User Tag List

First 1234 Last

Results 11 to 20 of 36

  1. #11
    i love skylights's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 so/sx
    Socionics
    EII Ne
    Posts
    7,835

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gromit View Post
    Not sure about on here, but in general, I'd say if they keep making the same types of choices or behaviors with damaging effects on themselves and/or others.
    this.

    medical language is to a vast extent a binary. i've taken a cultural anthropology class where we discussed the language of western medicine (i know there are problems with the designation "western", but i don't have a more accurate word for this as of yet), and things are generally yes or no. either you are disabled or you are not; either you are healthy or you are not; either you are ill or you are not.

    of course, all is shades of gray.

    in psychology/psychiatry one generally uses the term "unhealthy" to imply that a person is doing/thinking/believing something or in some way that is significantly inhibiting their ability to function the way they would like to. i think that holds some degree of water here as well. though that does bring up the interesting point of impact on others: is it possible to be a healthy antisocial person? is it possible to be healthy and still want to do harm to others? perhaps a better idea of health is relative: how are you doing compared to how you could be doing, not compared to anyone else.

    anyway, as for the forum, someone pissed off at another type (or another person of the same type) could totally call unhealthy when they just don't understand the other person or want to accept their reasons (of course an ENFP can't be hateful! or, well, they must be unhealthy!)

    healthy =/= likeable, though i imagine a healthy person would have a better chance of it .

  2. #12
    He who laughs
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Posts
    1,327

    Default

    in mbti terms it can be divided into two.

    It can be someone with an abnormal functional layout. Meaning that their development of either their dominant or tertiary function is lacking compared to the development of their inferior function. Therefore creating an unhealthy personality, in reference to said persons typological/functional layout.

    The second being a person that has major psychological issues that block and interfere with the person normal dominant and tertiary functions.

    Unbalanced could be used for the first one but I think unhealthy to most people is seen as someone that has an underdeveloped or understimulated function. In the sense having been emotionally or intellectually understimulated but still have either F or T as their dominant or tertiary function.

  3. #13
    Senior Member InTheFlesh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Enneagram
    CFV
    Posts
    276

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Antimony View Post
    Ime, I tend to just take in how balanced or unbalanced they are.

    Isn't that what we all do?
    So, if balance equates to healthiness (balanced people can still have depressive symptoms), does that mean a "healthy" type could be depressed?
    It seems a bit contradictory.
    I can't spell >.<

  4. #14
    Administrator highlander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/sp
    Socionics
    ILI Ni
    Posts
    17,887

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by slowriot View Post
    in mbti terms it can be divided into two.

    It can be someone with an abnormal functional layout. Meaning that their development of either their dominant or tertiary function is lacking compared to the development of their inferior function. Therefore creating an unhealthy personality, in reference to said persons typological/functional layout.

    The second being a person that has major psychological issues that block and interfere with the person normal dominant and tertiary functions.

    Unbalanced could be used for the first one but I think unhealthy to most people is seen as someone that has an underdeveloped or understimulated function. In the sense having been emotionally or intellectually understimulated but still have either F or T as their dominant or tertiary function.
    From a type standpoint, what jumps to mind for me is a dominant without a sufficiently developed auxiliary to balance it. I suppose you could have tertiary or inferior that is acting up too.

    Please provide feedback on my Nohari and Johari Window by clicking here: Nohari/Johari

    Tri-type 639

  5. #15
    i love skylights's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 so/sx
    Socionics
    EII Ne
    Posts
    7,835

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by highlander View Post
    From a type standpoint, what jumps to mind for me is a dominant without a sufficiently developed auxiliary to balance it. I suppose you could have tertiary or inferior that is acting up too.
    what, i wonder, is the difference between someone with well-developed aux and underdeveloped dom, and their I/E counterpart?

    take, for example, an ENFP with very well-developed aux Fi and underdeveloped dom Ne, and an INFP (dom Fi aux Ne):

    i assume it would end up being something like, in the ENFP, instead of Fi helping and guiding Ne, Fi would end up confining Ne. the functional "supportive parent" turning into the overprotective parent. it could make them seem "introverted" but really less introverted and more reclusive.

    switching that, for the INFP, well-developed Ne and underdeveloped Fi could lead to Ne pushing Fi every which way and not giving it the chance to stabilize and refine. it could make them seem "extraverted", but really more credulous than extraverted.

  6. #16
    Seriously Delirious Udog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    INfp
    Enneagram
    9w1 sp/sx
    Socionics
    INFp None
    Posts
    5,295

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Qre:us View Post
    What exactly is your thought process when evaluating this? What is healthy/unhealthy in terms of how you use the terms for MBTI types discussed on this forum?

