TRUMP’S WAY OF DECISION-MAKING
Frederik Huysamen, Elmarie Malek & Linda Stroebel
Analytical Typology Jungian Scholar Group
How does Donald Trump approach problems and make decisions? Put in the language of Jungian Psychology, the question is: which mental function does Trump use when he makes decisions? In this article we reflect on Trump’s typical approach to problems and way of decision-making. Our intention herein is to contribute a vital perspective on Trump’s mind-set, one which is critical to understand also in the domain of geopolitical analysis.
This is not an analysis of Trump’s personality. The term “personality” in Jungian Psychology is closely linked to other well-defined concepts, for instance, “ego complex,” “psychological individual” and Weltanschauung. For Jung personality refers to the unique grouping and combination of psychological elements that pertains to one individual. The personality of an individual is therefore neither collective, nor typical, but unique. As Jung puts it, every individual is “an exception to the rule.” Our analysis here is mainly concerned with the principal psychological function that Trump uses when he makes decisions. Prior to presenting his main decision-making function we are however compelled to point out two peculiarities of Trump’s character. These two peculiarities are prominent and closely associated with his approach to problems and way of decision-making.
Firstly, Trump has a distinct capacity to modulate individual and group perceptions and cognitive frameworks. An incident in the early 1980s illustrates this vividly. In Trump’s book, The Art of the Deal, 1 there is an account of Trump modulating the perception of the Holiday Board of Directors in persuading them to fund the construction of his large casino-hotel on a nearly vacant property, owned by him. The Board would be given the opportunity to see the proposed site on the Atlantic City Boardwalk and to assess the progress in construction. This worried Trump. One week before the scheduled board meeting, Trump got an idea: “I called in my construction supervisor and told him that I wanted him to round up every bulldozer and dump truck he could possibly find and put them to work on my site immediately. Over the next week, I said, I wanted him to transform my two acres of nearly vacant property into the most active construction site in the history of the world. What the bulldozers and dump trucks did wasn’t important, I said, so long as they did a lot of it. If they got some actual work accomplished, all the better, but if necessary, he should have the bulldozers dig up dirt from one side of the site and dump it on the other. They should keep doing that, I said, until I gave him other instructions.” On the day of the site visit there were so many pieces of machinery on site that they could hardly manoeuvre around each other. In consequence: “The distinguished corporate leaders looked on, some of them visibly awed. The outcome was that they walked away absolutely convinced that it was a perfect choice. Three weeks later, on June 20, 1982, we signed a partnership agreement.” In current economic and corporate discourse, this is viewed as perception management.
The term “perception management” emerged from the U.S. military and intelligence community in the 1980s as a specialized euphemism for psychological warfare and propaganda. The U.S. Department of Defence included the term “perception management” in its 1987 edition of the Department of Defence Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms. The U.S. Department of Defence explicitly noted that perception management encompasses psychological operations, deception, cover, and truth projection. These days, independent military analysts speak of information operations, mental warfare, trolling, and spin. Perception management seeks to influence public viewpoints by leveraging people’s emotions and aspirations to advance political and national security goals.
Perception management within corporate enterprise and perception management within military operations exhibit profound structural alignment, even though these entities operate in vastly different contexts. Both disciplines rely on the calculated dissemination or withholding of information to project power, manage risk, and manipulate stakeholder behaviour. Global power dynamics contest not only geopolitical dominance but also individual psychological sovereignty. Donald Trump possesses an innate aptitude for perception management, executing it with a blend of ruthlessness and unrestrained brutality. He bypasses subtle persuasion entirely, relying instead on fabricated narratives to invalidate and crush opposing viewpoints.
The second defining attribute is Trump’s idiosyncratic perspective on domestic and international jurisprudence. David E. Sanger of the New York Times asks Trump on 9 January 2026: “Do you feel your administration needs to abide by international law on the global stage?” Trump replies: “Yeah, I do, but it depends what your definition of international law is.” Trump is asserting that the law depends on how he chooses to interpret it. His specific interpretation and use of the law reflect this specific peculiarity of his character.
A USA TODAY investigation revealed that Donald Trump and his businesses have been involved in over 4,000 state and federal lawsuits over the last 30 years. This unprecedented litigation covers his personal life, real estate empire, branding deals, and political career, featuring him as both plaintiff and defendant in everything from tax disputes to criminal indictments. In January 2023, U.S. District Judge Donald M. Middlebrooks aptly labelled him a “prolific and sophisticated litigant.” Trump’s combative approach to litigation is mirrored in a December 2019 interview where his daughter, Ivanka Trump, noted he was “energized” by his first impeachment.
How does Donald Trump approach problems and make decisions? Formulated in the language of Jung’s Analytical Psychology, Trump has an intuitive approach to problems. Intuition is the psychological function that determines his decision-making. To put it simply, Trump is an intuitive.
We presuppose that readers know or at least suspect that different decision-making mind-sets exist. There are for instance individuals who have a thinking orientation to problems. To personalise thinking, we will give it a human face. We name Russia’s foreign minister, Sergey Lavrov, who has a thinking approach to problems and way of decision-making. Lavrov’s rational thinking provides a contrast and outside point of reference from which to view Trump’s intuition. A second example of an individual with a thinking decision-making mind-set is Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson. He is a decorated United States Army veteran who also served as Chief of Staff to U.S. Secretary of State, Colin Powell. He is currently active as a defence analyst. A third example of a thinker is Professor John Mearsheimer, an American political scientist and international relations scholar. Lavrov’s, Wilkerson’s and Mearsheimer’s thinking orientation thus serve as outside reference points from which to view Trump’s intuition.
INTUITION
Intuition, according to Jung, is the perception of chance possibilities inherent in a situation. Concrete intuition seeks to discover possibilities in the objective situation. It is constantly seeking outlets and fresh possibilities in external life. Where intuition has the priority, every ordinary situation in life seems like a closed room, which intuition has to open.² Emerging possibilities are compelling motives from which intuition cannot escape and to which all else must be sacrificed. The intuitive has a keen nose for things in the bud―pregnant with future promise. A fact is acknowledged only in so far as it opens up fresh possibilities of advancing beyond it and of releasing the individual from its operation.3 In short, intuition is “perception of the possibilities inherent in a situation.”⁴
Trump and chance possibilities
An unnamed reporter asked Trump on 18 June 2025 during an informal exchange with reporters outside the White House if the United States was moving closer to launching military strikes against Iranian nuclear facilities. Trump responded with the following response: “I may do it, I may not do it. I mean, nobody knows what I am going to do.” Coverage provided by Jake Traylor, Politico. Later that same day during a photo opportunity in the Oval Office, Trump reinforced this mind-set by stating that he prefers to make final decisions “one second before it’s due” to keep adversaries guessing.⁵
Speaking at the U.S. Coast Guard Academy’s commencement address on 20 May 2026, Donald Trump suggested he would still be in office in 2028 and potentially 2032. The remarks came during a discussion about a defence agreement with Finland to build 11 polar icebreakers. Noting that the first ships are scheduled for delivery in 2028, Trump remarked, “I’m going to be here in 2028. Maybe I’ll be here in 2032 too. I don’t know, maybe I will.”⁶
THE ACCIDENTAL FACTOR IN INTUITION
Jung writes in his book Psychological Types: “Objective events both conform to law and are accidental.”⁷ Events refer to occurrences. Jung augments by saying “… an event conforms to law when it presents an aspect accessible to reason, and when it presents an aspect for which we can find no law we call it accidental.”⁸ Events thus present two different kinds of aspects, namely those which are law-bound and those which are accidental or contingent. We can also refer to these two aspects as the rational and irrational parts of events.
