RE: Suggestion

[Guest guest]

From:

> I would be interested in some of your ideas about the typology of the

candidates or what in terms of HIS possible comments on the direction the

collective concious n unconscious is taking...

I agree with Alice. While the recent discussion has been spirited and has drawn

many in/back to active discussion (as politics tends to do here), it has

approached the absurd at times (e.g. extolling the virtues of feudalism). I

encourage my fellow sitters to look back over the recent posts for signs of

egoity - they abound! Not a condemnation, merely an observation.

I am also impressed by how the US election has captivated the attention of so

many in other countries. I love your energy about Obama's candidacy fa! And

I don't think you are alone by any means. I read yesterday that as many Japanese

(80%) are interested in the election, compared to (83%) in this country.

To respond to Alice about question about typologies, my quick impression of both

candidates would be:

Obama - Myers Briggs: ENFP; Enneagram: 9

McCain - Myers Briggs: ENTJ; Ennegram: 8

Perhaps others could suggest other typologies to consider. I have been reading

lately the works of Hawkins MD PhD on levels of consciousness (which he

claims to be both objective and verifiably " calibratible " . I am drawn to his

work, but he has set off my crap detector on a few points. His book TRUTH vs

FALSEHOOD is particularly interesting. Alice's friend Woolger put me onto

his THE EYE OF THE I, considered to be a modern-day classic by many.

My guess is that Obama would score over 400 on the consciousness scale; while

McCain would be in the mid 200s. But this is merely a first guess.

I would love to see an more thorough analysis of both astrologically for signs

of how each might lead our country. Astrologers please help out! Thanks to

Janet Kane for the brief synopsis of Obama's chart. I would also like to hear

some comments about how each score on the Love, Power, Wisdom scale, say on a

range of 1-10 in each category. I'll withhold my own opinion on the matter for

now.

IMO, our present times, given the state of the world and US, we desperately need

Obama and NOT McCain. Obama is young and inexperienced, yet these likely are to

our collective advantage at this moment not to our detriment. But this is likely

a reflection of hope/optimism rather than cynacism/despair on my part.

Obviously Obama tunes in to the former.

Final note: the loss of Tim Russert, to me, is an extraordinary one to this

country. He represented the VERY BEST in professional journalism, at a time we

most need it here. He will be sorely missed indeed.

Greg

_______________________________________________

Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com

The most personalized portal on the Web!

[Guest guest]

Dear Greg;

" I encourage my fellow sitters to look back over the recent posts for signs

of egoity - they abound! Not a condemnation, merely an observation. "

>

Really? That's not exactly as i read it, but then, my ego is still very

present. In fact, Greg, one needs an ego to make a judgment. If we spoke

from the Self(our ego would be very tiny, I assume...according to Jung) we

wouldn't make any judgments at all. At least that is my understanding of

" SELF "

No, no I am not taking your view personally at all. I included myself in

" all those fellow sitters "

how about we all admit we speak from our egos most of the time if not all

the time. That is where we are, or are there some special ascended folks

around here I didn't know about?

Also, I find it very difficult to use words about what I think without using

the word " I " . it would all have to be in the passive tense and that sounds

stilted to me.

So let's all make believe we are very much still on the earthly plane and

our judgments about political candidates are from our very earthly political

scene.

We egos find it hard, especially in political talk to not judge, because I

think that is what we are meant to do between two or more candidates?????

And is not judging by Myers-Briggs without actually knowing the subject a

bit " egoist?

Didn't I read somewhere; " Judge not that ye be not judged " like when we

speak from the Self? and a word from Jung which speaks of how often we fall

into projection? That is all of us, isn't it, hard as we try not to? But

that quote isn't about political elections, I believe. It might be about how

people's ideas sound on e-mail, no?

" We need desperately "

I would say we need a lot more that just Obama, but lets start with him. But

desperate....I don't think the US will slip off the map of the world just

yet...300,000,000 people are not completely desperate yet, I hope and pray.

Yes, i will miss Tim Russert a lot. I listened to him as often as i could.

he was a good and humble man with a great gift for separating wheat from

chaff.

I am humbly aware I speak from my ego as i write this.I believe Jung said we

can not exist without it anyway.