    E.g., a thread will pop up, with a poster describing a problem with a "friend", and ascribing a type to said friend. And, inevitably, the responses will start having words like, "unhealthy", etc. Are we ascribing anything negative to equal "unhealthy" automatically?
    Besides what Jock said, it's also used as a form of denial when a person doesn't want to take ownership of certain behaviors that someone of their own type displays. "An unhealthy <my type> would do that, but I would never." Sometimes this is legitimate, and other times, it's just self-denial.

    When I use 'healthy', it boils down to whether the person respects themselves and others around them, has a working relationship with the emotion of fear, has their eyes open as best as possible to reality, and takes responsibility for their actions. The last one in particular is key, as people who take responsibility for their actions often have to have at least some of the other traits.

    I sometimes intermix "mature" for "healthy", though, which I shouldn't. They aren't the same.

  7. #17
    Plumage and Moult proteanmix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Enneagram
    1w2
    Posts
    5,514

    Default

    Great frickin thread. Will respond later.
    Relationships have normal ebbs and flows. They do not automatically get better and better when the participants learn more and more about each other. Instead, the participants have to work through the tensions of the relationship (the dialectic) while they learn and group themselves and a parties in a relationships. At times the relationships is very open and sharing. Other time, one or both parties to the relationship need their space, or have other concerns, and the relationship is less open. The theory posits that these cycles occur throughout the life of the relationship as the persons try to balance their needs for privacy and open relationship.
    Interpersonal Communication Theories and Concepts
    Social Penetration Theory 1
    Social Penetration Theory 2
    Social Penetration Theory 3

  8. #18
    Habitual Fi LineStepper JocktheMotie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    8,193

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Udog View Post
    Besides what Jock said, it's also used as a form of denial when a person doesn't want to take ownership of certain behaviors that someone of their own type displays. "An unhealthy <my type> would do that, but I would never." Sometimes this is legitimate, and other times, it's just self-denial.
    This is also a big one. Essentially, how it's used here often is to allow one an escape hatch. It's a caveat that allows the wielder of the words "unhealthy" to either attack a subset, or distance oneself from the criticism of others.

    I don't really know how someone can really be quantified as typologically unhealthy, so it's a tricky set of language to wield. To be honest, I've lately thought that anyone who naturally expresses an extreme functional preference is typologically unhealthy, but that's nearly all of us, since only those who express a preference identify with the type descriptions in the first place.



  9. #19
    Seriously Delirious Udog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    INfp
    Enneagram
    9w1 sp/sx
    Socionics
    INFp None
    Posts
    5,295

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JocktheMotie View Post
    I don't really know how someone can really be quantified as typologically unhealthy, so it's a tricky set of language to wield. To be honest, I've lately thought that anyone who naturally expresses an extreme functional preference is typologically unhealthy, but that's nearly all of us, since only those who express a preference identify with the type descriptions in the first place.
    Interesting point - Typology doesn't really go into levels of health like the Enneagram does. Instead, most descriptions seem to substitute "healthy" for "socially acceptable". So for example, to be a healthy extrovert they simply have to learn how to stop annoying people by doing that thing they do.

    In MBTI discussions, "Health" implicitly seems to equate to the ability to deny the primary, basic urges of our mind, because no matter what our type, those primary urges tend to not be very socially acceptable. Instead of calling it that, though, we refer to it as "balance".

  10. #20
    The High Priestess Amargith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    Enfp
    Enneagram
    497 sx/so
    Socionics
    IEE Fi
    Posts
    14,656

    Default

    I tend to use it with regards to those that seem have been blindsighted or not addressed (significant) emotional baggage they carry with. Everyone has baggage, but those that are unaware of it, or refuse to address it and run from it, tend to be less balanced as an individual, it would seem. Also, ime, when someone actually acknowledges it, without knowing what to do about it or while working on it, it can already make a world of difference, I find.

    It's also in a way a natural state, as none of us are born with natural emotional maturity. Some just mature faster than others.

    Edit: I am aware that my own bias/perspective of the world is bound to colour this assessment.
    ★ڿڰۣ✿ℒoѵℯ✿ڿڰۣ★





    "Harm none, do as ye will”

Similar Threads

  1. How Do You Know/The Shadow Knows
    By Tiltyred in forum What's my Type?
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 08-02-2010, 11:00 PM
  2. [MBTItm] ESFP or ISFP - How do you tell the difference?
    By Thalassa in forum The SP Arthouse (ESFP, ISFP, ESTP, ISTP)
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 06-15-2010, 04:04 PM
  3. [MBTItm] NFP I or E How do you determine the difference?
    By INFtha14 in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 07-21-2009, 11:01 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO