Analysing User's Psyches Through Jung - Guide For Forum Relations

i do this too, i think it might be universal across all personality types tbh.

I’m not far off the mark you’re wrong. What appears to be happening now is a classic and documented archetype of sorts of the romanticist versus the technologist. You’re too constrained to your existing beliefs in mathematics and “personal growth”; ironically these prevent individuality more so than what you claim archetypes do.

Are you trying to gaslight me again? I said that mental illnesses come with personality traits - in fact you could say that mental illnesses as a whole are just aliases for a group of traits bundled together.
You have the narcissism trait - you don’t have to “give yourself” anything for that to be true.

Romantics believed in the natural goodness of
humans which is hindered by the urban life of
civilization. They believed that the savage is noble,
childhood is good and the emotions inspired by
both beliefs causes the heart to soar.

I do not have the narcissism trait. I am not self-obsessed.

You have a very childish idea of what narcissism is if you truly think you’re not narcissistic.

And it’s getting really old, whatever label you’re trying to drive home on me.

Whilst I give no credence to modern day psychology terms; you do bear some traits of what would be defined a narcissist although I think that term’s negativity is overinflated - I think narcissism is healthy to a degree.

I really don’t care anymore, then. I don’t trust your judgement.

It’s getting really old how you continually try to spark up debates for attention and act angry you’re being called out on it.

I didn’t try to spark a debate when I said typology is unfair to the individual, especially on an internet forum where people are trying to be individuals.

It’s not unfair it promotes individual growth and understanding.

Again using the “internet forum” phrase to separate yourself from your obvious flaws.

Have you ever played mafia @a2pas? How can you speak about typology when you haven’t experienced any psychological games?

That is scientifically debatable, and there’s yet to be any empirical evidence that these typologies are correct. It’s all psychoanalytical bullshit that makes people feel smart to study them, as I had, but most of that changed when I took courses that refuted this era in psychology.

I’ve played it face to face, yes.

I have flaws, we all do. Please tell me what obvious flaws you see.

That is not how it is meant to be experienced, so I’ll take that as a no.

Narcissism

There are courses that refute that refutal. Opinions in science are often based on personality and what’s cool - archetypes and Jung are the godfathers and the perfect descriptors of humanity so - like how people like to hate on popular music acts and films to be cool - a counter culture movement grew with well articulated but meaningless garbage leading to our modern day joke of psychology. Just because your courses told you to refute doesn’t mean they didn’t have Motives…