EXTRAVERTED THINKING (ENTJ, ESTJ) - Through The Lens of Carl Jung
Вставка
- Опубліковано 6 вер 2024
- In this video, I am talking about EXTRAVERTED THINKING through the lens of Carl Jung, discussing parts of the descriptions in "Psychological Types".
----------------
If you are interested in 1:1 coaching sessions with me, book your first session here: linktr.ee/INFJ...
Sign up for my newsletter here: rb.gy/oaitup
I really liked the description of Te finding the ruling principle out of a sense of fairness, and that when they find too many exceptions they discard the idea. (Something like that.)
I can never win a discussion against myself because of this.
Te: what about this idea?
Other functions: great, but have you considered this, that and those?
Te: ugh, back to the drawing board.
Doesn't help that my Te is inferior so it's never confident in its ideas either, (or too confident and runs away with it until the first good Ti argument whacks it in the face).
I've come to learn that sometimes it's a waste of time and frustration to come up with all those counterarguments and to just let it go and accept that not everyone is going to agree, but that doesn't necessarily mean the idea is invalid or untrue.
Thanks for these videos. I've been missing something like this. You do a good job of deciphering what Jung is saying - as in, I'd be completely lost if you didn't...😅
Great analysis! You helped me understand why I'm pushy with my ideas lol
This is such a good video, very insightful for people who want to know Jung's own definitions of the functions but can't quite get around reading his book. I self-type as INFJ and Te is my Polr function, so I have a very difficult time with Te doms in real life. Not only does that style of thinking clash with my own, since i never settle for "one logical principal working for everything", since I always find different holes and variables not being considered which make the reasoning incomplete + the complete disregard of the human element and the way it impacts society as a whole on an ethical level, since it is my Polr I tend to feel irrationally victimized/powerless if Te is being directed at me in the moment and my first impulse is to get away from the situation as soon as possible, since I feel cognitively unequipped to deal with it. Understanding Te more truly helps get a better perspective of it and be better able to navigate in society when interacting with strong Te types.
I do hope you make similar videos on all of the functions, this is something quite lacking on UA-cam (from what I've seen) and it is very valuable information. Thank you!
Ti-Fe at least is aware of other peoples feeling and perspective, where Te-Fi is primarily self oriented. Often Te dominant (or auxiliary) is very good at formulating logical argument; however, it is oriented and motivated by the child/inferior Fi, whether they want to admit it or not, which seems to be susceptable to ego, pride and self interest above others. This shows up when the same Te-Fi person pushes opposing arguments the day after they switch side/team/group.
Te is absolutely not about dominating. Everyone thinks Te doms like ENTJ and ESTJ's are dominant. But not. Te is related with enneagram type 3(Mostly or absolutely type 3 self-preservation) so it's all about success, recognition, prestige and approval. So they are not dominant. There is only one cognitive function which want to domineering others is SE that related with Enneagram 8.
Se is NOT about dominating.
Istj, yes we can definitely step all over our fi to get the job done. Love your content.
Your videos are great. I really love that you stick so close to the original Jung. Thanks.
Thank you! I am happy to know you enjoy them 🙏🏻
9:40 yep. after this video, I know I'm an INTJ for sure. thank you! that attitude 11:40 from Ti types just make me nuts...
You are great at explaining things. I kind of feel like Te got thrown under the bus by you and Carl (LOL), but you made up for it at the end saying how useful they are in society, which they are :) Maybe Te doms can handle it, haha! But maybe not Te auxiliary, lol ;)
I never use to think of Te as something that aggregates into a system and apply to optimal efficiency. In the real world. I guess that's true, but it sounds similar to Ti wanting to tie all things together as well. So it's difficult to make out the distinction... The way I see Te in the real world is a lot more emphasis and use of time management. Ti in my opinion - or at least hero Ti - values real world fact and input and working models, truth and justice, all of that. So there is a common motivation it seems. I suppose where an important distinction comes into play is Ti wants consistency to apply to more than real world evidence. Or at least evidence that extends far past the moment. In my case it's because a motivation for a decision is not sourced from some desirable outcome... But on a principle in its abstract which can be independent of my own influence. Idk something like that. Described in this way it's ironic, because the principle in its abstract still lives in the subjective mind so it's not exactly independent. But anyway.
It seems that Te wants to find what is of most use to most people, where Ti just wants to find the answer that seems closest to truth as possible, whether or not that truth "helps" people or not.
@@lishayost144 🤔 I think I would have to disagree with that. Ti isn't so against being useful, otherwise it wouldn't go so much out of its way to explain itself. It's just by nature easily misunderstood. I think Te is more outside agreement... of some agent - be it people or otherwise - to validate it. Involving people to validate I would think is more Fe, but regardless I can see why people would find Te more useful based on what I'm describing. if your conclusions are continually being validated (or invalidated), it's a sort self fulfilling prophesy. Another point to reflect on is "being useful" can be compared to F's "caring about others". You wouldn't say Fi users care less about others than Fe users. It's just a matter of context.
@@jeremycull8876 I didn't say Ti users don't care if something is useful or not, just that the truth matters more. It's great if the truth is useful. In fact, I for one think the truth can be the most useful thing, but it might not be viewed that way subjectively by everyone, so if one does not believe the truth to be truth, it probably won't be useful to them. And sometimes truth doesn't always get the usefulness it deserves (in my opinion) in Fe situations.
@@lishayost144 well in that circumstance it's just a matter of defining "useful". In which case with the use of Ti or Te you have to consider accessibility. And accessibility by who. I'm not going to assume Ti is more "true" or more motivated by truth than Te, it's just a matter of how they come to verify what is considered true. Because Te operates externally, it comes to rely on externals to judge what is true. And it so happens that the externals can involve people, because people in so many ways are (or can be) the externals themselves. Ti issues in Fe situations, are to my judgement less Ti matters of truth so much as poor Fe development. But of course they are linked because so much of "thinking" actually involves feeling. The distinction lies in how you choose to treat the judgement itself. I think. And choice itself is still an attitude. Anyway I'm getting off track...
Obviously Ti is less accessible to others. And the verification of what is true is entirely personal. And for all anyone knows it "can" be more useful to the external world. Or it "can" be less. It's circumstantial I'm sure. But it's motivated my its usefulness to itself more than its usefulness to others. Largely still for the sake of others, but in a different sense. Hell, sometimes I make it a point to look for an original path to something true just so that it can be more useful in the sense of a different approach. There are billions of people and we are all supposed to think in essentially the same terms? Where is the meaning in that? So there is a usefulness in the inaccessibility itself... For everyone even. Point is: Ti and Te relationship to others is different, and they both have pros and cons. So it's difficult to concede in all-out qualifications like "usefulness" or "truth" when they both apply just as much to introversion and extroversion. They just apply differently.
@@jeremycull8876 OK
neat
Hello I'm a new subscriber (great content BTW) and I noticed that you don't have Te in the description of the video! Your other videos on functions do. Yes, I am cursed to not know how to Fe lol.
Haha true!
Yes, I noticed that as well. The title doesn't have Te like it has in the other ones... UA-cam still showed it to me in the search results (after I watched the Ti one) even though I typed Thinking Te The lens of carl jung :)
@@lishayost144 I think the "Lens of Jung" part is probably helpful haha
@@INFJinxed Yes! :)
How Te users subscribing to your channel that you (partially) got the answer for them to study it.