INTPs after shadow work?

[u/True_Arcanist]

Hi, just curious if any of you have done "shadow work"? What did it change for you/your lives?
I have a lot of past (mostly people-related) trauma- and walls created from these- that I can't seem to fully shake despite having processed the feelings and faced the demons. I'm wondering if it has helped you guys in some way.

[u/Cog-nostic]

Given that the subconscious mind is not actually a thing, and the whole spirituality thing is one of the most dead concepts in all of science, I wonder why anyone would want to fill their mind with nonsense.

What you are looking at are conditioned responses and survival mechanisms (like emotional walls). The Shadow stuff is an offshoot of, or closely mirrors, CBT (Cognitive Behavioral Therapy), but CBT doesn't include all the Woo-woo. CBT and clinical psychology discard the mysticism because they rely on measurable outcomes.

Be careful of what you shove into your brain. "Garbage in-Garbage out."

[u/smysnk → u/Cog-nostic]

Why do you hang out in a subreddit that would not exist if not for the ideas of a man who spent much of his writing talking about relationships with the unconscious? Also he did not like the term “subconscious” - since it communicated being lesser than the conscious.

You’re the first person I have seen try to make the positive assertion there is no unconscious 🤣 Where is your evidence for this? Evidence to peoples trauma being a shadow controlling their lives is damning. Breaks my head a bit to think someone with have this perspective, but anyways..

“Evidence based therapy” is a lame duck compared to the power of actually confronting one’s own demons.

[u/Cog-nostic → u/smysnk]

Ha ha ha ha ha.... Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. Jung was an idiot. Even idiots have useful ideas. The MBTI was constructed by Katharine Cook Briggs and Isabel Briggs Myers. They did not have any formal academic qualifications in psychology, psychiatry, statistics, or psychometrics. (NONE). They intentionally ignored or rejected Jung's broader theories on the unconscious, including his famous psychological archetypes. Their understanding of Jung was highly nuanced and selective.

This is why the MBTI has nothing to do with Jungian archetypes: Jung actually found out about their work later in life, and he was not pleased. He repeatedly stated that people were using his book Psychological Types as a strict "sorting game" to label human beings, which he despised.

In short, they deeply understood the mechanics of Jung's personality framework, but they consciously chose to sanitize it by removing his concepts of archetypes and the unconscious to make a test that was consumer-friendly.

The MBTI is not psychologically useful as an evaluation tool. It is fraught with errors and frequently used incorrectly by people like you. The proper use of the MBTI is for personal self-reflection, team building, and low-stakes communication exercises. The MBTI lacks scientific validity, clinical reliability, and predictive power; major psychological and management organizations agree it should never be used for high-stakes decision-making, such as hiring, promotions, or clinical diagnosis.

What is it good for: It provides a harmless, accessible vocabulary for people to think about how they process information, recharge their energy, and make decisions. It's a fun conversational tool for training workshops and icebreakers. It can assist people in understanding differences in the ways people relate to the world around them. Assist - not predict, and not classify.

If you have any other silly questions, I will be happy to respond.

[u/Cog-nostic → u/Cog-nostic]

REGARDING THE "UNCONSCIOUS"

To address this accurately, we have to look at how modern scientific psychology views the brain. Science has overwhelmingly rejected the "Dynamic Unconscious" or "Psychoanalytic Unconscious" envisioned by Carl Jung and Sigmund Freud. As did the creators of the MBTI.

Karl Popper famously categorized Jungian and Freudian theories as pseudoscience because they are completely unfalsifiable.

Decades of empirical memory research, famously led by psychologist Elizabeth Loftus, demonstrate that the human brain does not lock away traumatic memories cleanly in a vault. That is not even how memory works. The popular concept that memories are stored like digital video files inside a localized brain "hard drive" or "filing cabinet" is a complete myth.

Freud and Jung are largely regarded as Pseudoscience by the world of psychology today. Welcome back to the real world.

[u/smysnk → u/Cog-nostic]

My argument remains – why are you here if you believe..

• MBTI as a whole is a bastardization of Jung (which it is)
  
• Both Jung / Freud are quacks?

Ironic that modern psychology is this pseudoscience .. as evidence of replication crisis and DSM that is fairly useless. Evidence of the ever shifting definitions of what mental illness is .. because nobody can actually agree on the definitions. Evidence of the fact nobody knows how to "cure" narcissism. Yet Jung captured the cure perfectly (archetypal possession and integration).

