Please Understand Me II

[Ezra]

Has anyone read this? It's by David Keirsey, and I'm well into the chapter about Artisans (SPs). I didn't actually realise that there was that much different between MBTT and KTT, but apparently there is. For example, Keirsey looks at observable behaviour, while Myers is more concerned with cognitive processes. In that respect, MBTT is closer to Jung. But perhaps this idea would mean that you could be of a different temperament to your type in MBTT. I dunno though.

 

[INTJMom]

I haven't read it, but I've seen other people mention it in this forum, so I'm sure you'll get a few responses eventually.

I have the first book, Please Understand Me. Ironically, I found it too hard to understand.
I finally got more out of it once I understood the basics better.

 

[Atomic Fiend]

I own it and read through all of the NF, half of the NT and some of the SP, sections.

It makes me feel warm inside.

 

[Magic Poriferan]

I own it and have read all of it.

I honestly don't like Keirsey that much.
I find much of his system unnecessary, sometimes awkward, and I'm bothered by how fundamentally intwined he has become with all things MBTI.
Still, the book is good for some things.

 

[Zergling]

I've read through it, it is interesting to read, but a lot of the descriptions of how types supposedly behave fit too closely to a pattern to really seem real or useful.

 

[Domino]

My sister has this book. We've both read it, almost entirely. Since I know people from every group, I find it handy to have read it all, as far demystification goes. However, I do take issues with some pretty glaring weak points, mostly Keirsey's bias for/against certain types that comes through into his theories.

It's not a fatal flaw though, as complex and generally helpful as the MBTI is.

 

[ThatsWhatHeSaid]

I liked it. I especially like the little charts about values, present/past/future, blah blah blah. Kiersey's a good people-watcher. I think KTT and MBTI are limited in their ability to dissect personality and dangerous, but it's interesting.


Edit: I also liked the all the whale pictures.

 

[Ezra]

I'm half way through the chapter on Guardians now, and I'm beginning to think I am not an ESTJ, nor is there any possibility of my being one. Just because my mornings are routinised and I hold certain values doesn't make me an ESTJ.

 

[Jasz]

it's my favorite type book but i could be biased as an NT (Keirsey is an NT too).

 

["?"]

It was my first book that I bought on type, over seven years ago. I think it's very necessary to read the comparable information. Then it may become quite understanding as to why SPs are far different than SJs and have more in common with NTs, in particularly along the lines of utilitarian usage. However I do find the book limiting unless you combine temperament with MBTI. Otherwise, attempting to see them as two separate systems can make typing oneself arduous. Linda V. Berens and Dario Nardi seems to have accomplished this quite well.

 

[INTJMom]

I'm half way through the chapter on Guardians now, and I'm beginning to think I am not an ESTJ, nor is there any possibility of my being one. Just because my mornings are routinised and I hold certain values doesn't make me an ESTJ.

I agree.

 

[developer]

It is not such a bad book, but it is terribly biased. According to Keirsey, NTs are the supreme beings, NFs are also good, SPs are sort of entertaining and SJs are just boring robots.

I do not know what type you (Ezra) are, but if you do not recognize yourself in the description of an ESTJ it means nothing.

As far as I know Keirsey was an INTP and his (beloved) wife an INFJ, therefore those two types get the best descriptions in the book......

 

[Zergling]

It is not such a bad book, but it is terribly biased. According to Keirsey, NTs are the supreme beings, NFs are also good, SPs are sort of entertaining and SJs are just boring robots.

I do not know what type you (Ezra) are, but if you do not recognize yourself in the description of an ESTJ it means nothing.

As far as I know Keirsey was an INTP and his (beloved) wife an INFJ, therefore those two types get the best descriptions in the book......

That's odd, actually, I saw it more as SP's and SJ's got the most 'realistic" descriptions, while NF's and NT's were more removed from everyday life.

