of several books and numerous articles on psychology and related fields, he is currently director of the doctoral program at the Institute of Transpersonal Psychology in Palo Alto, California.
“I have been fortunate to collaborate with many of the leading theorists and therapists whose work is highlighted in this book, and I have myself practiced Jungian analysis, Gestalt therapy, Reichian and neo-Reichian therapy, and Rogers group work. Additionally, I have lived in Zen monasteries, yogi ashrams, and Sufi centers, studying and practicing these traditions.
In addition to psychology, I teach the Japanese martial art of Aikido, which I have been practicing for over thirty years. He studied with the founder of the Aikido school. He was the first in a line of amazing mentors who taught me what Maslow called “expanding the limits of human nature.” I also lecture on Sufism and have recently completed a collection of Sufi stories, teachings and poems called Essential Sufism
(“The Essence of Sufism”).
I am married to an amazing, creatively gifted artist; We have four children who are now 27, 24, 13 and 10 years old."
James Fadiman
James Fadiman received his PhD in psychology from Stanford University and has taught at the University of San Francisco, Brandeis University, and Stanford. He has his own consulting firm that conducts seminars for executives and educators in the United States and abroad. He has written and edited a number of books on holistic medicine, goal setting, and pathopsychology, is the editor of two journals, and is a board member of several conservation corporations.
“I have been fortunate to be able to apply the psychological and clinical skills I acquired in graduate school to a variety of fields outside of psychology. Although I spent several years working at the college level and continue to teach psychology, most of my time was spent consulting with academics and business people. My early studies of altered states of consciousness allowed me to discover the hidden wisdom of indigenous and eastern cultures. I was delighted to discover that ancient wisdom can be extremely practical.
What inspired me in writing this book was that it gave me the opportunity to bring together different points of view that I found useful, even if the originators of those ideas were bitter opponents.
I'm currently running a creative problem solving and invention course at a large electronics firm in Silicon Valley, starting a second novel, continuing to write a number of short stories, and collaborating with several environmentally friendly start-up companies. production facilities.
My wife, to whom I have been married for thirty years, is a documentary filmmaker. We have two kids."
Who are introverts?
To define types, Jung uses the concept of psychic energy, which extroverts draw from the outside, and introverts from the inside. But this cannot be taken literally - as such, no psychic energy exists, it is only a metaphor that allows us to describe an intangible something.
The introvert is turned inward. All the most important things in his life happen inside him. This does not mean that he does not see the world around him, he just pays much less attention to it than to the inner world. And even looking outside, he looks at everything through the prism of himself.
This is not egocentrism, but rather isolation, isolation towards oneself. His world is the world of his experiences, feelings and thoughts. He goes there to recuperate after a collision with external reality. The world outside brings him more trials than joy. But he knows his inner world, his refuge, like the back of his hand.
If you ask an introvert what is happening to him inside, he will not be able to describe it, because there are no such words or a lot of words are needed. And if you ask an extrovert about the same, he will also not be able to say anything, but only because for him his inner world is a dark forest.
And exactly the same with the outside world. An introvert has to purposefully focus his attention on aspects of the external world in order to effectively interact with it, while an extrovert, on the contrary, is completely absorbed in what is happening around him, and can look into his soul only through an effort of will.
Introverts are calm, thoughtful, reasonable - their time flows slowly and even somehow viscously. They are slow, inert and often clumsy, which is why extroverts constantly make fun of them.
At their best, introverts are level-headed, calm people who look beneath the surface of things rather than jumping to the top like extroverts do.
At their worst, introverts are familiar to everyone in the image of a typical loser nerd or computer geek - disheveled, unable to express his thoughts, in torn clothes (because he doesn't care) and with thoughts constantly hovering somewhere far away.
But an introvert does not mean a failure. Introverts often become losers because modern society is a society of extroverts, and not every introvert finds an acceptable way of adapting to this world. On the other hand, extroverts suffer from a different problem - they are “lucky”, and this is no better than being a “loser”, but this is a topic for another discussion.
In general, introverts are no worse than extroverts - both have their own strengths and weaknesses. Both of them look at each other with some misunderstanding, and both of them constantly stumble due to the fact that the opposite type reacts in a completely unexpected way.
Hence there are many problems in communication between introverts and extroverts, but even more problems arise when people of the same type communicate. We'll come back to this too.