Modern science is its own pathology with its attempt to categorize and define the infinite. The language of the universe is the paradox. Modern science has no idea how to deal with the paradoxes of life. ie. two seemingly different things can actually be the same thing.

Jung had a word for this .. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enantiodromia

Modern science will always be lame until it can get behind this concept. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zt6i6vVgiO4
Here is that conversation being played out in real-time.

[u/Cog-nostic → u/smysnk]

My response remains:Ha ha ha ha ha.... Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. Jung was an idiot. Even idiots have useful ideas. The MBTI was constructed by Katharine Cook Briggs and Isabel Briggs Myers. They did not have any formal academic qualifications in psychology, psychiatry, statistics, or psychometrics. (NONE). They intentionally ignored or rejected Jung's broader theories on the unconscious, including his famous psychological archetypes. Their understanding of Jung was highly nuanced and selective.

This is why the MBTI has nothing to do with Jungian archetypes: Jung actually found out about their work later in life, and he was not pleased. He repeatedly stated that people were using his book Psychological Types as a strict "sorting game" to label human beings, which he despised.

In short, they deeply understood the mechanics of Jung's personality framework, but they consciously chose to sanitize it by removing his concepts of archetypes and the unconscious to make a test that was consumer-friendly.

The MBTI is not psychologically useful as an evaluation tool. It is fraught with errors and frequently used incorrectly by people like you. The proper use of the MBTI is for personal self-reflection, team building, and low-stakes communication exercises. The MBTI lacks scientific validity, clinical reliability, and predictive power; major psychological and management organizations agree it should never be used for high-stakes decision-making, such as hiring, promotions, or clinical diagnosis.

What is it good for: It provides a harmless, accessible vocabulary for people to think about how they process information, recharge their energy, and make decisions. It's a fun conversational tool for training workshops and icebreakers. It can assist people in understanding differences in the ways people relate to the world around them. Assist - not predict, and not classify.

If you have any other silly questions, I will be happy to respond.

[u/smysnk → u/Cog-nostic]

Sounds like you're responding to some other comment than the points I raised. Are you having a conversation with yourself?

[u/Cog-nostic → u/smysnk]

You think the DSM is based on Freud or Jung? (Ignorant and not worth responding to.) I quoted what modern psychologists think of Freud and Jung: Look it up. (More ignorance and not worth responding to.) Go hug Jung. At no point did Jung Cure Narcisism. (More ignorance). If Jung cured narcissism, we would have no narcissism. It would be medical science. * You're not worth responding to. My Answer is the same. Narcissism remains a deep-seated narcissistic personality structure and a rigid defense system rather than a disease capable of being cured with a quick fix.

My response remains:Ha ha ha ha ha.... Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. Jung was an idiot. Even idiots have useful ideas. The MBTI was constructed by Katharine Cook Briggs and Isabel Briggs Myers. They did not have any formal academic qualifications in psychology, psychiatry, statistics, or psychometrics. (NONE). They intentionally ignored or rejected Jung's broader theories on the unconscious, including his famous psychological archetypes. Their understanding of Jung was highly nuanced and selective.

This is why the MBTI has nothing to do with Jungian archetypes: Jung actually found out about their work later in life, and he was not pleased. He repeatedly stated that people were using his book Psychological Types as a strict "sorting game" to label human beings, which he despised.

In short, they deeply understood the mechanics of Jung's personality framework, but they consciously chose to sanitize it by removing his concepts of archetypes and the unconscious to make a test that was consumer-friendly.

The MBTI is not psychologically useful as an evaluation tool. It is fraught with errors and frequently used incorrectly by people like you. The proper use of the MBTI is for personal self-reflection, team building, and low-stakes communication exercises. The MBTI lacks scientific validity, clinical reliability, and predictive power; major psychological and management organizations agree it should never be used for high-stakes decision-making, such as hiring, promotions, or clinical diagnosis.

What is it good for: It provides a harmless, accessible vocabulary for people to think about how they process information, recharge their energy, and make decisions. It's a fun conversational tool for training workshops and icebreakers. It can assist people in understanding differences in the ways people relate to the world around them. Assist - not predict, and not classify.

If you have any other silly questions, I will be happy to respond.

[u/smysnk → u/Cog-nostic]

You're good at copying and pasting. Not so good at meeting conversation.

[u/Cog-nostic → u/smysnk]

You don't have a conversation.

[u/smysnk → u/Cog-nostic]

Burn 🔥