Michael Kiyoshi Salvatore An Introduction to

C. G. Jung’s living legacy can broadly be placed within two psychological frameworks: that of depth , a study of human experience with an emphasis on working with the unconscious and its contents, and that of psychological types, descriptions of cognitive and behavioral inclinations that are theorized to be innate to individuals.

Jung began conceptualizing his typology in part to grasp the irreconcilability he saw in ’s and ’s own psychological theories. Jung’s inquiry, with the help of his friend Hans Schmid and original contributions of Maria Moltzer and Jung’s ‘spiritual wife’ Toni Wolff1, grew into psychological types. While initially hesitant to posit a plurality of truth, Jung came to see how “every judgment made by an individual is conditioned by his type … every point of view is necessarily relative.”2 His typology captures how these biases tend to operate.

Four attitudes, or orientations of mental energy Four functions, or processes of mental information Introversion (I) Extroversion (E) Sensing (S) (N)

Oriented towards the inner Oriented towards the outer Operates from “actualities” Operates from “enticing world of feelings, ideas, world of people, objects, and “direct experience”5 from visions of possibilities”6 or memory, and imagination.3 places, and action.4 the details received from the “hunches”7 of the five senses. imagination. Irrational, or Perceiving (P) Rational, or Judging (J) Thinking (T) Feeling (F)

“Attuned to incoming “Concerned with making Seeks “objective truth”10 and “Informs you . . . of the value information” with an “open, decisions, seeking closure, to “organize facts and ideas of things . . . whether a thing curious, and . . . adaptable” planning operations, or into a logical sequence.” is acceptable or agreeable or .8 organizing activities.”9 not,” its “worth.”11

1 Nan Healy, Toni Wolff & C.G. Jung: A Collaboration (Los Angeles, CA: Tiberius Press, 2017), 177-183. 2 C. G. Jung, Memories, Dreams, Reflections (New York, NY: Vintage Books, 1989), 209. 3 Dario Nardi, 8 Keys to Self-Leadership (Huntington Beach, CA: Unite Business, 2005), 5. 4 Nardi, 8 Keys to Self-Leadership, 5. 5 Isabel Myers and Peter Myers, Gifts Differing (Palo Alto, CA: Davies-Black, 1995), 59. 6 Myers, Gifts Differing, 59. 7 C. G. Jung, in Theory and Practice (The Tavistock Lectures) (New York: Vintage Books, 1970), 13. 8 Isabel Myers and Mary McCaulley, A Guide to the Development and Use of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologist Press, 1985), 14. 9 Myers and McCaulley, A Guide to the Development and Use of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator, 14. 10 Myers, Gifts Differing, 65. 11 C. G. Jung, Analytical Psychology in Theory and Practice, 13.

1 Following the publication of Psychological Types in 1921, C. G. Jung’s subsequent work largely focused on elucidating more esoteric and mystical subjects. As his typology caught on, he distanced himself from its popular applications, comparing them to “a childish parlour game.”12 Jung nevertheless continued to use his typological theories in his private practice, still finding it integral as a “psychology of consciousness”13 that supplements his work inward and downward towards the spirit.

Contrary to his preferences, Jungian typology has become an internationally acclaimed tool in both professional and hobbyist fields of business, counseling, coaching, and psychotherapy. The success of psychological types is in no small part a consequence of Isabel Myers’ and ’ operationalization of Jung’s ideas, their own amateur research into human personality converging with Jung’s. Through the latter half of the 20th century, they worked to further clarify and formalize Jung's original ideas, creating an assessment tool and framework that emphasizes accessibility and practical utility for understanding and developing oneself or others. Jung’s typology has inspired many other type iterations,14 although the most successful tend to follow the precedent set by the focus of the Myers-Briggs Type Inventory: the eight functions and attitudes, and the sixteen personality types they produce.