Introverts are less likely to take initiative in the outside world. They are reinsurers who are ready to measure seven times seven times before they act. Such caution also greatly hinders them in a society of extroverts, where it is not the smartest, but the most active who wins.
On the other hand, introverts are good strategists. They see the situation deeper, further and more globally. Extroverts are more tactical - they need battle and victory here and now, and not in the long term.
Introverts are silent and passive - they are happy to give the initiative to extroverts. Introverts are more comfortable observing and commenting from their dark corner than climbing onto the podium on their own and rousing the audience with their fire.
At school, introverts are loners or quiet people who are always somewhere on the sidelines, always somewhere on the outskirts, or, at best, together. They are well-mannered, cultured and often pathologically kind. They are easy to offend, but they do not know how to fight back - they experience their defeats inside and rather press on the feelings of guilt and pity of the offenders.
In relationships, introverts also tend to fade into the background. And if this is an introverted man, then often because of this peculiarity he becomes henpecked, which is why he suffers. Introverted women, due to the same feature, on the contrary, feel more comfortable in relationships than extroverted women.
And so on, I hope the general image is clear. We will continue the topic of psychological types in other articles and in comments, and I will expand the list of characteristic features of both types as we go.
Who are extroverts?
Extroverts are everyone else who is not an introvert. They are active, active, reckless and imprudent, which is why they often resemble a monkey with a grenade. This is their strength and this is their weakness.
In a free market society, extroverts feel like fish in water. They don’t need to explain that they need to be able to stand up for themselves and their ideas. They naturally strive for leadership and official status. Prizes and awards are more important to them than real achievements themselves.
Unlike introverts, extroverts relax better in the company of friends - society does not tire them at all, but on the contrary, invigorates them and infuses them with new strength. For this reason, extroverts are rarely alone - they are always looking for the company of their own kind.
Extroverts are frivolous and superficial, but at the same time light, active and proactive. Initiative does not frighten them, because they do not think ahead and do not think about the consequences. They are one of those who are strong in hindsight and bite their elbows after the fact. Because of this, introverts look at them with a wry smile - they warned...
At their best, extroverts are sociable, optimistic, and easy-going. It is extroverts who become the soul of the company, leaders of movements and activists. You can talk about anything with them and enjoy it - they always have something to tell, what news and gossip to share.
At their worst, extroverts are arrogant, opinionated, and selfish. Realists to the core, denying everything that goes beyond their understanding. They are people of the crowd and public opinion is more important to them than their own, so they often look like opportunists and sycophants.
They put their interests first and therefore easily step over anyone who stands in their way. Introverts are more likely to step over themselves, but there is no righteousness in this - only self-pity and fear of other people's indignation.
In relationships, extroverts naturally want to be in charge, and this is good when the man is an extrovert and the woman is an introvert. In all other cases, all sorts of difficulties begin due to the fact that the generally accepted idea of the relationship between a man and a woman presupposes just such a couple.
Extroverts are talkative and even talkative, and along with their manner of acting without thinking about the consequences, they can be very sharp-tongued and quick to take revenge. They are emotional and expressive to the point of hysteria, while introverts are more prone to depression and apathy.
And so on. Ask questions in the comments, and I will try to clarify any unclear points.
Unconscious
Freud called the unconscious an ocean on the surface of which floats a tiny float of our consciousness. The unconscious is everything that we are not aware of, do not want to realize, or want to, but cannot. Strange, unexpected desires and aspirations come to us from the unconscious; unwanted emotions, reactions and manias are squeezed into the unconscious. And despite the fact that the very concept of the unconscious was developed in general terms by Freud, the term “unconscious” itself was not invented by him.
Freud believed that the “unconscious” lay below the level of consciousness and therefore called it the “subconscious” in his major works before meeting Jung. However, Carl Jung noted that we cannot definitely say that it is “underneath” us. Often it turns out to be “above” us, when from it people receive amazing revelations and insights that force them to create a masterpiece, found a religion, or, in sad cases, go crazy.
In other words, it often turned out to be not something primitive and disgusting, but surprisingly refined and bewitching. In addition, it is so inaccessible to knowledge that the only thing that can be said with certainty is that there is no human consciousness in it. Therefore, he began to call it in his works not “subconscious”, but “unconscious”. The term has taken root and has spread from scientific circles even into everyday life.
I also recommend reading: How to get rid of melancholy?
