Jungian Function Types and the Tarot

[re-pete-a]

Due to your approach and Teheuti's ideas , the Book MAN AND HIS SYMBOLS has been ordered.
Perhaps then the knowledge level of these conversations can be adhered to.

The question of ascending and descending order of the Majors was directed at you personally, to find out how you feel about that idea, based on your personal knowledge of Jung and your level of Tarot understandings.

 

[JSNYC]

Due to your approach and Teheuti's ideas , the Book MAN AND HIS SYMBOLS has been ordered.
Perhaps then the knowledge level of these conversations can be adhered to.

The question of ascending and descending order of the Majors was directed at you personally, to find out how you feel about that idea, based on your personal knowledge of Jung and your level of Tarot understandings.

Thank you re-peta-a, your compliment is very much appreciated. But level of knowledge is relative. We have both mentioned exploring, I believe that is really the best way to really understand the Tarot, and you have been exploring longer than I have. I think your comments have already added to the discussion.

I created a post in the other thread that may address your comments as well. But I wanted to address something specific beyond that. If you might be asking if I think studying Jung would necessitate... replacing what you mentioned. I believe the answer is absolutely not!

I think what you mentioned sounds interesting. I looked up the book on Amazon (there are a few editions) and put the book on my (Rational ) list of books to get more information on. But I can't speak intelligently of it because I didn't know about it previously. (Although the title, "The Road Less Traveled" sounds familiar, more than just the axiom, but I can't figure out why... ) But the way you described it sounds interesting, I like perspectives that contrast two points.

And I certainly think it would be quite compatible with Jung. I believe Jung's brilliance was displayed in the creation of his structures upon which we can all build our own meanings. But that is not to say I do not believe Jung's additional meanings had no value. They certainly had value, at the very least as an example in understanding how the structure that he elaborated works.

 

[re-pete-a]

Well, am glad you got something from those posts, though from this side it still leaves a sensation on the mind that requires scratching vigerously.

Sometimes the mental stirrings leave one in a mental limbo , where the exploring has led to a fine line between sanity and illusions.

Where sanity is an agreed perspective and illusion just may be the next step , If only some one would agree .

That must have been the way that Jung felt when he started delving into the uncharted and un named .

First the limiting fears ,strengthened by ridicule, then the self trust. Then the game followers who tententivly agree to the new order.

AAh, finally sanity agreed to.

Still scratching and stumbling.

 

[Nevada]

This site lists Jung as an INFJ (at the bottom): http://keirsey.com/handler.aspx?s=keirsey&f=fourtemps&tab=3&c=counselor

It's weird also, that a high school english teacher assigned my class some writing assignments once based on who he thought we closely related too, and he assigned me Emily Bronte who is also listed here as an INFJ.

No one really knows, since the four-letter type didn't exist in his lifetime, as far as I know. He only went as far as eight types in his writings I've come across on personality types. He mainly concerned himself with the four functions and attitude (introverted, extraverted).

But John Beebe theorizes that Jung was an INTJ in this exerpt:

http://www.intj.org/articles/jungs-type-redux/

 

[Amanda]

Let's discuss, as JSNYC and I know the two are very similar but have their differences.

http://www.tarotforum.net/showthread.php?p=2239347#post2239347

 

[ANA]

Well, am glad you got something from those posts, though from this side it still leaves a sensation on the mind that requires scratching vigerously.

Sometimes the mental stirrings leave one in a mental limbo , where the exploring has led to a fine line between sanity and illusions.

Where sanity is an agreed perspective and illusion just may be the next step , If only some one would agree .

That must have been the way that Jung felt when he started delving into the uncharted and un named .

First the limiting fears ,strengthened by ridicule, then the self trust. Then the game followers who tententivly agree to the new order.

AAh, finally sanity agreed to.

