User Tag List

First 21011121314 Last

Results 111 to 120 of 171

  1. #111
    Lex Parsimoniae Xander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    9w8
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    4,463

    Default

    Basic analysis...

    MBTI is a tool for describing someone's basic cognitive preferences and to outline a set of characteristics which should in general be accurate. It is as accurate as saying that a subject is dependable when that subjects own actions have shown them to be so.

    If it is used to prescribe someone as having to act in a certain manner or used to limit a person in any way then it is not being used correctly. Ergo it does not follow the theory to ascribe any value of healthy or unhealthy to any function or orientation there of. You may say that someone is stressed when they are showing negative signs of a type as described by INTJMom but it is not valid to say that Ti, for example, is unhealthy for any type. The only means with which you can use the MBTI to define healthy or unhealthy is by using it as it is designed to be used which is a framework for communication.

    For example, my father is an ENTJ. He is trained and somewhat want to listen to people attentively and compassionately, this is not a quality which is attributed to an ENTJ. It is, however, neither healthy nor unhealthy. But to put him in the position where it is necessary to continue to do those things as a means of survival then it would be an unhealthy position for him and one form of helping him with that problem would be to try and get him to use his more dominant preferences for a while as a break.

    This kind of healthy/unhealthy situation is also exampled by my former employment situation where I worked in a hostile environment with a bunch of competitive ESTJs and ESTPs. My adaptation to that environment and the coping mechanisms I used were not unhealthy but when I got home I'd spend 10-15 minutes with a book relaxing in order to release the tension being in that situation caused. Were I to arrive home and continue to bring that hostile environment with me (as I did on occasion) I'd display characteristics which would be unhealthy for me as they were no longer in context and were a result of me not being able to cope on that occasion. Some of these signs could be assigned MBTI attributes by those with a want to do so but I would still be an INTP no matter what I was doing. Assigning MBTI attributes to things which should not have such things is not a fault of the system but a fault of the person employing the system.

    How am I defining unhealthy, that would be a state where I or someone is showing characteristics which do not serve to further themselves in terms of survivability (instincts), popularity (social) or goals. I'd guess if you wanted a good idea of where those kinds of measurements came from then I'd suggest looking into Maslow's hierarchy of needs, though I have my reservations about the whole "stage 1 needs to be done before stage 2 can happen", personally I think they under use the idea of undermining.
    Isn't it time for a colourful metaphor?

  2. #112
    Senior Member sculpting's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    4,226

    Default

    My friend sent me the below link today which is much like this discussion in the thread. Granted, it discusses true mental illness, not simply labels of "healthy" and "unhealthy", but the findings are quite interesting and highlight the damage labels can do as well as the very subjective nature of even medical diagnosis by experts. Just some food for thought.

    Link with some quotes below: http://psychrights.org/Articles/Rosenham.htm

    “If sanity and insanity exist, how shall we know them?”

    “To raise questions regarding normality and abnormality is in no way to question the fact that some behaviors are deviant or odd. Murder is deviant. So, too, are hallucinations. Nor does raising such questions deny the existence of the personal anguish that is often associated with “mental illness.” Anxiety and depression exist. Psychological suffering exists. But normality and abnormality, sanity and insanity, and the diagnoses that flow from them may be less substantive than many believe them to be.”

    “At its heart, the question of whether the sane can be distinguished from the insane (and whether degrees of insanity can be distinguished from each other) is a simple matter: Do the salient characteristics that lead to diagnoses reside in the patients themselves or in the environments and contexts in which observers find them?

    “A psychiatric label has a life and an influence of its own. Once the impression has been formed that the patient is schizophrenic, the expectation is that he will continue to be schizophrenic. When a sufficient amount of time has passed, during which the patient has done nothing bizarre, he is considered to be in remission and available for discharge. But the label endures beyond discharge, with the unconfirmed expectation that he will behave as a schizophrenic again. Such labels, conferred by mental health professionals, are as influential on the patient as they are on his relatives and friends, and it should not surprise anyone that the diagnosis acts on all of them as a self-fulfilling prophecy. Eventually, the patient himself accepts the diagnosis, with all of its surplus meanings and expectations, and behaves accordingly.”

  3. #113
    Senior Member INTJMom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    5,351

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Orangey View Post
    I didn't say unhealthiness didn't exist (though I'm skeptical when people say that they "turned into XXXX type" because they're unhealthy...I mean, yeah, you may exhibit SOME behaviors that individuals of your shadow type would if they were unhealthy, but you don't really become that type, nor would you ever really be confused for that type), just that it's kind of a meaningless term when it's applied to others. You can feel free to call yourself unhealthy all you want, but when it comes to calling OTHER PEOPLE unhealthy (especially those known only through limited interaction on the internet) it's kind of, well, bullshit.
    ...
    I'm sure if we spent 3 hours discussing the details of it, we would discover that we agree with each other.
    Perhaps we should call it "shadow behavior" instead.

  4. #114
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    2,390

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Orobas View Post
    My friend sent me the below link today which is much like this discussion in the thread. Granted, it discusses true mental illness, not simply labels of "healthy" and "unhealthy", but the findings are quite interesting and highlight the damage labels can do as well as the very subjective nature of even medical diagnosis by experts. Just some food for thought.

    Link with some quotes below: http://psychrights.org/Articles/Rosenham.htm

    “If sanity and insanity exist, how shall we know them?”
    This is the study which showed that only the insane could spot if others were sane?