Accidental aspects comprise all the non-positable aspects of events which consequently lack general validity. The facts that intuition registers are the variables, the inconsistencies, and that which is non-regular―that is to say, those facts which do not conform to law. Intuition is concerned with the “perception of accidentals.”⁹ Intuition thus orients towards the accidental factor. Intuition is a function that lacks “all rational direction.”¹⁰ Intuition is “by its very nature irrational.”¹¹ For this reason Jung calls intuition “an irrational function.”¹²
Trump’s perception and use of the accidental factor
We only need to underscore Trump’s intuitive manipulation of oil markets. He moves markets like no one else ever could.
Commentary
Trump, like every intuitive, is a master in the perception and use of irrational facts, that is, accidental facts.
THE PRIMARY FUNCTION OF INTUITION
The primary function of intuition is to transmit perceptions of relations and conditions.¹³ The idea of possibilities involves space and time as factors. In reality objects are not isolated in space and time. The faculty of intuition “makes possible, at least approximately, the determination of space-time relationships.”¹⁴
Jung expresses the intuitive’s orientation to space relationships as follows: “But, in space, every object is in endless connection with a multiplicity of other objects.”¹⁵ Not all these connections conform to universal law. They are not necessarily regular. The intuitive is primarily oriented to the accidental connections. Viewed from the intuitive’s perspective, the said non-regular connections broaden the too narrow confinement of the initial occurrence. In this way, intuitive possibilities inherent to the said situation open up.
The faculty of intuition also makes possible the determination of time relationships. In reality objects are not isolated in time. Jung writes: “…in time, the object represents merely a transition from a former state to a succeeding one.” Jung expresses intuition’s relation to time as follows: “But there is another category, and that is time. Things have a past and they have a future. They come from somewhere, they go to somewhere, and you cannot see where they came from and you cannot know where they go to, but you get what the Americans call a hunch [an intuition].”¹⁶ Jung says that intuition “points to the possibilities, the whence and whither which lie within the immediate facts.”¹⁷
Trump’s orientation to space and time relations and conditions
Trump, like all differentiated intuitives, sees the broader picture and uses or creates relations and conditions that maximise space and time related opportunities. He withdrew the United States from two major nuclear-related pacts: The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action in 2018 and the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty in 2019. He encouraged NATO on 7 January 2025 to commit 5% of their GDP for the military, two weeks before being sworn into his second presidential term. Trump’s support for NATO’s war against Russia at Ukraine’s cost and his 2026 war of choice against Iran are connected. All these events are connected in Trump’s intuitive mind-set. To reach his final objective, he manipulates the judgements, perceptions and emotions of friends and foes alike, pitting them against one another.
Carl Jung says: “In space, every object is in endless connection with a multiplicity of other objects.” The following further illustrates the expansiveness of Trump’s engagement. At the time of this writing, more than 20 U.S. warships have been deployed, ready to escalate the war in the Strait of Hormuz. In Ukraine, American ground-launched ballistic missile systems and mobile launchers that fire GPS-guided rockets are being used against Russia. The U.S. provides precise coordinates and helps plan attacks on Russian energy facilities and logistical hubs deep behind the front lines. The U.S. has been redeploying B61-12 nuclear warheads to RAF Lakenheath in the U.K. The U.S. is actively discussing deploying nuclear-capable aircraft to additional NATO members on the eastern flank, with Poland expressing strong interest and Finland recently lifting all legal bans. Decisions to be implemented, taken at the recent NATO summit in Turkey, speak for themselves. In reality all these objects or occurrences are not isolated in space. They are mixed into and blended with other events and facets of life which are totally unrelated to them. The intuitive Trump excludes the regular and the irrelevant and perceives the connections between what remains in their multiplicity.
Trump’s shifting interest in the global space is evident in his multiple engagements in international conflicts and their interconnectivity. He has shifted his main focus in the global space, for instance, from Ukraine, to Venezuela, to Greenland, to Iran, and to the Strait of Hormuz.
There is also another category, and that is time. Intuition makes possible the determination of time relationships. For the intuitive, time is an opportunistic factor to change or modify the object. Take for example America’s attempt to undermine and “trophy” Iran’s sovereignty. Expressed in psychological terms, the object to be seized is Iranian integrity and resistance. Intuition furthermore uses time to alter its modus operandi―typically based on irrational facts and factors. Trump’s modus operandi of attempting to seize Iranian integrity and resistance through the application of his irrational intuitions, has merely changed, in continuous successions, from one irrational occurrence to the next.
It is not difficult, for instance, to demonstrate some of the intuitive “levers” Trump uses to put pressure on Iran. Trump’s recent wars with Iran began officially with operation Midnight Hammer with the order to destroy or degrade Iran’s nuclear capabilities in June 2025. On 22 January 2026, Trump announced his Armada of warships heading to Iran. The assassination of Ayatollah Sayyed Ali Khamenei followed on 28 February 2026. Trump initially anticipated that a regime change would take effect within 24-48 hours. After the 40-day war a fragile ceasefire was mediated on 8 April 2026. His next intuitive pressure point was to impose a naval blockade on the Strait of Hormuz on 13 April 2026. The process of drafting the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the USA and Iran followed. Trump initially attempted to exclude the issue of Israel and Lebanon. Iran resisted. Trump signed the 14 point MOU on 17 June 2026. Analysts interpreted this as Trump being under pressure because of the depletion of America’s sour oil reserves. However, in breaching the MOU shortly after signing it, it has in itself become an irrational Trumpian lever exerting pressure on Iran. It allowed Trump ample time to put pressure on Oman and to start using its territory, implementing his next intuitive move. Trump’s “levers” represent merely a transition, in continuous successions, from a former state to a following one.
Commentary
As an intuitive, Trump is conscious of space and time relationships and how to interpret and use them. It seems that many analysts have not yet figured out that he rarely seeks an off-ramp. Instead, he enforces diversions, bypasses and deviations. Even if he were to appeal directly to the Pakistanis to mediate an off-ramp for him with Iran, it simply buys him time and Iran will face the backlash.
