15.11.2012 Views

Digesting Jung: Food for the Journey - Inner City Books

Digesting Jung: Food for the Journey - Inner City Books

Digesting Jung: Food for the Journey - Inner City Books

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

A Psychological Compass 19<br />

tests concretize what is inherently variable, and <strong>the</strong>reby overlook<br />

<strong>the</strong> dynamic nature of <strong>the</strong> psyche.<br />

Any system of typology is no more than a gross indicator of<br />

what people have in common and <strong>the</strong> differences between <strong>the</strong>m.<br />

<strong>Jung</strong>’s model is no exception. It is distinguished solely by its parameters—<strong>the</strong><br />

two attitudes and <strong>the</strong> four functions. What it does not<br />

and cannot show, nor does it pretend to, is <strong>the</strong> uniqueness of <strong>the</strong><br />

individual. Also, no one is a pure type. It would be foolish to even<br />

try to reduce an individual personality to this or that, just one thing<br />

or ano<strong>the</strong>r. Each of us is a conglomeration, an admixture of attitudes<br />

and functions that in <strong>the</strong>ir combination defy classification. All<br />

that is true, and emphatically acknowledged by <strong>Jung</strong>—<br />

One can never give a description of a type, no matter how complete,<br />

that would apply to more than one individual, despite <strong>the</strong> fact that in<br />

some ways it aptly characterizes thousands of o<strong>the</strong>rs. Con<strong>for</strong>mity is<br />

one side of a man, uniqueness is <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r. 13<br />

—but it does not obviate <strong>the</strong> practical value of his model, particularly<br />

when one has run aground on <strong>the</strong> shoals of his or her own<br />

psychology.<br />

Whe<strong>the</strong>r <strong>Jung</strong>’s model is “true” or not—objectively true—is a<br />

moot point. Indeed, is anything ever “objectively” true? The real<br />

truth is that <strong>Jung</strong>’s model of psychological types has all <strong>the</strong> advantages<br />

and disadvantages of any scientific model. Although lacking<br />

statistical verification, it is equally hard to disprove. But it accords<br />

with experiential reality. Moreover, since it is based on a fourfold—<br />

mandala-like—way of looking at things that is archetypal, it is psychologically<br />

satisfying.<br />

As mentioned earlier, one’s behavior can be quite misleading in<br />

determining typology. For instance, to enjoy being with o<strong>the</strong>r people<br />

is characteristic of <strong>the</strong> extraverted attitude, but this does not<br />

automatically mean that a person who enjoys lots of company is an<br />

extraverted type. Naturally, one’s activities will to some extent be<br />

13 Psychological Types, CW 6, par. 895.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!