ESTP ISTP ESFP ISFP ENTP INTP ENFP INFP Extraverted Introverted Extraverted Introverted Extraverted Introverted Extraverted Introverted Sensing Sensing Sensing Sensing Intuiting Intuiting Intuiting Intuiting Thinking Thinking Feeling Feeling Thinking Thinking Feeling Feeling Perceiving Perceiving Perceiving Perceiving Perceiving Perceiving Perceiving Perceiving ESTJ ISTJ ESFJ ISFJ ENTJ INTJ ENFJ INFJ Extraverted Introverted Extraverted Introverted Extraverted Introverted Extraverted Introverted Sensing Sensing Sensing Sensing Intuiting Intuiting Intuiting Intuiting Thinking Thinking Feeling Feeling Thinking Thinking Feeling Feeling Judging Judging Judging Judging Judging Judging Judging Judging

Despite its popularity, types remain outside of mainstream psychology, often derided for its essentializing of human nature. The current scientific paradigm, grounded in centuries of success privileging the explanatory power of the mechanistic and material over the teleological and typological,

12 Jung, Psychological Types, xiv. 13 C. G. Jung, Memories, Dreams, Reflections, 209. 14 Post-Jungian typology includes the highly systematized model of the Lithuanian psychologist Aušra Augustinavičiūtė and her followers that developed on the other side of the Iron Wall, neurological correlations studied by anthropologist Dario Nardi, four-function hierarchical models of Naomi Quenk and others, John Beebe’s eight- archetype model, and ’s four and behaviorally-focused research..

2 assumes innate behavior and cognitive development should be attributable to specific genes, hormones, evolutionary processes, and/or neurology. Likewise, psychological modeling should follow the evidence, abstracting from emergent averages in the data along spectra and scales, not emphasizing immaterial binaries that depend on subjective generalizations and geometric elegance.

At the same time, acclaimed Big Five researchers McCrae and Costa find “each of the four indices [of type] showed impressive evidence of convergence with one of the five major dimensions of normal personality.” Jungian extraversion parallels Big Five extroversion; intuition corresponds to openness to experience; feeling relates to agreeableness; judging is similar to conscientiousness; neuroticism has no match.15 These researchers view type as a “set of internally consistent and relatively uncorrelated indices” with “no lack of correlational data” if type were reimagined as an open inventory of traits opposed to the closed, typological model it is.16

These criticisms point to the irrevocably archetypal nature of psychological types, as its pairings of functions and attitudes exemplify the Heraclitian principle of , everything giving rise to and most knowable through its tension with its polar opposite, forming dualities and quaternities.17 There is no material basis for these complementary pairings, nor explanation for why their synthesis is fundamental to the process of becoming psychologically whole. Could it be Jung was inspired by the quarternaries of the humors, astrological elements, or alchemical processes he is well-known for studying?18 Perhaps. These structural parallels should not be overstated, however; “for Jung it was a great discovery when he later found confirmation of his more intuitively conceived idea in the fact that everywhere in myths and religious symbolism there appears the model of the fourfold structure of the . In studying the behavior of his patients, he found that he had apparently hit upon a basic structure.”19 Thus, Jung created an irreducible psychological model, speaking to something elemental with consciousness.

15 Robert McCrae and Paul Costa Jr., “Reinterpreting the Myers‐Briggs Type Indicator From the Perspective of the Five‐ Factor Model of Personality,” Journal of Personality 57, no. 1 (March 1989): 32–33. 16 Robert McCrae and Paul Costa Jr., “Reinterpreting the Myers‐Briggs Type Indicator From the Perspective of the Five‐ Factor Model of Personality,” Journal of Personality 57, no. 1 (March 1989): 19, 23. 17 C. G. Jung, The Archetypes and the , vol. 18 of The Collected Works of Carl Gustav Jung, trans. R. F. C. Hull (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University, 1981), 178. “There is no consciousness without the discrimination of opposites.” 18 Phillipson, Garry and Peter Case, “The Hidden Lineage of Modern Management Science: Astrology, Alchemy and the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator”, Culture and Cosmos 5, no. 2 (Winter/Autumn 2001): 59. 19 Marie-Louise von Franz, Lectures on Jung's Typology (Putnam, CT: Spring, 2013), 10.