Toni

RE: Suggestion

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

> From:

>> I would be interested in some of your ideas about the typology of the

>> candidates or what in terms of HIS possible comments on the direction the

>> collective concious n unconscious is taking...

>

>

> I agree with Alice. While the recent discussion has been spirited and has

> drawn many in/back to active discussion (as politics tends to do here), it

> has approached the absurd at times (e.g. extolling the virtues of

> feudalism). I encourage my fellow sitters to look back over the recent

> posts for signs of egoity - they abound! Not a condemnation, merely an

> observation.

>

> I am also impressed by how the US election has captivated the attention of

> so many in other countries. I love your energy about Obama's candidacy

> fa! And I don't think you are alone by any means. I read yesterday

> that as many Japanese (80%) are interested in the election, compared to

> (83%) in this country.

>

> To respond to Alice about question about typologies, my quick impression

> of both candidates would be:

>

> Obama - Myers Briggs: ENFP; Enneagram: 9

>

> McCain - Myers Briggs: ENTJ; Ennegram: 8

>

> Perhaps others could suggest other typologies to consider. I have been

> reading lately the works of Hawkins MD PhD on levels of

> consciousness (which he claims to be both objective and verifiably

> " calibratible " . I am drawn to his work, but he has set off my crap

> detector on a few points. His book TRUTH vs FALSEHOOD is particularly

> interesting. Alice's friend Woolger put me onto his THE EYE OF THE

> I, considered to be a modern-day classic by many.

>

> My guess is that Obama would score over 400 on the consciousness scale;

> while McCain would be in the mid 200s. But this is merely a first guess.

>

> I would love to see an more thorough analysis of both astrologically for

> signs of how each might lead our country. Astrologers please help out!

> Thanks to Janet Kane for the brief synopsis of Obama's chart. I would

> also like to hear some comments about how each score on the Love, Power,

> Wisdom scale, say on a range of 1-10 in each category. I'll withhold my

> own opinion on the matter for now.

>

> IMO, our present times, given the state of the world and US, we

> desperately need Obama and NOT McCain. Obama is young and inexperienced,

> yet these likely are to our collective advantage at this moment not to our

> detriment. But this is likely a reflection of hope/optimism rather than

> cynacism/despair on my part. Obviously Obama tunes in to the former.

>

> Final note: the loss of Tim Russert, to me, is an extraordinary one to

> this country. He represented the VERY BEST in professional journalism, at

> a time we most need it here. He will be sorely missed indeed.

>

> Greg

[Guest guest]

Final note: the loss of Tim Russert, to me, is an extraordinary one to this country. He represented the VERY BEST in professional journalism, at a time we most need it here. He will be sorely missed indeed.

*** I am also so sad for the loss of Tim Russert , especially at this time when he was the first to step forward and make a commitment to vetting all stories about both candidates and helping to make this a positive election process.

SuzanneVote for your city's best dining and nightlife. City's Best 2008.

[Guest guest]

Greg, all,

Greg: I encourage my fellow sitters to look back over the recent

> posts for signs of egoity

Yup, lots of egoity in my posts Greg. Thank goodness.

***

> Obama - Myers Briggs: ENFP; Enneagram: 9

Don't know about where Obama would be on the Enneagram. Believe him to be

an introvert; don't see the extroversion dominant, although do see it very

accessible. ...very possibly wrong with my guess based in not enough data.

***

> Obama is young and inexperienced,

He doesn't strike me in the least bit as being inexperienced. Although, I

suppose it depends on what you mean by " experience. " Hopefully he's like

Abe Lincoln as far as capability goes.

What do you mean by experience? Doesn't experience plug into something?

Doesn't it get processed?

Hey, Jung hardly mentions experience at all.

***

Questions for informal archetypal research:

What symbols seem to be concretized in the culture these days?

What kinds of mythic categories and qualities have found their way into

the public discourse about the candidates?

What are the reasons candidates are being demonized or otherwise viewed in

a one-sided manner?

Where is the conflict of energy in a symbolic sense?

What kinds of beliefs seem to be fueling the various propensities for

magical participation?