THE VISION OF THE INTUITIVE
Jung states that intuition is represented by a certain attitude of expectation―a perceptive and penetrating vision. Only the subsequent outcome can prove how much was perceived into the object, contra to how much actually lay in the object.¹⁸
Trump’s principal strategic vision
Donald Trump projects himself as the saviour of the declining USA economy. The USA’s national debt is $39.20 trillion. Gold surpassed US Treasuries to become the world’s largest single central bank reserve asset at the end of 2025. The dollar’s share of global trade invoicing has declined from 85% in 1977 to approximately 50% as of 2026. Does the USA have a plan to save its economy? Does Trump have a strategic vision?
The concrete intuitive has a vision. In its abstract form, the term “concrete” is difficult to grasp. This term will however become clearer further on as we apply it in world events. Intuitives cannot act without having a fixed point on the periphery of their field of vision that they endeavour to realise. Furthermore, one cannot enforce a set vision on the concrete intuitive. That is perceived as nothing less than imprisonment. The concrete intuitive creates a vision or may even buy into one, provided that the vision allows for modification and leaves ample room for the intuitive’s approach to problems and way of decision-making. Donald Trump is a concrete intuitive with a definitive strategic vision.
What is Trump’s principal strategic vision? We find his vision articulated in the U.S. National Security Strategy (NSS), which was signed into effect by Trump in December 2025, stating: “This document is a roadmap to ensure that America remains the world’s strongest, richest, most powerful, and most successful country for decades to come...”¹⁹ He envisions “a new golden age” for America.²⁰ Trump wrote and undersigned the preface to the said document which ends as follows: “In the years ahead, we will continue to develop every dimension of our national strength―and we will make America safer, richer, freer, greater, and more powerful than ever before.”²¹
But what is Trump’s strategy for saving America’s economy? We find the answer in the NSS: “This document is a roadmap to ensure that America remains the greatest and most successful nation in human history, and the home of freedom on earth.”²² The NSS roadmap states: “To ensure that America remains the world’s strongest, richest, most powerful, and most successful country for decades to come, our country needs a coherent, focused strategy for how we interact with the world.”²³ The NSS further reads: “The choice all countries should face is whether they want to live in an American-led world of sovereign countries and free economies or in a parallel one in which they are influenced by countries on the other side of the world.”²⁴ China is mentioned nineteen times in the NSS and Russia ten times. They are the “countries on the other side of the world.” They are viewed by America as its main adversaries. Why? The NSS states: “The United States cannot allow any nation to become so dominant that it could threaten our interests. We will work with allies and partners to maintain global and regional balances of power to prevent the emergence of dominant adversaries.”²⁵ Trump’s world, “the home of freedom on earth,” simply cannot cope with the idea of China outperforming the USA economically or Russia outperforming the USA militarily. China and Russia must be stopped at all costs. They must be prevented from ever outperforming the USA. Trump’s goal is to prevent China from rising economically. However, the U.S. cannot do it on its own. The NSS roadmap states: “…our country needs a coherent, focused strategy for how we interact with the world.”²⁶ What precisely does this new strategy of interaction with the world entail? The NSS states: “Moreover, we will also work to align the actions of our allies and partners with our joint interest in preventing domination by any single competitor nation.”²⁷ Commitment to an American-led world means the alignment of a nation’s policies with Trump’s vision to contain China and Russia. America’s allies and friends will have to sacrifice their own sovereignty and blood for the protection of America’s unipolarism. The choice all nations face is to fully embrace Trump’s agenda to contain China and Russia, or face consequences. We can summarise Trump’s NSS roadmap in a nutshell, as America’s agenda for mobilising its allies to knock out rivals and restore its global primacy.
The NSS document in its entirety and regardless of whoever else worked on the final product, can readily be viewed as a self-representation of Trump’s vision. The lead author of the NSS, Michael Anton, succeeded in capturing the imprint of Trump’s decision-making mind-set, in the document. This is evident to anyone familiar with Trump’s approach to problems and way of decision-making. As such it adequately serves our purposes of representing the decision-making mind-set of Trump.
Commentary
It is clear that Trump has aligned himself with the goals of “the powerful hidden determinant” that dictates and shapes presidential decision-making in America whenever it wishes and as much as it is deemed necessary. One bipartisan U.S. lobbying group that often surfaces in this connection is AIPAC, that is, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, which was founded in 1954. AIPAC actively endorses and heavily funds both Democratic and Republican candidates who support its platform, making it a major financial force in U.S. elections.
The NSS states that “President Trump uses unconventional diplomacy” to “surgically extinguish…violent wars.”²⁸ This deal-driven unconventional approach was discussed by Trump’s envoys, Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner, in a 60 minutes interview with Lesley Stahl on October 19, 2025, in which Kushner explained this as a “focus on interests over values.” Trump’s prioritization of interests over values also dictates his approach to warfare. Pete Hegseth, Trump’s Secretary of War, was highly vocal on this matter. In his address to military leaders on 30 September 2025, he was bold to state: “We … don’t fight with stupid rules of engagement,” adding that “President Trump has your back.”
There is a plenitude of psychological principles indicating that Trump’s road, the American road, does not bode well for the world. There are no winners and losers at this breaking point―no holy grail, no Nietzschean Superman. There are only survivors.
CONCRETE INTUITION
Concrete intuition carries perceptions which are concerned with the actuality of things. We can substitute the term “concrete” with the term “extraversion.” Intuition that orients outwards to the concrete event or occurrence, is extraverted. Extravert intuition is thus the perception of the immediate potential inherent in a concrete situation. The extravert intuitive has a decided dependence upon external situations.²⁹
An example of Trump’s concrete attitude
The locus of Donald Trump’s intuition is the world of concrete problems, for instance the contracting U.S. economy and its diminishing industrial competitiveness. Thinkers like Sergey Lavrov, Lawrence Wilkerson and John Mearsheimer are also concrete. Whilst they use their thinking decision-making function to construct conclusive solutions to problems, Trump uses his intuitive decision-making function to produce perceived solutions to problems.
Commentary
In a conversation with a colleague, Carl Jung pointed out that the intuitive is “like someone looking at that mountain over there through a telescope and the next thing is, they feel they have been there. But they haven’t, they must do the work.”³⁰ The NSS document clearly demonstrates the said aspect of Trump’s intuition. It claims that Trump negotiated a peace deal between Israel and Iran that ended the war in Gaza.³¹ In reality, however, the genocide of Palestinians continues alongside America’s bombardment of Iran. Another example of Trump’s illusion of having achieved success, is the several dozen times that he has claimed war victory over Iran. Intuitions are only real when they have been realised. “Concrete” is not to be confused with “reality”.