3 Further complicating psychological type’s relationship with science and academia proper, the orientations and mental processes outlined above are viewed by many type theorists as supplemental and superficial compared to what is argued to be at the core of the theory underlying Jungian types20: the eight cognitive processes.

Extraverted Thinking (Te) Extraverted Feeling (Fe) Extraverted Sensation (Se) Extraverted Intuition (Ne)

Introverted Thinking (Ti) Introverted Feeling (Fi) Introverted Sensation (Si) Introverted Intuition (Ni)

Also known as attitude-functions, cognitive functions, and mental processes, the cognitive processes represent eight essential dynamics of perceiving or understanding the world. They are a combination of Jung’s better known attitudes/orientations (introverted and extraverted) and functions/processes (feeling, sensing, thinking, intuiting), but represent the emergence of something markedly different and more aligned with the embodied experience of consciousness than the behavioral focus of much and research addressing the attitudes and functions independently.

While many Jungian typologist join academic personality researchers in their rejection of cognitive processes for their “speculating”21 into human cognition, dependence on anecdotal evidence, and lack of statistical validation,22 they remain widely popular for their accessibility, practical applications, and elegance, with many theorists arguing the processes “are truly the building blocks of personality,”23 reflecting how the “psyche is dynamic and is always seeking balance.”24

Jung originally theorized that everyone has an innate preference for one of the eight processes. This dominant or superior process is in turn easiest to use, the most reliable and generative, and initiates and directs the process. In addition, Jung believed everyone had a less

20 This is suggested by Catherine D. Myers in Leona Haas and Mark Hunziker, Building Blocks of (San Bernardino, CA: Eltanin, 2014), xvii. 21 David Kiersey, Please Understand Me II (Carlsbad, CA: Prometheus Nemesis Books, 1998), 30. “I have never found a use for [the] scheme of psychological functions, and this is because function typology sets out to define different people’s mental make-up—what’s in their heads—something which is not observable, and which is thus unavoidably subjective, a matter of speculation, and occasionally of projection.” 22 For a thorough rebuke of cognitive processes, see James Reynierse, “The Case Against Type Dynamics,” Journal of Psychological Type 69, no. 1 (January 2009): 1–21. 23 Leona Haas and Mark Hunziker, Building Blocks of Personality Type (San Bernardino, CA: Eltanin, 2014), 2. 24 Gary Hartzler and Margaret Hartzler, Functions of Type (Huntington Beach, CA: Telos, 2005), 3.

4 differentiated and complementary auxiliary process that supports the dominant process,25 and an inferior process that is the inverse of the superior process.

Subsequent research into cognitive processes, following the accessibility and utility set by Myers and Briggs, comes from professional counselors and coaches who abstract general qualities of clients or research subjects who identify with a dominant cognitive process or associated personality type. Many theories, as proposed by Naomi Quenk and Aušra Augustinavičiūtė for example, have evolved the concept into more standardized four- and eight-part hierarchical “stacks” of processes, sometimes assigning to each position within the stack a particular set of attributes in addition to the characteristics of the cognitive process assigned to it. Preliminary electroencephalogram (EEG) research by Dario Nardi shows some correlation between neocortical activity and the dominant cognitive process.26 He hypothesizes that the typological patterns of cognition are examples of strange attractors: irreducible, non-material patterns that can emerge from chaos.27

