- Type: NeFi
- Development: ll--
- Attitude: Seelie
Ok, so I’m back. Here goes. I think it’s brilliant that CT recognizes that personality type is a complex (Jung’s usage). A composite of beliefs, motivations etc. That sets CT way apart from other Jungian typologies, and I think we have vultology to thank for it.
Our psyches have the twin aspect of awareness and energy (roughly, intellect and will). The innate, natural ability to know and the innate natural ability to do/effect etc. The ego is a complex of our current limit of self-awareness and those aspects of the will (desires, intentions, etc) that are within that awareness. The ones we identify with. And personality type is kinda like that: a complex of cognition and energetics. What I’m suggesting is that we don’t strictly blur the distinction between cognition and energetics.
“Full development” can mean a CF (whatever they ultimately are) is well-rooted in both cognition and energetics. We know we are both unconscious and conscious in our intellect. So perhaps it’s the case that the development cycle goes like:
Intellect –> Will
(or Cognition –> Energetics)
And in the first stage (Intellect) it goes, as we know it does, Unconscious –> Conscious.
But I think we speak of “fully conscious” as if it is the same thing as “fully developed”, and I’m not sure that’s accurate any more. We know, using the analogy of beliefs, that things start in a kind of superficial ‘mental’ level, and don’t start affecting our lives until it sinks deeper into a more body/heart/will level. Until it is integrated into our priorities.
It’s in that sense that I mean I think CFs are cognitive and the EQs are “intentional” or in the realm of inclination/desire/pull/will/choice etc.
But that’s because we think of them as two separate aspects themselves that merge in a way (which seems accurate to me).
But another way to see it is to consider that a CF (whatever it is), is a capacity that sits in the unconscious, rises into the conscious cognitive ‘realm’, then with time/devlt, sinks into the deeper will and is integrated into the priorities of the person. In this sense, the 4 EQs aren’t really a thing in themselves so much as four sets of similarities, between Fe/Te & Ne/Se & Fi/Ti, & Si/Ni.
But I prefer the first way (which is how we look at it now): The EQs are inclinations of the will (IMO) which merge with certain elements of cognition (the 8 CFs), to create a complex we recognize as a ‘personality type.’