DECISIVENESS THROUGH INTUITION
Decisiveness necessitates selectivity. Jung puts it as follows: “The activity of consciousness is selective. Selection demands direction. But direction requires the exclusion of everything irrelevant.”³² Selection is imperative for the orientation of consciousness. How then does intuition select facts or decide on the strongest possibility as the solution to a specific problem? Jung writes that whatever the intuitive individual does or does not do “is based not on rational judgement but on the sheer intensity of perception.”³³
Intuition apprehends the relative strengths inherent in the whole range of relevant possibilities and arranges them accordingly. Intuition not only selects the strongest possibility that a situation holds in store but also strives “to apprehend the widest range of possibilities.”34 Intuition not only selects the accidental facts that serve as a springboard for intuitions but also selects the most ideal possibility in a specific situation, which becomes the decisive factor for the orientation of consciousness. Dominant intuition is therefore selective and decisive.
Jung summarises by saying: “… the intuitive raises perception to the level of a differentiated function, by which he also achieves his adaptation to the world. He adapts by means of unconscious directives, which he receives through an especially sensitive and sharpened perception and interpretation of dimly conscious stimuli.”³⁵ Adaptation refers to the processes of mental adjustment and modification. “The intuitive type,” says Jung, “goes by hunches, he sees around corners, he smells a rat a mile away. He can give you perception and orientation in a situation where … your intellect [thinking] … [is] no good at all.”³⁶
Trump’s decisiveness
Throughout his career in business and politics, Trump has consistently defended his reliance on personal intuition over data, experts, and advisors.
In April 2025, in relation to Trump reversing his course on his tariffs, AP News reported on his simple explanation for how he would make decisions in the coming weeks: “Instinctively, more than anything else,” he told the reporters. “You almost can’t take a pencil to paper, it’s really more of an instinct than anything else.” ³⁷ The report stated that Trump took a similar approach into the White House during his first term. While talking about the economy with The Washington Post, Trump said, “…my gut tells me more sometimes than anybody else’s brain can ever tell me.”³⁸ During a media event in April 2025, when asked how he would evaluate whether direct diplomatic talks with Iran were breaking down, Trump added: “…when you start talks, you know if they’re going along well or not. And I would say the conclusion would be when I think they’re not going along well. And that’s just a feeling.”³⁹
In a speech on 11 March 2026, at a campaign-style event at Verst Logistics in Hebron, Kentucky, Trump shared the following anecdote. During his address, he detailed how military officials originally presented him with a list of roughly 20 potential names for the joint military campaign by the United States and Israel against Iran. Trump recounted that he found the majority of the options uninspiring, remarking to the crowd that he was “practically falling asleep reading them” until he spotted “Operation Epic Fury” and personally selected it. The exact quote stated: “They gave me a list of names, [the general said] ‘You could pick the name you like, sir,” Trump said, “I said, ‘The name of what?’ ‘The name of the attack on Iran,’ and they gave me, like, 20 names, and I’m, like, falling asleep. I didn’t like any of them. Then I see ‘Epic Fury.’ I said, ‘I like that name.’”⁴⁰
The above events illustrate that Trump’s decisiveness is based on the irrational factor in occurrences, rather than on principles and the forming of logical conclusions. His use of the word “instinct” reflects the particular nature of intuition as “unconscious perception.” Intuition is partly shaped by unconscious processes.
Commentary
Trump is not a thinker. His point of view is that of an intuitive. His intuitive perception is not based on randomness but is indeed selective. He does not simply create chaos but is capable of creating possibilities through chaos and uses chaos in a way that serves his agenda. It would be a serious mistake to underestimate Trump.
Carl Jung’s incisive conceptual differentiation provides the necessary precision and clarity to understand Trump’s explicit statements.
INTUITION AND CONTRACTS
Jung indicates that in a very short time every actual situation becomes a prison to the intuitive; it burdens him like a chain, prompting a compelling need for solution. At times objects would seem to have an almost exaggerated value, should they chance to represent the idea of a severance or release that might lead to the discovery of a new possibility. Yet no sooner have they performed their office, serving intuition as a ladder or a bridge, than they appear to have no further value, and are discarded as mere burdensome appendages. Facts are acknowledged, even a rational fact or idea, only in so far as it open up fresh possibilities of advancing beyond them and of releasing the individual from their operation.⁴¹
The intuitive can never exist in stable, long-established conditions of generally acknowledged though limited value; because his eye is constantly ranging for new possibilities, stable conditions have an air of impending suffocation.⁴² This fact is hardly comprehensible to the thinking rational mind, but its unthinkableness merely equals the astonishment of the irrational intuitive, when he discovers someone, a thinker, who can set the ideas of reason above the living and actual event. Such a thing seems scarcely credible to him. It is, as a rule, quite hopeless to look to him for any recognition of [thinking] principles in this direction, since a rational understanding is just as unknown and, in fact, tiresome to him as the idea of making a contract, without mutual discussion and obligations, appears unthinkable to the rational type.⁴³ Carl Jung is thus saying that extravert intuitives are not principally oriented to the law-boundedness in contracts, yet will tolerate this, but only for as long as it suits them. The extravert intuitive will naturally incorporate irrational factors in contracts, allowing the widest scope of possible interpretations of the content. With intuitives present, such vulnerabilities will be readily apparent to them and quickly thwarted or exploited.
Trump’s attitude to contracts, treaties and deals
The Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the U.S. and Iran was officially signed on 17 June 2026 by Donald Trump and Masoud Pezeshkian. Soon afterwards, Trump began demonstrating his contempt for the MOU and his lack of commitment to such matters. It seems the only weight Trump’s signature carried, was as a mere “witness” to Pezeshkian’s signing of the MOU, as such claiming the right to oversee Iran’s full compliance with its content.
Commentary
Sergey Lavrov has frequently used the term “agreement incapable” to describe the United States’ and its Western allies’ attitude to contracts, treaties and deals. We can apply Lavrov’s words directly to Donald Trump who has become the personification of this hegemonic agreement incapacity.
INTUITION AND MORALITY
Jung notes that the intuitive has his own characteristic morality, which consists in a loyalty to his intuitive view of things and a voluntary submission to its authority. Consideration for the welfare of his neighbours is weak. No solid argument hinges upon their well-being any more than upon his own. Neither can we detect in him any great respect for his neighbour’s convictions and customs; in fact, he is not infrequently put down as an immoral and ruthless adventurer. Since his intuition is largely concerned with outer objects, scenting out external possibilities, he readily applies himself to callings wherein he may expand his abilities in many directions.⁴⁴
Trumpian morality
Katie Rogers of the New York Times asked President Trump on 9 January 2026: “Do you see any checks on your power on the world stage? Is there anything that can stop you if you wanted to?” President Trump answered by saying: “My own morality, my own mind. It’s the only thing that can stop me.”
This attitude is starkly evident in the callous response Trump displayed in response to the killing of school children during the war in Iran, prompting a headline in an Al Jazeera report dated 11 March 2026: “The US president denies knowledge of the findings that indicate the US military was behind the deadly strike amid calls for a probe.”The report stated that: “President Donald Trump has been giving contradicting answers about the incident over the past week. In early instances, he blamed Iran for the bombing. More recently, he has claimed that he does not know the details of the strike.” Even after a preliminary Department of Defence investigation into the bombing found that the US military was behind the strike, when asked whether he takes responsibility for the attack after the Times report, Trump once again said, “I don’t know about it.”