ESTP ISTP ESFP ISFP Dominant/Superior Extraverted Sensing Introverted Thinking Extraverted Sensing Introverted Feeling Auxiliary Introverted Thinking Extraverted Sensing Introverted Feeling Extraverted Sensing Tertiary Feeling Intuiting Thinking Intuiting Inferior Introverted Intuiting Extraverted Feeling Introverted Intuiting Extraverted Thinking ESTJ ISTJ ESFJ ISFJ Dominant/Superior Extraverted Thinking Introverted Sensing Extraverted Feeling Introverted Sensing Auxiliary Introverted Sensing Extraverted Thinking Introverted Sensing Extraverted Feeling Tertiary Intuiting Feeling Intuiting Thinking Inferior Introverted Feeling Extraverted Intuiting Introverted Thinking Extraverted Intuiting ENTP INTP ENFP INFP Dominant/Superior Extraverted Intuiting Introverted Thinking Extraverted Intuiting Introverted Feeling Auxiliary Introverted Thinking Extraverted Intuiting Introverted Feeling Extraverted Intuiting Tertiary Feeling Sensing Thinking Sensing Inferior Introverted Sensing Extraverted Feeling Introverted Sensing Extraverted Thinking ENTJ INTJ ENFJ INFJ Dominant/Superior Extraverted Thinking Introverted Intuiting Extraverted Feeling Introverted Intuiting Auxiliary Introverted Intuiting Extraverted Thinking Introverted Intuiting Extraverted Feeling Tertiary Sensing ]Feeling Sensing Thinking Inferior Introverted Feeling Extraverted Sensing Introverted Thinking Extraverted Sensing

25 Jung, Psychological Types, § 668. “Experience shows that the secondary function is always one whose nature is different from, though not antagonistic to, the primary function.” 26 Dario Nardi’s Neuroscience of Personality is his first book on these correlations between EEG scans and personality types, which suggests that dominant processes have distinct resting and “flow” states, with some activity suggesting the auxiliary process. 27 Dario Nardi, Neuroscience of Personality (Los Angeles, CA: Radiance House, 2011), 11.

5 Jung did not explicitly define a third cognitive process, but later theorists widely agree a tertiary process should complement the auxiliary process. However, there is no agreement if its orientation is the same or opposite of the auxiliary, or undifferentiated altogether. For example, an ESFJ’s auxiliary process is introverted sensing, but its complement is theorized to be extraverted intuiting, introverted intuiting, or undifferentiated intuiting.

From Jung onward, a fourth inferior process continues to be seen in opposition to the superior process. Jung asserts that the inferior function is permanently in a state of underdevelopment, “otherwise we would be perfect like God, and that surely will not happen.”28 Theorists generally interpret the inferior process as difficult to develop, associated it with one’s , the unconscious, and the anima or animus, and see it as key to transformative self-development.

For the sake of clarity, I describe each cognitive process as it is defined in a dominant role in the psyche. Synthesizing various texts by professional typology and Jungian theorists, I summarize each process's unique mental experience and expertise that generally constellate a normative set of attitudes and beliefs among those who prefer using the process. These descriptions are built from Leona Haas’s and Mark Junsiker’s Building Blocks of Personality Type, Gary Hartzler’s and Margaret Hartzler’s Functions of Type, Dario Nardi’s 8 Keys to Self-Leadership and Neuroscience of Personality, and Personality Type: an Owner’s Manual by Lenore Thomson.

Each cognitive process is introduced by its name, the two personality types for whom it is a superior process, and the two for whom it is auxiliary. The cognitive process descriptions are organized by their oppositional pairings, as defined by Jung.

The Perceiving Cognitive Processes

These first four cognitive processes are modes of perception—“how we access data and focus attention”29—which Jung called “irrational,” “not as denoting something contrary to reason, but something beyond reason, something, therefore, not grounded in reason.”30

28 C.G. Jung, The Symbolic Life, vol. 18, Collected Works of Carl Gustav Jung, (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University, 2014), 97–98. 29 Nardi, Neuroscience of Personality, 74 30 Jung, Psychological Types, § 774

