I think would have been pretty bloody irritated to have someone as intelligent as you telling them they had no deficiency or disability just because they were differently intellectually gifted.
And quite right too, because that would be to introduce an equal and opposite dogmatism. What Jung (or the reviewer describing Jung) is doing isn't that, I don't think. He's describing an attitude that's open to the possibility of minds working in different ways, and therefore needing different kinds of descriptors and measures in order to be accounted for properly. So, IQ tests or GED exams will measure one thing, perhaps, but if we apply only at the criteria that appear salient when studying "normal" people, then we are likely to miss something. I don't think that at all implies that he (or I!) is telling people without legs that they can win the high jump if they just "try hard enough", or that their problems aren't real problems, etc, etc.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2009-09-14 04:14 pm (UTC)And quite right too, because that would be to introduce an equal and opposite dogmatism. What Jung (or the reviewer describing Jung) is doing isn't that, I don't think. He's describing an attitude that's open to the possibility of minds working in different ways, and therefore needing different kinds of descriptors and measures in order to be accounted for properly. So, IQ tests or GED exams will measure one thing, perhaps, but if we apply only at the criteria that appear salient when studying "normal" people, then we are likely to miss something. I don't think that at all implies that he (or I!) is telling people without legs that they can win the high jump if they just "try hard enough", or that their problems aren't real problems, etc, etc.