thoughts on Carl Jung's cognitive functions?

Pretty neat, layers somewhat on Big Five which is more commonly accepted by contemporary Psychology

>>9078934
My opinion is that this is a science board which means that everything that's not founded on logical empiricism does not belong here.

>>9078934
There's definitely something to it and it's easy to type people using it so I find it useful.

>>9078934
Pseudoscience, proven to be inaccurate.

>>9078934
There's clearly something to it, however it's inherently pseudoscience and there's really no way to change that. You really can't argue in favor of psychoanalysis and Freudian/Jungian concepts, the most you can do is believe in it as an individual and give your own personal credence to it.