6 Introverted Sensation (Si; superior for ISFJ, ISTJ; auxiliary for ESFJ, ESTJ)

Those who are the dominant introverted sensation type perceive through a vast reservoir of rich sensory details and memory, automatically comparing what is in the present moment with past experience, noticing any minute concrete differences from past precedent. Their memories can be as vivid as their initial experience, becoming condensed, valued foundations for processing the present and planning for the future. They have a heightened awareness of their physical constitution, such as their energy or hunger levels. As a consequence, they prefer operating from standards that best keep them comfortable: what is personally familiar, or what has been widely established as a reputable. They are inclined towards what has stood the test of time, such as traditions and customs, social duties and obligations, and roles in which working sequentially and with expertise gained through rote repetition make them respectable members of their community. Through a commitment to what is known to work, following role models and authorities, and acting carefully to maintain and honor the structures of society, introverted sensors aim to build roots and erect barriers to prevent unforeseeable problems caused by the constant flux of life. In turn, they prefer working slowly and steadily towards their objectives, remaining sensitive to any anomalies that violate the stability of what is known. They may become overly cautious and averse to new experiences, holding their desire for security and predictability above making necessary changes in life.

Extraverted Intuition (Ne; superior for ENFP, ENTP; auxiliary for INFP, INTP)

Those who are the dominant extraverted intuition type perceive through emerging patterns and dynamics, quickly connecting the dots of their present context and their experiences or ideas, generating alternative possibilities to what is accepted as fact by themselves or others. They follow their curiosity and hunches to explore tangents wherever they may take them, brainstorming spontaneously and impartially without immediate concerns for utility or relevance. As a consequence, they prefer operating from a variety of inputs, particularly what is novel and stimulating, or piques their imagination and humor. They are inclined towards roles that keep them inspired, allowing them to be inventive and operate outside the box. At best, their divergent thinking may converge on original insights that may shift present dynamics or catalyze a change. Extraverted intuitives often become pioneers of new ideas or technology, excited by untapped potentials for innovation. In turn, they are apt

7 to use their enthusiasm and optimistic idealism to promote or champion causes that may be revolutionary. They may become too engrossed in hypotheticals for their own sake, fail to make decisions, complete projects, or stick to commitments, holding their desire for novelty above boring and stifling routines.

Extraverted Sensation (Se; superior for ESFP, ESTP; auxiliary for ISFP, ISTP)

Those who are the dominant extraverted sensation type are immersed in their perception of their present situation, developing a strong memory for details in context. They are stimulated by sights, tastes, sounds, movement, and richness of the environment surrounding them; tracking where things are moving and heading; noticing subtle changes in the moods and behaviors of others and the motives they suggest. Enjoying the here and now matters most to extraverted sensation types: they take life as it comes, becoming one with their environment, taking time to “smell the roses.”31 They value aesthetic harmony for its sensual pleasure, and activities that keep them energized, such as athletics. They are in tune with their gut reactions and impulses for seizing opportunities, rising to challenges, testing limits, or acting quickly if a crisis presents itself. As a consequence, they often strive to remain current, in sync, and on the pulse of their fields of interest, learning the nuances and mannerisms, and adopting the standard style and tools to keep up appearances. By absorbing such conventions and familiarizing themselves with the paradigmatic norms and popularity, extraverted sensors become skillful improvisers and multi-taskers who can leverage their acculturated knowledge to make a strong effect as an insider. They may become overly impulsive and reckless in their behavior, overindulgent in sensory pleasures, or fail to consider anything that is not concrete or outside the present moment.

Introverted Intuition (Ni; superior for INFJ, INTJ; auxiliary for ENFJ, ENTJ)

Those who are the dominant introverted intuition type perceive through a meta-perspective that implicates deep meaning beneath or behind concrete experience. They come to know things by closing off from the external world and receiving flashes of insight, perceiving symbols and images that emerge seemingly from nowhere, reconciling disparate viewpoints into a greater whole that is sometimes premonitory in nature. Reality is limited by the perspectives through which it is approached,

31 Haas, Building Blocks of Personality Type, 41.

8 therefore introverted intuitives seek hidden angles to transform their perception, and as a consequence themselves. Insights cannot be willed: they require the right conditions or provocations to release them from the depths of their mind. Because totalized perspectives and metaphysical understanding come to them easily, introverted intuitives are interested in contemplating ultimate questions about life, death, and meaning, often coming to conclusions they struggle to articulate. Therefore, they often keep insights to themselves, despite the confidence they may or may not feel in their perceptions. At best, introverted intuitives fill the roles of visionaries who transform society with their vision of what ultimately is true. They may become obsessed with paranoid world views that disconnect them from others or society, neglecting everyday practical needs and decisions that require concrete responses.