How would the collective complex(s) be described?

etc..

regards,

ps. > Hawkins MD PhD on levels of

> consciousness (which he claims to be both objective and verifiably

> " calibratible " .

How silly to claim objectivity without subjecting one's research to

independent verification. Feeling here: snake oil!!!

Ohh, the Hawkins with the mail order Ph.D., his own new thought

cottage industry, and proclamation about his own enlightenment, an

enlightenment gained within the venue of a yoga he custom built for

himself? That one, huh?!

> my crap detector on a few points.

Well it should be...

[Guest guest]

Dear Greg,

Carl Jung extolled the virtues of feudalism. To reject feudalism in

such a cavalier way, as though it were simply absurd, is to reject out

of hand what Jung actually said about the problems of human beings

living together. Of course feudalism is open to critique, and one

might, for example, well argue that the ancient Roman way of life was

superior - but feudalism as a holistic way of life designed to meet all

of mans' needs, but especially his psychological needs, and to take

fair cognizance of the differences as well as the similarities between

individual human beings, is well defensible. This is, I gather, why

Jung defended it.

Not to say that one could really return to feudalism under present

conditions. I believe that it would take, at a minimum, a global

catastrophe of some kind for even the bare possibility of such a return

to come about.

And may I say that a group that looks to astrology for political

guidance might be a little bit cautious about prejudging other

unconventional political views or rejecting them out of hand.

regards,

Dan Watkins

Greg wrote:

From: [mailto: IonaDoveaol]

> I would be interested in some of your ideas about the typology of

the candidates or what in terms of HIS possible comments on the

direction the collective concious n unconscious is taking...

I agree with Alice. While the recent discussion has been spirited and

has drawn many in/back to active discussion (as politics tends to do

here), it has approached the absurd at times (e.g. extolling the

virtues of feudalism). I encourage my fellow sitters to look back over

the recent posts for signs of egoity - they abound! Not a condemnation,

merely an observation.

I am also impressed by how the US election has captivated the attention

of so many in other countries. I love your energy about Obama's

candidacy fa! And I don't think you are alone by any means. I read

yesterday that as many Japanese (80%) are interested in the election,

compared to (83%) in this country.

To respond to Alice about question about typologies, my quick

impression of both candidates would be:

Obama - Myers Briggs: ENFP; Enneagram: 9

McCain - Myers Briggs: ENTJ; Ennegram: 8

Perhaps others could suggest other typologies to consider. I have been

reading lately the works of Hawkins MD PhD on levels of

consciousness (which he claims to be both objective and verifiably

"calibratible". I am drawn to his work, but he has set off my crap

detector on a few points. His book TRUTH vs FALSEHOOD is particularly

interesting. Alice's friend Woolger put me onto his THE EYE OF

THE I, considered to be a modern-day classic by many.

My guess is that Obama would score over 400 on the consciousness scale;

while McCain would be in the mid 200s. But this is merely a first guess.

I would love to see an more thorough analysis of both astrologically

for signs of how each might lead our country. Astrologers please help

out! Thanks to Janet Kane for the brief synopsis of Obama's chart. I

would also like to hear some comments about how each score on the Love,

Power, Wisdom scale, say on a range of 1-10 in each category. I'll

withhold my own opinion on the matter for now.

IMO, our present times, given the state of the world and US, we

desperately need Obama and NOT McCain. Obama is young and

inexperienced, yet these likely are to our collective advantage at this

moment not to our detriment. But this is likely a reflection of

hope/optimism rather than cynacism/despair on my part. Obviously Obama

tunes in to the former.

Final note: the loss of Tim Russert, to me, is an extraordinary one to

this country. He represented the VERY BEST in professional journalism,

at a time we most need it here. He will be sorely missed indeed.

Greg

_______________________________________________

Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com

The most personalized portal on the Web!

[Guest guest]

From: toni

To: JUNG-FIRE

>Really? That's not exactly as i read it, but then, my ego is still very

present.

Hi Toni,

Did you choose to hear/read it that way, or did you automatically do so

(habitually?). Therein may lay the answer to your question. And I'll all for

the ego being present. That is, after all, how we operate on the plain of

time/space (the so-called " real " world).

>In fact, Greg, one needs an ego to make a judgment.