 

[OctaviaCaesar]

I really enjoy this book. Truth be told, I have not read the section on NTs because I think it seems boring and complicated. (They get an extra diagram that the other temperaments don't get, too! :steam: Equality! Justice! for all temperaments!)
I loved the section on SPs. Kiersey writes that he has spent much of his practice as a psychologist helping people (parents, spouses, lovers) understand that SPs aren't bad or wrong for being the way they are; as the people in my life that most others have problems with right now seem to be SPs, I found the chapters resonant and descriptive. Applying his understanding and insights has improved my relations with all my SPs so much!

 

[gretch]

I've read this book over and over and over. It's falling apart.

I have enjoyed it. It's been my first experience with typing and I find it extremely thorough.

He is a master at categorization.

My complaints with it are two fold:
1. He has a bias against S's... that is to say that he likes N's quite a bit more.
2. He's very implicit about certain faults that humans fall into being traits of personality. Though he is correct that if those people do give in to their worse nature, they portray those traits in spades. (this is where complaint #1 usually comes into play.-He values N abstractness, and finds frustration with S reality.)

Please Understand Me II Introduces the 4 intelligences: SP Tactical, SJ Logistical, NF Diplomatic, and NT Strategic, which he bases upon interest practice skill. Saying basically that Certain personalities have tendencies towards certain intelligences, which makes sense. If you have difficulty typing people this is an excellent way to determine their type. However, it is not foolproof as it is possible or necessary for some to take another intelligence as their main. This doesn't happen often, but it can. He also qualifies it with 'normal development'. For instance, my development was not 'normal' as I had an extremely controlling ESTP father who used tactics. Therefore I am an ENFP who had to learn tactics in order to survive and get things I needed and wanted. There was no place for diplomacy in this narcissistic regime, so I learned to fight fire with fire. (NOT THAT TACTICS ARE BAD!)

One trick to the book is that it's something you can/will want to skim over and over, once you learn his definitions and meanings for certain words- and the application there of. It's harder to get into initially, but once you get his language down it's extremely insightful.


David Keirsey is an INTP. I would highly, highly recommend the book to any rational (NT), as he seems to have then very thoroughly understood. He is a genius no doubt about it.

I also enjoy the titles he gives to each type.

To be honest I have no *idea* what you guys are talking about when you put A capitalized letter next to a small case one eg Ti. I have been a little curious.

 

[spirilis]

To be honest I have no *idea* what you guys are talking about when you put A capitalized letter next to a small case one eg Ti. I have been a little curious.

the big letter-little letter notation refers to the 8 functions Jung specified in his "Psychological Types" book, which MBTI and related systems are loosely based upon. he specified 2 classes of functions (rational vs. perceptive functions), inside which there are 2 types (T/F for rational functions and S/N for perceptive functions), and each has an I/E (the small letter). basically T, F, S, N with 'i' and 'e', so Te/Ti Fe/Fi Se/Si Ne/Ni

obviously T = Thinking, F = Feeling, S = Sensing, N = iNtuition

Te = Extroverted Thinking, Ti = Introverted Thinking
and so forth.

As for verification of the functions' existence, and what exactly they mean....... ....... .....good luck with that

 

[Ezra]

What I've noticed is that the NT explanations are a hell of a lot more complex. Even more than the NFs. Especially near the beginning of the chapter. I think he has a clear emphasis on NTs, because he knows what he's talking about there (he is one).

 

[Jae Rae]

Well, the book is called Please Understand ME. [smile.]

By the way, it was the first book I read and bought about typology. It's useful, especially if you want to know about NTs. I do. [smile again.]

Jae Rae

 

[Garivande]

That's odd, actually, I saw it more as SP's and SJ's got the most 'realistic" descriptions, while NF's and NT's were more removed from everyday life.

Since SP's and SJ's are more concerned with the reality, while NF's and NT's are more occupied with theory/ethics etc and what goes on inside their own mind, rather than the everyday life!?

 

[chatoyer]

As far as I know Keirsey was an INTP and his (beloved) wife an INFJ, therefore those two types get the best descriptions in the book......

Hey, where is it documented that she is an INFJ? This question has been bothering littlelostnf for months!!