The Judging Cognitive Processes

This second set of cognitive processes are “how we organize and make decisions,”32 which Jung calls rational, or “that which accords with reason.”33

Extraverted Thinking (Te; superior for ESTJ, ENTJ; auxiliary for ISTJ, INTJ)

Those who are the dominant extraverted thinking type operate with control and results in mind, in accordance to evidence-based metrics and criteria that allow them to act decisively and optimally. They prefer using data that can be objectively measured and quantified for the maintenance and improvement of their tasks and plans. Analyzing the world and locating inefficiencies comes easily to extraverted thinkers, as does setting priorities and creating step-by-step methods to reach concrete goals. They often focus on mechanics and causality, not wanting to waste limited resources and time on whims, speculation, or details: decisions are best when reduced to black and white, or cause and effect. Likewise, they are concise communicators who focus on the logical consistency of their own and others' reasoning to persuade others and reach conclusions. They are often both strategically and tactically skilled, and can quickly recognize the scope of problems and generate solutions to them, making them effective managers and leaders who enjoy rising to challenges, setting courses of action, implementing multi-faceted plans, and maintaining performance standards for themselves and others. They may become overly controlling of others in their imposition of rules, dismissing any negative

32 Nardi, Neuroscience of Personality, 74 33 Jung, Psychological Types, § 785

9 feedback or distractions that ultimately may be pertinent to their objectives, or ignoring complexities in a unilateral search for simplicity.

Introverted Feeling (Fi; superior for ISFP, INFP; auxiliary for ESFP, ENFP)

Those who are the superior introverted feeling type make decisions in alignment with their deeply felt personal values and conscience. They experience strong reactions concerning what matters to them most, and have a profound need for internal harmony and moral integrity, even when their values are not fully conscious. Their values feel self-evident and absolute, and so they often do not discuss controversial issues, assuming theirs and others' convictions would not change or benefit from the exchange. At the same time, they are skilled listeners, highly attuned to subtleties communicated by others, including tone and word choice, noting when others are trying to hide something, or experiencing internal turmoil. They highly value honesty and authenticity, and are willing to defend the desires and beliefs of others when they do not harm or impose on others. They tend to extend this tolerant attitude broadly towards others, preferring to be free to live according to their own beliefs, and expecting the same of and from others. Therefore, introverted feelers prefer interacting with others on a one-on-one basis, emphasizing the uniqueness of individual motivations and convictions, opposed to conforming to normative social behavior. They may become closed off from people they feel violate their sense of right and wrong, or they may choose not to articulate or share their values with others, even those to whom they are close.

Introverted Thinking (Ti; superior for ISTP, INTP; auxiliary for ESTP, ISTP)

Those who are the dominant introverted thinking type come to understand a subject by detaching from the particulars of a given thing and evaluating it in terms of various frameworks and principles that they have compiled. They actively classify and categorize the world around them, figuratively or literally taking things apart to understand their components, sometimes applying multiple models at once to maximize the accuracy and clarity of their determinations. They have a curiosity for understanding how things work on a deep level, putting great effort into defining things precisely and refining existing models as new data requires it. They strive to bring elegance to their

10 understanding, “maximizing explanatory power with minimum complexity,”34 in order to create leverage points of minimal effort for maximum effect. They are compelled to follow any logical inquiry to its conclusions, regardless of their reasoning's discrepancies with conventional values or preconceived criteria of true or false. As a consequence, they are skilled at creating original models for understanding the world and critiquing preexisting ideas for improving their internal consistency. They may not accept things that fail to fit within their models, overextending their ideas beyond their appropriate scope, or fail to consider the concrete consequences of their impersonal ideas.