I agree with you. But man/woman does not live by " judgement " alone. No? Some

(those with predominant P vs J on the MBTI scale, tend to make options (P) as

opposed to quick, declarative decisions (J). One is not right or wrong, better

or worse, but rather represent different modes of functioning in the here and

now, the world of ego.

>If we spoke from the Self(our ego would be very tiny, I assume...according to

Jung) we wouldn't make any judgments at all. At least that is my understanding

of " SELF "

I have found (in my own experience of being Greg) that the Self, when I let my

ego get out of the way, tends to speak through me, as it lies in the Unc, and

that sometimes antagonizes the ego (little me). Jung certainly had judgements

about things...and I'm not aware that he urged us not to have judgements. Some

are better in disengaging egoity from their judging than others (allow us to

function in life more effectively than others), would you agree?

>No, no I am not taking your view personally at all. I included myself in " all

those fellow sitters "

Good, I had hoped than no one would. We all have egos and tend to operate out

of them much of the time....but that IS a choice we have.

>how about we all admit we speak from our egos most of the time if not all the

time. That is where we are, or are there some special ascended folks around here

I didn't know about?

I admit it too. But would you suggest that Gandhi, Jesus, Krishna, Budha, etc.

tended to speak from the ego most of the time? If not, perhaps that is why we

are still listening to their words as guidance for a better way of living...in

the here and now. They certainly were in the ranks of the " ascended " it seems

to me, those who had better access to the Self (at opposed of the ego - which

they most surely had too). Ego is not " bad " ...just limited.

>Also, I find it very difficult to use words about what I think without using

the word " I " . it would all have to be in the passive tense and that sounds

stilted to me.

This suggests that you are speaking of thinking (vs feeling). Perhaps you are

more comfortable with the thinking function and operate there much of the

time...not a " judgement " , but a question for you to answer for yourself. I do,

being an INTJ (in the world of ego functioning). But I really try not to live

there ALL the time. I recommend you purchase and read Hawkins's THE EYE OF THE I

and see how it strikes you. He seems to me to be highly compatible with Jung

BTW (whom he places on the consciousness scale slightly higher then Freud .

>So let's all make believe we are very much still on the earthly plane and our

judgments about political candidates are from our very earthly political scene.

Why is that important to you? It seems to me that Obama is capable (indeed

prefers) to operate on a plain that comfortably includes love and wisdom,

something I find refreshing in a politician. I don't see this in the same

degree in his opponent.

>We egos find it hard, especially in political talk to not judge, because I

think that is what we are meant to do between two or more candidates??

Yes, it seems we must continually choose between two candidates...and often not

the two we would choose to choose between. I have often voted for the " lessor of

two 'evils'. " Such is politics in our present " democracy. " It doesn't assure

us that we get the best leader, but we surely get the leader that we deserve

(collectively). Many would say (including me) that our present leader is good

evidence of this phenomenon. We did elect him....twice!

<And is not judging by Myers-Briggs without actually knowing the subject a bit

" egoist? "

In what sense? I am not using MB here to " judge " but was responding to Alice's

invitation to better understand the candidates via well known typologies, of

which MBTI is widely considered a good one. I see no harm in that. But I see

your point, perhaps judging is more akin to ego than to " that higher/inner

plain " to which we can also attain, especially if it is caught up in negativity

much of the time. I struggle with this constantly. And I find that I " give in "

to negativity, not much good comes from it...neither for moi or for others.

That is a hard lesson for ego to learn indeed. But is seems to me worth the

effort to at least try.

>Didn't I read somewhere; " Judge not that ye be not judged " like when we speak

from the Self?

I believe this statement is uttered from the POV of Self, not ego; yes.

>and a word from Jung which speaks of how often we fall into projection?

Yes of course. He talks of it often. And when we operate unconsciously out of

ego, we tend to project unconciously. Projection is always done UNCONSCIOUSLY,

even as we are capable of observing it in action....even if we seldom do so. But

if we begin to self-observe (who does the observing?) then we can begin to

honestly catch ourselves do it...projecting. That is psychological

growth....growing beyond ego, would you agree?

I'll stop for now. Good to " talk " again Toni.

greg

_______________________________________________

Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com

The most personalized portal on the Web!

