Note 253 — Chapter XV

I should here observe that I am intentionally refraining from discussing our problem from the standpoint of the psychology of types. A specialised and somewhat complicated investigation was necessary in order to discover formulations appropriate to the types. For instance, "person" means something totally different to the extrovert from what it does to the introvert. I must content myself here with pointing out the difficulties such a task would involve. In the types, the conscious and real adapted function in childhood is collective, but soon acquires a personal character, and may retain this to the end, unless the individual feels impelled to develop his type to the uttermost. If this happens, the conscious real adapted function attains a degree of perfection which may claim universal validity and therefore bears a collectivistic character, in contrast to its originally collective character. According to this mode of expression collective psyche would be identical with "herd soul" in the individual; but the collectivistic psychology would be a highly differentiated adaptation to society. For the introvert the conscious real adapted function is thinking, which in the lower stages of development is entirely personal, but has a tendency to acquire a universal character of a collectivistic kind; his feeling remains distinctly personal so far as it is conscious, and collective-archaic in so far as it has remained unconscious or is repressed. The opposite applies to the feeling and thought of the extrovert. The introvert is always concerned with the endeavour to preserve the integrity of his ego, which results in a different attitude towards his own person from that of the extrovert, whose adaptation is made through his feelings, even at the cost of his own person. These few sentences indicate into what an extraordinarily difficult situation we should have been led had we considered our problem from the standpoint of the types.