A CNN report in May 2026 reflects how Trump waved off economic concerns for American citizens. “I don’t think about Americans’ financial situation. I don’t think about anybody. I think about one thing: we cannot let Iran have a nuclear weapon. That’s all. That’s the only thing that motivates me,” he told reporters, when asked how much Americans’ economic concerns were behind his push for a peace deal. Pressed on that remark, Trump told Fox’s Baier: “That’s a perfect statement. I’d make it again.”
Trump has made multiple public demands for Israel to end Netanyahu’s corruption trial. For instance, in a November 2025 letter, Trump urged Israeli President Isaac Herzog to pardon Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, characterizing the corruption charges against him as a politically motivated, “unjustified” prosecution. Trump argued for the pardon to end “lawfare” and promote unity, while the Israeli president’s office maintained that pardons require formal, established procedures.⁴⁵
Commentary
Ironically, the most compelling definition of “terrorism,” is coined by Benjamin Netanyahu. He defines terrorism as: “…the systematic and deliberate attack, murder, maiming, and menacing of innocent civilians for political goals.”⁴⁶ What is the appropriate terminology then for a U.S. President and military members targeting civilians in Iran with airstrikes? Netanyahu’s definition frames it as terrorism.
WELL-INTENDED VERSUS EGOISTICAL INTUITION
Jung asserts that the intuitive decision-making type is uncommonly important, both from the standpoint of political economy and on grounds of general culture. If well-intentioned, with an orientation to life not purely egoistical, he may render exceptional service as the promoter, if not the initiator of every kind of promising enterprise. He is the natural advocate of every minority that holds the seed of future promise. Because of his capacity, when orientated more towards men than things, to make an intuitive diagnosis of their abilities and range of usefulness, he can also “make” men. His capacity to inspire his fellow-men with courage, or to kindle enthusiasm for something new, is unrivalled, although he may have forsworn it by the morrow. The more powerful and vivid his intuition, the more is his subject fused and blended with the divined possibility. He animates it; he presents it in plastic shape and with convincing fire; he almost embodies it. It is not a mere histrionic display, but a fate.⁴⁷ It follows that extravert intuition holds immense dangers when purely egoistical and ill-intentioned.
Trump’s egoistical intuition
Trump consistently displays an egoistical attitude, which directs his intuition in pursuit of self-interest and personal benefit. On June 5, 2026, US Senator Adam Schiff presented a list of “Trump’s Top Ten Scandals We Found out About in May,” illustrating Trump’s attitude of self-interest and personal gain. This list includes: Trump buying stock in Paramount, Warner Brothers, and Netflix, as well as in Oracle, Boeing and Nvidia; making a major investment in Palantir; offering lucrative no-bid deals for favourite contractors working on White House and National Mall projects; pursuing the construction of a billion dollar ballroom; self-dealing for a secret IRS tax deal; and creating the nearly $1.8 billion “government abuse” fund that was designed to financially reward Trump’s political allies and supporters.
The above examples, related to Trump, and covering but a single month’s activities, point to the dangerous effects of the combination of his egoistical attitude with his pronounced extravert intuition.
Commentary
In an attempt to interpret Trump’s self-representations and behaviour, some psychologists and psychiatrists have resorted to designating Trump as having a personality disorder, called “malignant narcissism”. Commentators and military analysts often take recourse to the said designation when faced with the quandary of trying to make sense of the complexities implicit in his self-presentations and behaviour. This article is by no means a critique of the said diagnosis or the terminology used. Our main concern is to present a Jungian perspective on Trump’s approach to problems and way of decision-making. Additionally, we have already noted two personal characteristics that frequently bias his intuitions negatively: his aptitude for engineering narratives and his judicial hubris as outlined above.
Donald Trump is a pronounced extravert intuitive decision-making type. His intuition, combined with his marked self-interest and fluid moral code, results in his particular approach to problems and way of decision-making, aptly described by Jung as a “morality consisting in a loyalty to his intuitive view of things and a voluntary submission to its authority.”⁴⁸
Trump’s power
Trump is not simply an intuitive. His intuitive decision-making forms part of his conscious personality and is interrelated to every aspect of his psyche. Trump’s vision, as formulated in the NSS, embraces an existing vision created by the Deep State over decades. Trump has fully bought into this vision. Moreover―and this is the part that is most concerning―he has completely identified with it. Some view Trump as a lifetime conman. Others view him as conducting a systematic, unprecedented form of psychological warfare. Viewed from a psychological perspective, Trump completely identifies himself with the role of perception manager. He fabricates the narratives and manages propaganda, as seen in legacy media. Jung states that the more vivid the intuition, the more the subject is fused and blended with the possibility. Trump literally “animates” his vision; presents it “with convincing fire;” he actually “embodies” it,⁴⁹ that is to say, he personifies it.
Trump is the military Commander in Chief who, by virtue of his identification therewith, epitomises the war machine and becomes the executioner of Iran’s General Soleimani and the Iranian Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. At the G7 Summit on 17 June 2026, Trump took sole credit for the 2020 drone strike that killed Soleimani. He said: “I was the one that killed General Soleimani.” He explicitly used first person phrases like “I killed” and “I blew him up.” Furthermore, in a phone call with ABC News Chief Washington Correspondent Jonathan Karl on 2 March 2026, Trump also took credit for the killing of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei on 28 February 2026. Again, Trump explicitly used first person phrases like: “I got him before he got me. They tried twice. Well, I got him first.” Psychology refers to this phenomenon as “identification.” In all this, Trump stands as, and personifies, the saviour of American hegemony.
As the President of America, Trump is solely empowered to decide on the use of the nuclear option. In Trump’s mind, it seems, there are two power-options: soft power and nuclear power. For Trump, soft power represents his unconventional diplomacy, also portrayed as his “Peace through Strength.” The term soft power denotes narratives and various gradings of diplomacy. However, in practice, Trump’s notion of soft power translates and extends to including actions like targeting of Venezuelan fishing vessels in the Caribbean and missile strikes against civilian targets in Iran. Trump has his own interpretation of soft power. In the NSS document, “soft power” is set between apostrophes. Grammatically, this indicates a newly coined, Trumpian, term. The power-category in the NSS for everything non-nuclear is “soft power.”
The combination of Trump’s intuitive way of decision-making with his peculiar moral code signals the extreme danger that underlies Trump’s disposition for propaganda and identification with his role and position. He views himself as the president who is doing what previous presidents couldn’t do. He has integrated the phrase, “finish the job” into his primary rhetoric. For instance, on 9 July 2026 he stated on Facebook regarding Iran and the Strait of Hormuz: “We’re either going to make a deal, or we’re going to finish the job,” threatening that the U.S. has the capability to dismantle Iran’s energy grid and infrastructure if a diplomatic resolution fails. Broadly speaking, he views “finishing the job” as fully realizing his NSS vision during his second term. He considers it doable without reckoning with the underlying psychological autonomous processes that are thereby set in motion. He has also repeatedly mused about having his face added to Mount Rushmore.