[Guest guest]

From: dan watkins

To: JUNG-FIRE

>Carl Jung extolled the virtues of feudalism.

Hi Dan,

Cite please.

> To reject feudalism in such a cavalier way, as though it were simply absurd,

is to reject out of hand what Jung actually said about the problems of human

beings living together.

Human beings lived together in the dark ages, but few would like to return to

that existence in the midst of the 21st century. What are the key virtues of

feudalism for our lives today Dan? What circumstances would make them

preferable in your view?

>Of course feudalism is open to critique, and one might, for example, well argue

that the ancient Roman way of life was superior - but feudalism as a holistic

way of life designed to meet all

of mans' needs, but especially his psychological needs, and to take

fair cognizance of the differences as well as the similarities between

individual human beings, is well defensible. This is, I gather, why

Jung defended it.

I would appreciate reading how Jung defended feudalism (and the context in which

he did so). Did he suggest we roll back the clock to do so?

>Not to say that one could really return to feudalism under present

conditions. I believe that it would take, at a minimum, a global

catastrophe of some kind for even the bare possibility of such a return to come

about.

Well if you are considering the " global catastrophe " scenerio, feudalism may be

a worthy system - to some other dreadful alternatives to complete anarchy. But

are you suggesting a preference for feudalims short of that? Some could argue

that our present state of corporate oligarchy has some elements of the feudal

state, in which the captains of industry have dominion over their wage-slave

subjects I suppose.

>And may I say that a group that looks to astrology for political

guidance might be a little bit cautious about prejudging other

unconventional political views or rejecting them out of hand.

I, for one, am fascinated with the possibilities of astrology as a desciptor of

the " soul/psyche " (as Newton said, because I have " studied the matter " .) I also

studied Newtonion and Quantum Physics in university, but certainly don't claim

to be an expert in either. But they seem to work at certainl levels of

comprehension....and not at others. Newton's explanation of gravity was quite

different from Einstein's yet they both work in certain contexts. Newton, as

Jung, also considered the possibility of astrology, as did Kepler and others,

seeing in it something of value, even if they may have lacked the courage to

disclose to the societies in which they lived their doing so. But their

writings on the matter are now coming to light. Sonu Shamdasani is now working

on this aspect of Jung's life (in his work on Jung's Red Book) and has consulted

our Alice on the subject. Newton was an accomplished Alchemist, something

largely unknown to the world until very recently. Yet even

those who do the TV specials on it seem to lack an adequate understanding of

Alchemy (esoterically) to make a reasonable case for it.

But I am skeptical about Jung's championing of feudalism (in our time) as a

viable alternative. Set me straight Dan.

Greg

_______________________________________________

Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com

The most personalized portal on the Web!

[Guest guest]

Dear Toni,

This dialog feels like slogging through very thick, heavy mud. As is often, and

sadly, the case we seem not to communicate well, despite best of intentions on

both parts. And since I have neither the time nor the energy to carry on

further [and trying not to merely defend my own ego], I'll simply respond that

where you see " judgement " in my remarks there was meant to be honest observation

and straight forward communication. That seems not to have been welcome however,

or was seriously misinterpreted as harsh judgement. So be it. I seem to have

tried....and failed...yet again.

I must honestly say, however, I feel a heaviness of the kind of " judgement " of

which I seem to be accused throughout your post; but I'll not trudge further

into that swampland. I simply ask you consider the possibility of projection

here and invite you to have any last word on the subject you deem appropriate.

I wish you the best Toni.

Greg

_______________________________________________

Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com

The most personalized portal on the Web!

[Guest guest]

Thanks Greg for the encouragement. I am on

a whirl at the moment, crashed this evening and am now awake in the wee small

hours.

I have found it difficult to assess the

candidates in terms of Jungian typology. On reflection I think it is because

they have to operate from the persona on the campaign trail. Also, like Marte,

I just cannot connect with all this Myers-Briggs stuff!

I think it fairly clear that Bush is

a Feeling type. I want to proclaim Obama Thinking but suspect that he is

actually Intuitive, with Thinking as his first auxiliary. I would guess that

McCain is a Sensation type. Do however realize that I am assessing their

campaign propaganda and allow my opinion to change.

fa

" Show me a sane man and I will cure

him for you. " CG Jung

,___

[Guest guest]

From: josefa

To: JUNG-FIRE

> On reflection I think it is because they have to operate from the persona on

the campaign trail. Also, like Marte, I just cannot connect with all this

Myers-Briggs stuff! I think it fairly clear that Bush is a Feeling type. I want

to proclaim Obama Thinking but suspect that he is actually Intuitive, with

Thinking as his first auxiliary. I would guess that McCain is a Sensation type.

Do however realize that I am assessing their campaign propaganda and allow my

opinion to change.

The following article suggests that Bush is ESTP. I would have guessed he is a

J, but the others make sense to me. I don't see him as a feeler; it seems more

like an inferior function that he tries very hard to thrust

forward....unconvincingly to moi.

http://www.slate.com/id/90167/

I haven't figured out McCain yet....and with any luck I'll not have to spend

much time pondering his personality. I have seen and heard enough to know he

won't have my vote.

I feel much more comfortable with an Enneagram type of " 7 " for him...the puer

aeternus. That seems quite a good fit, if not the ideal type for a person in

his position. His father was clearly a " contraphobic 6 " .....a loyal guardian

who feels so tied up by convention and duty that he has to jump out of airplanes

at age 80 to prove himself. He now seems to be in the role of long-suffering

Senex to his " forever boy. " Can't wait until the two are mercifully rejoined

back in Texas so that our coutry can lick its festering wounds and recover from

our long national disaster.

These types somehow help me to orient myself to a person's natural way of being

in the world...their habitual way....their ego style. I agree with you that we

can be thrown off by their political persona - something conjured up by their

political alchemists to feed on the projection de jure of their constituents -

at least enough so to obtain 51% of the vote. So many elections now are really

just that close these days. I see the predominant " type " (Myers Briggs or

otherwise) as a reflection of the survival mechanism we each develop along the

way in order to cope with life's pressures and challenges from our infancy. And

at some point, usually in midlife, they don't seem to work as well as they did

in our earlier years. So, after much anguish, we are eventually offered the

opportunity to view ourselves more objectively from the POV of our inner Divine

Guest, hopefully without any judgement; but rather with endearment, amusement

and good humor. That usually provides the

opening for the two beings within to start to have a conversation. In the

resulting inner dialog, the little me makes friends with the Big me (Self) and a

loving respect can develop that will see us through the rest of our days. That,

at least, is my simple-minded way of understanding what Jung called

Individuation....at least the early stages of it.

It is refreshing to know that so many like you are interested in our elections

here in the US. It also reminds us here of the added responsibility we bear on

election day, since the one elected means so much to those far beyond our own

shores. I will be happily voting for Obama; while not my first pick, I think he

would make an outstanding president. We desperately need hope and change now

and he seems a viable vehicle for both IMO.

All the best,

Greg

_______________________________________________

Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com

The most personalized portal on the Web!

[Guest guest]

Dear Greg,

No last word necessary.I too wish you well.We all go at our own pace to

consciousness, and no one can even " observe " or " judge' our

awareness...least of all ourselves, I find I too, have often tried too hard

to defend my " ego " as you put it, and resolve, like you to use my energy

elsewhere.To me, that mean less reacting and more acting.I have spent too

much time in my life trying to " explain " myself when things get

un-communicatable, and i found it was totally unnecessary except to my

anxiousness to be understood.

Perhaps we should all take a deep breath, and decide( however hard it seems

to be for many of us...obviously including myself) merely to listen to

others and not make any remarks or observations as to how we think what we

say is received.

We just cannot get into each other's minds or hearts, I am being to feel,

with everyone, so I will try to only observe what I am saying and hope it is

with unconditional love.Only grace will make that possible.

Knowing ourselves, and questioning our own motives is after all one of the

hardest parts of our growth. And yes, it is impossible to see, speak or

communicate with another without some projection on both sides. Jung taught

us that as well. There is always projection...on both sides.It is how human

beings see reality, through their own eyes,and why we must always question

our first reactions).