Still scratching and stumbling.

so very true, i have been following these posts, and the way you describe the feeling of a sensation on the mind that requires scratching vigerously is what i have been feeling while reading these

i do belive the universe will alwasy find a way to make/help/force/entice us to understand it and Jung was maybe the briliant conduit "it" chose at that time

there are many people who tap into the universe and are able to relate it to everyday life and express how 'it' thinks; case in point all of us here who read for each other and more often than not we make sense and connect to our sitters, and this happens in truth as i know that we are honest which other when given feeback and when it does not connect we say so

so i come back to the need for mind scratching, and our way of trying to rationalize the experiences we have while reading, i too am the type that needs a reational explanation for what i see happening and yet everytime i try and rationalize it i get pulled back to just let it happen

and i go back to the ancient hermetic tenant 'as bove so below' and to physics and M theory derived from String theory and the "Holy Grail" of physics the Theory of Everything (Unification Theory) and realize we humanity have come full circle, we are indeed made of star stuff LITERARELY

the way i express this is that humanity in our day and age belives in the "religion" of science

the ancient Egyptians just belived

and Jung tried to find a way to a "theory of everything" for the mind

and we tarot readers are looking for a way to "just" believe again

and we all come to the same conclusion "as above so below" and yes we are made of "star stuff"

 

[re-pete-a]

Was at a meeting the other day and one of the topics ended with science and wondering where the rest of the universe is.
It was postulated that there's only 10% known, the other 90% is unknown.

This left the feeling that , AINT IT STRANGE, THAT THE UNIVERSE IS REFLECTING WHAT IS AVAILABLE THROUGH , WHAT IS ABLE TO BE COMPREHENDED.
The outer, reflecting the limits of the inner.


Still scratching that spot.

 

[JSNYC]

Was at a meeting the other day and one of the topics ended with science and wondering where the rest of the universe is.
It was postulated that there's only 10% known, the other 90% is unknown.

This left the feeling that , AINT IT STRANGE, THAT THE UNIVERSE IS REFLECTING WHAT IS AVAILABLE THROUGH , WHAT IS ABLE TO BE COMPREHENDED.
The outer, reflecting the limits of the inner.


Still scratching that spot.

I just came back to reread your post for some reason after posting in the other thread. I think we just said the essentially same thing... (Only you are much more pithy! )

Or is it the inner, reflecting the limits of the outer? Or does it simply depend on the focus and perspective?

I said I like contrasting two points.

 

[re-pete-a]

The inner is capable of of anything, tough it requires the intellect to catch up.
Out there, already is in existance, though beyond the perceptual fields .

Thats the 90% hand brake.

From experienceing some very strange things.
The mind readily accepts.
The Intellect goes beserk if it cant find a way to make it fit into the limited perspectives of the present viewpoint.

Considered by the knowledgable to be 'VERY STRANGE BABBLINGS' incuring a tagging label of ,unbalanced.
The 'structure of meaning' takes a tumble(Tower)and is assisted by the present personal limits of the discoverer as well as outsiders opinions, until an altered or accommodating structure can be constructed.

NOT always achievable by the mind that discovers it.

As with Jungs discoveries, he was willing to collapse his existing structures , while the followers needed time to add new meanings and alter their current perspectives.


GIFTED, is the term placed on those that survive the assults of the parameter building protectors.

Now they judge him, using his uncovered knowledge and claiming the new territory 'restricted' to those that understand.

The outer is restricted to the level of the observers capabilities.

 

[JSNYC]

The inner is capable of of anything, tough it requires the intellect to catch up.
Out there, already is in existance, though beyond the perceptual fields .

....

The outer is restricted to the level of the observers capabilities.

I actually do understand... well kind of, but not completely... which is why I want to interpret it.

My point was, what if the inner and outer are the same thing? And our limitation is rooted in our need to distinguish the two?

And to the topic of this thread: what if Jung's function types described not only how a person functions internally...

And also... maybe 90% is known and only 10% is unknown and the real problem is that the 10% connects the other 90%, so essentially the equation would be that 10% is unknown and 90% isn't understood (because of the unknown 10%).

I do really like abstract, esoteric, mental wanderings... I am just not as good at presenting them as you because, especially when writing, I try to define or describe things too precisely, which can them lose their magic sometimes... Believe me, I read your posts and take (mental) notes. Because they make sense... sort of... or at least they get my brain churning!

(I actually had an insight while reading/writing this... An insight about myself and my limitations... or just maybe about what my function (type) is...)