ADDITIONAL COMMENTARY
Trump’s predictability
The transition from a world shaped by unipolarity, to a world shaped by multipolarity, is as yet substantially incomplete. Unipolarity has prevailed because the United States is still widely regarded as the preeminent power in both economic and military terms. Multipolarity can only be fully realized when it is anchored by the world’s strongest power. China has cast its anchor, but it has yet to take firm hold.
Is Donald Trump really unpredictable? His agenda is to disanchor China. He wants to determine space and time. His approach to problems and way of decision-making is typical. He is agreement incapable. His “soft power” includes everything non-nuclear. His raw power is a nuclear button. He is unabashed about his prejudices. His flued moral code allows piracy and the targeting of civilians.
What frustrates Trump presently the most? He needs something tangible to use as propaganda for the build-up to the midterm election in November. Trump wants Russia to commence with defensive strikes against NATO member states. Trump is also bargaining on Iran’s withdrawal from the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) as a definitive sign of its nuclear ambitions. This development would provide him with the political justification in the West to execute limited strategic nuclear strikes on Iran.
Trump continuously surprises people only if they naively expect conventional views and actions from him.
Statistical delusion
Several recent polls in the USA have confirmed that the majority of Americans do not support Trump’s war with Iran. However, there is a common misconception regarding the degree of mass support needed for the pursuit of wars. In the case of Germany, Carl Jung makes the following remarks in a letter to Mary Mellon, dated 7 January 1941: “The news one gets from Germany is most contradictory. A German, well informed, told me that about 90% are against the regime. A Swiss from Berlin told me that the workmen openly criticized Hitler and called him a liar. Mussolini is most unpopular and the mood of the people is unsatisfactory. The young people in Germany, however, are still full of illusions, although the mood in the army has considerably dropped since England could not be overrun. People from Paris told me that the Germans are unlikely to succeed in the administration of the conquered countries since they are lacking in sufficient numbers of qualified people. Peculiarly enough, Germany seems to suffer from an increasing lack of labour, and less from food scarcity.”⁵⁰ Despite these realities, World War II reached its ultimate conclusion only on 2 September 1945. When it comes to war, popularity contests are utterly meaningless. The power Trump holds in sway, trumps the polls.
The moral dilemma
Leaders in countries that intentionally target civilians do not even consider the question of morality. The last thing that Trump does is to reflect on moral issues. The central, most pressing paradox of modern warfare―the problem of good and evil―is something that military planners in a country like Russia lose sleep over, but rarely say out loud. Real life is a voyage between Scylla and Charybdis.
What is the moral question? Carl Jung conceptualizes as follows: “People have no real conceptions of good and evil. They think morality is whether one follows the moral law or not. But that is absolutely not a moral question. Such a question begins at all only when the moral law no longer provides any information. But it’s simply terribly difficult to describe this phenomenon of good and evil more precisely. And one encounters astonishing incomprehension when one ventures into this domain.”⁵¹ Jung also said: “What you can learn from moral codes and manuals of morality and penal codes are practicalities which no intelligent person will overlook. But no book of laws has ever been written for conflicts of duty and there alone does the real ethical problem begin. There alone will you learn ethical responsibility. Everything else is settled by adaptation and plain horse sense… Ethical value attaches only to those decisions which are reached in situations of supreme doubt.”⁵²
This brings us to the moral problem in warfare. How do you counter adversaries who commit acts of terrorism and piracy? How do you defend yourself against adversaries who are all-too-ready to push their nuclear buttons? How do you choose between two evils? How do you determine which evil is the lesser? And who decides that “lesser” necessarily means “better?” What does it mean to be “bolder” and to what degree?
Damage control
Military and geopolitical analysts use the terms “escalation,” “escalation ladder” and “escalation control” to refer to a war or special military operation becoming more intense or spreading wider. The psychological tension in the world is escalating as is evident in more and more wars and their cumulative autonomous character. We can coin the said psychological phenomenon, within the framework of Analytical Psychology, as “complex escalation.” A complex, in layman’s terms, refers to an unconscious factor in the human psyche that produces and projects inferiority, anxiety, prejudice, megalomania, hate, etc. What drives the escalation of these wars are the prejudices, the psychological complexes, that is to say, “the psychic fire from below.”
According to various geopolitical analysts, the declining American empire still has the option to stop all its wars and start serious talks with China and Russia, straight away. From their perspective, these two superpowers can mitigate America’s inescapable transition, from being the imperial unipole in the world towards integration into a multipolar world. The problem with this view is essentially a psychological one. Imperial decline is inextricably linked to the decline of the empire’s connection to its moral foundation. It is painfully clear that America lacks the necessary self-critique and political modesty to be able to face its psychological and economic decline and to deal with these factors constructively.
Quite a number of individuals, in and outside the United States, believe that Trump has no plan and no strategy in his war of choice against Iran. In response, Nietzsche’s Zarathustra comes to mind where he says: “Man is a rope stretched between the animal and the Superman―a rope over an abyss. A dangerous crossing, a dangerous wayfaring, a dangerous looking back, a dangerous trembling and halting.” And there in the market-place Zarathustra witnesses the performance of the rope-dancer. The rope-dancer “had commenced his performance: he had come out at a little door, and was going along the rope which was stretched between two towers, so that it hung above the market-place and the people.” We witness the slow dance of moral perfection to get to the other side. The rope-dancer “…scattereth golden words in advance of his deeds, and always doeth more than he promiseth.” Dancing on the line. Too straight. Too perfect. Too white. Too slow.⁵³ When the rope-dancer is just midway across, “...the little door opened once more, and a gaudily-dressed fellow like a buffoon sprang out, and went rapidly after the first one. ‘Go on, halt-foot,’ cried his frightful voice, ‘go on, lazy-bones, interloper, sallow-face! – lest I tickle thee with my heel! What dost thou here between the towers? In the tower is the place for thee, thou shouldst be locked up; to one better than thyself thou blockest the way!’ – And with every word he came nearer and nearer the first one [the rope dancer]. When, however, he was but a step behind, there happened the frightful thing which made every mouth mute and every eye fixed: – he uttered a yell like a devil, and jumped over the other who was in his way. The latter, however, when he thus saw his rival triumph, lost at the same time his head and his footing on the rope; he threw his pole away and shot downwards faster than it, like an eddy of arms and legs, into the depth. The market-place and the people were like the sea when the storm cometh on: they all flew apart and in disorder, especially where the body was about to fall.”⁵⁴ The buffoon or trickster-figure is the opposite of the rope-dancer. For the trickster, no restriction is absolute. His ultimate objective is the übermensch. Selective chaos carries a definite pattern. Controlled chaos can be operationalized to drive strategic dominance.