Toni

Re: Suggestion

>

> Dear Toni,

>

> This dialog feels like slogging through very thick, heavy mud. As is

> often, and sadly, the case we seem not to communicate well, despite best

> of intentions on both parts. And since I have neither the time nor the

> energy to carry on further [and trying not to merely defend my own ego],

> I'll simply respond that where you see " judgement " in my remarks there was

> meant to be honest observation and straight forward communication. That

> seems not to have been welcome however, or was seriously misinterpreted as

> harsh judgement. So be it. I seem to have tried....and failed...yet

> again.

>

> I must honestly say, however, I feel a heaviness of the kind of

> " judgement " of which I seem to be accused throughout your post; but I'll

> not trudge further into that swampland. I simply ask you consider the

> possibility of projection here and invite you to have any last word on the

> subject you deem appropriate.

>

> I wish you the best Toni.

>

> Greg

>

[Guest guest]

Greg, all,

Given that it's guesswork, my guesses are:

Bush

ESTJ

Could be an intuitive. Doesn't strike me as a feeling type at all when one

observes how 'cheap' his public expressions of empathy seem. Also his

incredibly strange public affect, where he leans forward and speaks in too

loud a voice with a patronizing tone and hectors his audience as if they

were about to turn into disruptive school kids, as well as his robotic

public walk, where he seems uncomfortable with being watched but also

knows he has to look a certain way, both reinforce his being very

uncomfortable in his own skin. ...don't know how that ramifies a

typological aspect.

McCain

ESFJ

The " F " could stand for flip flopper. " Thinking " doesn't fit somebody who

seems much more wired to control for what is valuable for him rather than

what is generally/objectively correct.

Obama

INFP

Very hard to make a good guess because there may be strong bi-valent

currents; enough to make a case for XSTP or XNTP. My gut sense can't

support any sense of strong extroversion. When he searches for the right

words he seems to be searching inside.

Excellent point about the persona, and especially what might be the

implicit unconscious drivers, thus what one would expect to be the

inferior means via which consciousness would try to come to be

enlightened.

regards,

[Guest guest]

Hi all,

I'm pretty much in agreement with here, with the proviso that a person can have Some development in all areas. I also believe that the Feeling function can be recognized in a person's ability to relate well to others. There is a pause, seems to me, when Hillary switches from Thinking to Feeling. She can do it, but it isn't her first preference and when she does switch it tends to be rather 'collective' Feeling. I believe the same is true of McCain. This may be partially an effect of those two's Extraversion. Obama seems to focus right in when relating. Yet I don't believe someone with inferior Thinking development would be likely to select law school.

It's my hope that if Obama wins, as seems at least likely, he will find a way to bring his apparent organizational skills to the Federal Govt., none of whose operations seem to be functioning effectively at this point in time. At any rate his speeches are certainly is a pleasure for wordsmith to hear ! Especially after Bush.

Just my two golden cents ;-)

Best,

RE: Suggestion

Greg, all,Given that it's guesswork, my guesses are:BushESTJCould be an intuitive. Doesn't strike me as a feeling type at all when oneobserves how 'cheap' his public expressions of empathy seem. Also hisincredibly strange public affect, where he leans forward and speaks in tooloud a voice with a patronizing tone and hectors his audience as if theywere about to turn into disruptive school kids, as well as his roboticpublic walk, where he seems uncomfortable with being watched but alsoknows he has to look a certain way, both reinforce his being veryuncomfortable in his own skin. ...don't know how that ramifies atypological aspect.McCainESFJThe "F" could stand for flip flopper. "Thinking" doesn't fit somebody whoseems much more wired to control for what is valuable for him rather thanwhat is generally/objectively correct.ObamaINFPVery hard to make a good guess because there may be strong bi-valentcurrents; enough to make a case for XSTP or XNTP. My gut sense can'tsupport any sense of strong extroversion. When he searches for the rightwords he seems to be searching inside.Excellent point about the persona, and especially what might be theimplicit unconscious drivers, thus what one would expect to be theinferior means via which consciousness would try to come to beenlightened.regards,

No virus found in this incoming message.Checked by AVG. Version: 8.0.100 / Virus Database: 270.3.0/1505 - Release Date: 6/16/2008 7:20 AM