Extraverted Feeling (Fe; superior for ESFJ, ENFJ; auxiliary for ISFJ, INFJ)

Those with dominant extraverted feeling tune in to the needs and values of others. They can read the emotional energy of a room or group and adjust their behavior accordingly, coming to decisions to maintain and create social harmony. They are inclined towards considering the needs of the collective in terms of commonly-held values; likewise, they are known for operating from social norms as a foundation for developing amiable interactions and maintaining standards of politeness. At the same time, they are driven to interact with people as individuals and are apt to empathize with others’ perspectives, disclosing their own values to prompt others to share theirs, before often taking on others' needs as their own. Extraverted feelers frequently feel compelled to take on causes or roles to help or defend others, through which they can discuss and cultivate strong social values and networks. As a consequence, they are skilled at generating a sense of oneness and intimacy with others or among groups, producing a congeniality that makes them great hosts and facilitators, or by creating safety that allows for vulnerability and the resolution of conflict. Their desire to help may become excessively imposing, crossing personal boundaries or forcing superficial values and norms on others. Alternatively, they may sacrifice their needs for others and become dependent on others' affirmation.

34 Nardi, Neuroscience of Personality,106

11 Bibliography

Beebe, John. Energies and Patterns in Psychological Type. New York: Routledge, 2017.

Bennet, Angelina. The Shadows of Type. Lexington, KY: Lulu, 2010.

Haas, Leona, and Mark Hunziker. Building Blocks of Personality Type. San Bernardino, CA: Eltanin, 2014.

Healy, Nan Savage. Toni Wolff & C.G. Jung: A Collaboration. Los Angeles, CA: Tiberius Press, 2017.

Hartzler, Gary, and Margaret Hartzler. Functions of Type. Huntington Beach, CA: Telos, 2005.

Hunziker, Mark. Depth Typology. San Bernardino, CA: Write Way, 2016.

Jung, C. G. Psychological Types. Translated by H. G. Baynes. Revised by R. F. C. Hull. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University, 1976.

———. Analytical Psychology: Its Theory and Practice (The Tavistock Lectures). New York: Vintage, 1970.

———. Memories, Dreams, Reflections, edited by Aniela Jaffé. New York: Vintage, 1989.

Kiersey, David. Please Understand Me II. Carlsbad, CA: Prometheus Nemesis Books, 1998.

Myers, Isabel and Peter Myers. Gifts Differing. Palo Alto, CA: Davies-Black, 1995.

Myers, Isabel. A Guide to the Development and Use of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologist Press, 1985.

McCrae, Robert and Paul Costa Jr. “Reinterpreting the Myers‐Briggs Type Indicator From the Perspective of the Five‐Factor Model of Personality.” Journal of Personality 57, no. 1 (March 1989): 17–40.

Nardi, Dario. 8 Keys to Self-Leadership. Huntington Beach, CA: Unite Business, 2005.

———. Neuroscience of Personality. Los Angeles, CA: Radiance House, 2011.

Phillipson, Garry and Peter Case, “The Hidden Lineage of Modern Management Science: Astrology, Alchemy and the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator”, Culture and Cosmos 5, no. 2 (Winter/Autumn 2001): 53-72.

Quenk, Naomi. Was That Really Me? Mountain View, CA: Davies Black, 2001.

Reynierse, James. “The Case Against Type Dynamics.” Journal of Psychological Type 69, no. 1 (January 2009): 1–24. https://www.capt.org/research/article/JPT_Vol69_0109.pdf.

12 Thomson, Lenore. Personality Type: An Owner’s Manual. Boston, MA: Shambhala, 1998.

Von Franz, Marie-Louise and . Lecture on Jung's Typology. Putnam, CT: Spring, 2013.

13