Both aspects were part of Zarathustra’s psyche. Both personifications are an integral part of the human psyche. Damage control means the balance between rope-dancing and trickery, that is to say, the balance between good and evil. Too mild comes with a cost. Too bold comes with decades of guilt. The Dao De Jing puts it as follows: “Great perfection appears defective” and “Great straightness seems crooked.”⁵⁵ When diplomacy fails to bridge our polarities, war declares itself to restore the balance. It strips flesh from bone, leaving the raw skeleton of our failures as a mirror for the next generation. World wars compensate for humanity’s lack of consciousness by disrupting collective complacency and shaking mankind from its slumber.
One thing can be said about the Trump phenomenon: it is an eye opener.
Intuition versus thinking
Any objective occurrence is both law-determined and accidental. In so far as it is law-determined, it is accessible to reason; in so far as it is accidental, it is not. One might reverse it and say that we apply the term law-determined to the occurrence appearing so to our reason, and where its regularity escapes us we call it accidental. The postulate of universal lawfulness remains a postulate of reason only; in no sense is it a postulate of our functions of perception.⁵⁶ Jung also uses the term “chance possibilities” when referring to intuition. We can thus speak of chance-determined intuition and law-determined thinking.
Thinkers, for instance Sergey Lavrov, Lawrence Wilkerson and John Mearsheimer, are concerned with the law-bound aspects of events which possess general validity. Mearsheimer says for instance on CNN-News 18 on 15 July 2026 that Trump failed to achieve the following four objectives in the war against Iran: regime change; eliminating uranium enrichment; halting the long-range missile program; and ending the support for regional proxies. And he is correct. However, what about the implicit objectives in the NSS document to hurt China and Russia economically and militarily as much as possible, and how does this relate to the wars in Iran and Ukraine? Thinking does not consider the actual object or situation as a whole, but only that part of it which has been singled out for rational observation. It takes into account only what is merely posited. Thinking is the connecting of the content of ideas with a concept. Thinking is oriented towards the peculiarities and principles inherent in positable objects. Thinking naturally excludes the flux of accidentals in events and everything beyond what is posited. Accidental facts, in themselves, are useless for thinking. They cannot serve as anchors for thinking.
Viewed from a thinking perspective, the above-mentioned NSS presents a “hodge-podge” of statements of intent which are peppered with conceptual inconsistencies. For example, on page 8 of the NSS, a list of 10 principles is introduced with this statement: “President Trump has proven that American foreign, defence, and intelligence policies must be driven by the following basic principles.” However, the so-called “principles” are all statements of intent, none of which are posited or substantiated with any factual “proof,” as claimed in the preceding sentence. Another example is the contradiction in statements regarding America’s “dominance.” NSS statements to this effect include: ensuring America’s “continued economic dominance and military superiority”⁵⁷; ensuring its “military dominance for future generations”⁵⁸; the prevention of “emergence of dominant adversaries” is prioritised⁵⁹; “Energy Dominance” and “Financial Sector Dominance” are emphasised as “principles”⁶⁰, and “America still holds the dominant position in the key technologies that the world needs.”⁶¹ However, under the “principle” of “Balance of Power,”⁶² the NSS states that “the United States rejects the ill-fated concept of global domination for itself.” This statement contradicts all of the above.
Further contradictions are evident in the non-application of the standard set under the principle “Predisposition to Non-Interventionism”, on page 9, which states that “In the Declaration of Independence, America’s founders laid down a clear preference for non-interventionism in the affairs of other nations and made clear the basis: just as all human beings possess God-given equal natural rights, all nations are entitled by ‘the laws of nature and nature’s God’ to a ‘separate and equal station’ with respect to one another.” The NSS counters this with its very next statement, as follows: “… rigid adherence to non-interventionism is not possible. Yet this predisposition should set a high bar for what constitutes a justified intervention.” Accordingly, the entire NSS reflects the deliberate intent of the USA’s interference in multiple regions of the world, for example: through “inducements” in Asia, as laid out on pages 19-24; or to “help Europe correct its current trajectory,” as on pages 25-27; or in “addressing threats … militarily” in the Middle East, as detailed on pages 27-29; and even in “harnessing Africa’s abundant resources” for “a good return” as on page 29. In short, this demonstrates how even the Declaration of Independence is subject to Trumpian modification, without any consequences.
These contradictions are further exacerbated by the expectations expressed throughout the NSS for the rest of the world to be aligned with the agenda of the USA. This is evident in two of the five stated “priorities” as follows: on page 12, under “Burden Sharing and Burden-Shifting,” reference is made to the intent of the US to “organize” a “network” and “convene” a “model” that “uses economic tools to align incentives” of “those countries that willingly … align their export controls with ours.” In an even more explicit statement, on page 13 under “Realignment through Peace,” this intent is reiterated through the seeking of “peace deals” by means of “presidential diplomacy” in order to “realign countries and regions towards our interests.”
Overview of intuition
Intuition perceives the possibilities inherent in a situation. The faculty of intuition enables the determination of space-time relationships. In space, every object is in endless connection with a multiplicity of other objects. In time, the object represents merely a transition from a former state to a succeeding one. The perception of the intuitive is directed simply and solely to events as they happen. Things come from somewhere and they go to somewhere. You cannot see where they came from and you cannot know where they go to. But the intuitive type glances at things, taking in their fullness. Among the many things which they perceive they get one point on the periphery of their field of vision, that is the intuition or possibility. In intuition a content presents itself whole and complete, without our being able to explain or discover how this content came into existence. It is the function that mediates perceptions in an unconscious and therefore irrational way. Intuition is a kind of instinctive apprehension. The intensity of the intuition decides conscious orientation.
According to Jung, intuition is a basic psychological function. It transmits perceptions in an unconscious way.⁶³ Through intuition any one content is presented as a complete whole, without our being able to explain or discover in what way this content has been arrived at. Intuition is a kind of instinctive apprehension, irrespective of the nature of its contents. Its contents have the character of being given, in contrast to the “deduced” character of thinking contents. Intuitive cognition, therefore, possesses an intrinsic character of certainty and conviction which enabled Spinoza to uphold the “scientia intuitiva” as the highest form of cognition.⁶⁴
References:
Trump, D.J., Schwartz, T. (1987) The Art of the Deal, pp. 212-215
Jung, C.G., Baynes, H.G. (1923) Psychological Types. CW 6, p. 463
Ibid., p. 464
Jung, C.G. (1981) The Structure and Dynamics of the Psyche. CW 8, par. 292
Nerozzi, D. (2025, June 18). “Trump says moments before Situation Room meeting that he hasn’t made a final decision about striking Iran – but will ‘one second before’”
Abravanel, L. (2026, May 21). “Donald Trump threatens ‘he’s going to be’ in office in 2028 and – ‘maybe in 2032’ too”
Jung, C.G. (1971) Psychological Types. CW 6, par. 616
Ibid.
Ibid., par. 776
Ibid.
Ibid., par. 616
Ibid., par. 776
Jung, C.G., Baynes, H.G. (1923) Psychological Types. CW 6, p. 462
Jung, C.G. (1981) The Structure and Dynamics of the Psyche. CW 8, par. 257
Jung, C.G. (1989) The Symbolic Life. CW 18, par. 257
Ibid., par 24
Bennet, E.A. (2006) C.G. Jung, p. 77
Jung, C.G., Baynes, H.G. (1923) Psychological Types. CW 6, p. 462
The White House. (2025) National Security Strategy of the United States of America, p. 1
Ibid., p. 2
Ibid., p. ii
Ibid.
Ibid., p. 1
Ibid., p. 18
Ibid., p. 10
Ibid., p. 1
Ibid., p. 21
Ibid., p. 8
Jung, C.G., Baynes, H.G. (1923) Psychological Types. CW 6, p. 464
Bennet, E.A. (1985) Meetings with Jung, p. 32
The White House. (2025) National Security Strategy of the United States of America, p. 8
Jung, C.G. (1971) Psychological Types. CW 6, par. 694
Ibid., par. 616
Ibid., par. 612
Ibid., par. 240
Jung, C.G. (1993) C. G. Jung Speaking, p. 342
Megerian, C. (2025, April 13). “Trump goes with his gut and the world goes along for the ride”
Rucker, P., Dawsey, J., Paletta, D. (2018, November 27). “Trump slams Fed chair, questions climate change and threatens to cancel Putin meeting in wide-ranging interview with The Post”
Madhani, A. (2025, April 10). “Trump: Israel would be the “leader” of Iran strike if Tehran doesn’t give up its nuclear weapons program”
Carter, C. (2026, March 11). “Trump says he chose ‘Epic Fury’ as title of Iran operation out of ‘like, 20 names’”
Jung, C.G., Baynes, H.G. (1923) Psychological Types. CW 6, pp. 463-464
Ibid., p. 464
Ibid., p. 469
Ibid., p. 465
Gritten, D., Usher, S. (2025, November 12). “Trump urges Israel’s president to pardon Benjamin Netanyahu”
Netanyahu, B. (1986) Terrorism: How the West Can Win, p. 9
Jung, C.G., Baynes, H.G. (1923) Psychological Types. CW 6, p. 466
Ibid., p. 465
Ibid., p. 466
Jung, C.G. (1973) Letters Vol. 1, p. 290
Jung C.G., Jaffé, A. (2026) Jung’s Life and Work: Interviews for Memories, Dreams, Reflections with Aniela Jaffé, p. 191
Jung, C.G. (1973) Letters, vol. 1, p. 520
Nietzsche, F. (1999) Thus Spake Zarathustra, pp. 4-5
Ibid., p. 8
Lao Zi. Mwangdui Manuscripts Translation. (Public domain status). Dao De Jing, ch. 45
Jung, C.G., Baynes, H.G. (1923) Psychological Types. CW 6, p. 468
The White House. (2025) National Security Strategy of the United States of America, p. 4
Ibid., p. 7
Ibid., p. 10
Ibid., p. 14
Ibid., p. 22
Ibid., p. 10
Jung, C.G., Baynes, H.G. (1923) Psychological Types. CW 6, p. 567
Ibid., p.568
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Abravanel, L. (2026, May 21). “Donald Trump threatens ‘he’s going to be’ in office in 2028 and – ‘maybe in 2032’ too”. The Microsoft Network News. msn.com
Bennet, E.A. (1985). Meetings with Jung: Conversations recorded during the years 1946-1961 by E.A Bennet. Zürich: Daimon Verlag
Bennet, E.A. (2006). C.G. Jung. Wilmette, Illinois: Chiron Publications
Carter, C. (2026, March 11) “Trump says he chose ‘Epic Fury’ as title of Iran operation out of ‘like, 20 names’”. Washington Examiner. washingtonexaminer.com
Gritten, D., Usher, S. (2025, November 12) “Trump urges Israel’s president to pardon Benjamin Netanyahu”. British Broadcasting Corporation. bbc.com
Jung, C.G., Baynes, H.G. (Trans.) (1923). Psychological Types. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul Ltd. (Original work 1921)
Jung, C.G., Read, H., Fordham, M., Adler, G., McGuire, W. (Eds.), Hull, R.F.C. (Rev. Trans.) (1971). The Collected Works of C.G. Jung, Vol. 6, Psychological Types. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Jung, C.G., Read, H., Fordham, M., Adler, G., McGuire, W. (Eds.), Hull, R.F.C. (Trans.) (1981). The Collected Works of C.G. Jung, Vol. 8, The Structure and Dynamics of the Psyche. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Jung, C.G., Read, H., Fordham, M., Adler, G., McGuire, W. (Eds.), Hull, R.F.C. (Trans.) (1989). The Collected Works of C.G. Jung, Vol. 18, The Symbolic Life. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Jung, C.G., McGuire, W., Hull, R.F.C. (Eds.) (1993). C.G. Jung Speaking: Interviews and Encounters. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Jung, C.G., Adler, G., Jaffé, A. (Eds.), Hull, R.F.C. (Trans.) (1973). Letters, Vol. 1. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Jung C.G., Jaffé, A., Shamdasani, S., Fischer, T. (Eds.), McCartney, H., Peck, J. (Trans.) (2026). Jung’s Life and Work: Interviews for Memories, Dreams, Reflections with Aniela Jaffé. Princeton and Oxford: Princeton University Press
Lao Zi. (Public domain status). Dao De Jing: The Classic Book of Integrity and the Way. Mwangdui Manuscripts Translation. This digital edition: Universal Life University (Original work ca. 6th century BCE)
Madhani, A. (2025, April 10). “Trump: Israel would be the “leader” of Iran strike if Tehran doesn’t give up its nuclear weapons program”. The Associated Press. apnews.com
Megerian, C. (2025, April 13). “Trump goes with his gut and the world goes along for the ride”. The Associated Press. apnews.com
Nerozzi, D. (2025, June 18). “Trump says moments before Situation Room meeting that he hasn’t made a final decision about striking Iran – but will ‘one second before’”.New York Post. nypost.com
Netanyahu, B. (Ed.) (1986). Terrorism: How the West Can Win. New York City: Farrar, Straus and Giroux
Nietzsche, F., Common, T (Trans.) (1999). Thus Spake Zarathustra. Mineola, New York City: Dover Publications
Rucker, P., Dawsey, J., Paletta, D. (2018, November 27). “Trump slams Fed chair, questions climate change and threatens to cancel Putin meeting in wide-ranging interview with The Post”. The Washington Post. washingtonpost.com
The White House. (2025). National Strategy of the United States of America. Washinton D.C.: The White House. whitehouse.gov
Trump, D.J., Schwartz, T. (1987) The Art of the Deal. New York: Ballantine Books