  5. #115
    Senior Member INTP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    MBTI
    intp
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx
    Posts
    7,823

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by INTJMom View Post
    I'm sure if we spent 3 hours discussing the details of it, we would discover that we agree with each other.
    Perhaps we should call it "shadow behavior" instead.
    Quote Originally Posted by http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shadow_(psychology)
    In Jungian psychology, the shadow or "shadow aspect" is a part of the unconscious mind consisting of repressed weaknesses, shortcomings, and instincts. It is one of the three most recognizable archetypes, the others being the anima and animus and the persona. "Everyone carries a shadow," Jung wrote, "and the less it is embodied in the individual's conscious life, the blacker and denser it is."[1] It may be (in part) one's link to more primitive animal instincts,[2] which are superseded during early childhood by the conscious mind.

    According to Jung, the shadow, in being instinctive and irrational, is prone to projection: turning a personal inferiority into a perceived moral deficiency in someone else. Jung writes that if these projections are unrecognized "The projection-making factor (the Shadow archetype) then has a free hand and can realize its object--if it has one--or bring about some other situation characteristic of its power." [3] These projections insulate and cripple individuals by forming an ever thicker fog of illusion between the ego and the real world.

    From one perspective, 'the shadow...is roughly equivalent to the whole of the Freudian unconscious';[4] and Jung himself considered that 'the result of the Freudian method of elucidation is a minute elaboration of man's shadow-side unexampled in any previous age'.[5]

    Jung also believed that "in spite of its function as a reservoir for human darkness—or perhaps because of this—the shadow is the seat of creativity.";[6] so that for some, it may be, 'the dark side of his being, his sinister shadow...represents the true spirit of life as against the arid scholar'.[7]
    yep, doesent seem very healthy.
    "Where wisdom reigns, there is no conflict between thinking and feeling."
    — C.G. Jung

    Read

  6. #116
    nee andante bechimo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    8,025

    Default

    Isn't this entire thread all about "don't judge or label me"? Wouldn't it be less disingenuous to just state this?

  7. #117
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    2,390

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jenaphor View Post
    Isn't this entire thread all about "don't judge or label me"? Wouldn't it be less disingenuous to just state this?
    The thread is about the inappropriate use of labels; labels and judgements are entirely appropriate in situ when it is appropriate to use them.

  8. #118
    nee andante bechimo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    8,025

    Default

    Psychology is a form of pseudo-science and typologycentral, less about psychological theory and more about what happens around the water cooler or coffee maker at work. Most on TypeC aren't professionals in the psychiatric field, more casual inhalers of knowledge in general or students. To then suggest that the label "unhealthy" is inappropriate for usage around the water cooler, would be inappropriate indeed. Very much a defensive reaction against criticism of any form that is personally deemed as inappropriate.

    But I understand the human need not to be labeled or judged so I'll back out of your thread. Just wish you would be honest, if not with everyone else, with yourself.

  9. #119
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Orobas View Post
    My friend sent me the below link today which is much like this discussion in the thread. Granted, it discusses true mental illness, not simply labels of "healthy" and "unhealthy", but the findings are quite interesting and highlight the damage labels can do as well as the very subjective nature of even medical diagnosis by experts.
    This particular experiment (which occured in 1973) is more complicated than that.

    Mislabeling by a medical expert is not the main fault here; the patients clearly falsified their symptoms, which was a violation of patient/doctor relationship (since the doctor cannot draw proper conclusions if the patient is falsely reporting information and actually doesn't need the help they are pretending to need).

    Nurses and attendents then used this falsely acquired label in the process of daily caring for the patients, providing their meds, etc. Did they have authority in that system, at that time, to rediagnose a patient, if they were not an accredited doctor? Considering the authority ascribed to doctors in our culture until maybe the last 25 years (where the patient has become far more a self-advocate and doctors are routinely questioned as part of treatment), it's not surprising that diagnosis was left to the "expert" and the asylum employees just did their jobs of caring for patients and administering the prescribed medications.

    The complaint about patients being considered "in remission" rather than cured also seems simplistic, since mental illness probably has more in line with cancer rather than the removal of one's appendix. The patient "looks cured" enough to function in society as if healthy... but one doesn't know for sure if the cure will stick or if the cancer will one day return. Realistically, one is only ever "in remission" (or, in terms of psychiatric care, "functional") rather than permanently cured.

    Finally, there was enough accordance that the patients were released from the wards, rather than held indefinitely. Enough evidence accumulated to overpower the initial false diagnoses that were manufactured by the patients themselves.

    In any case, since a diagnosis (AKA label) is necessary for treatment, and treatment cannot occur without one, we're not going to remove labels. Doctors exist to provide a diagnosis/label, so then patients who believe they are sick can be treated appropriately.

    Which leads back to Jim's point:
    The thread is about the inappropriate use of labels; labels and judgements are entirely appropriate in situ when it is appropriate to use them.
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  10. #120
    Blah Orangey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    ESTP
    Enneagram
    6w5
    Socionics
    SLE
    Posts
    6,364

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jenaphor View Post
    Psychology is a form of pseudo-science and typologycentral, less about psychological theory and more about what happens around the water cooler or coffee maker at work. Most on TypeC aren't professionals in the psychiatric field, more casual inhalers of knowledge in general or students. To then suggest that the label "unhealthy" is inappropriate for usage around the water cooler, would be inappropriate indeed. Very much a defensive reaction against criticism of any form that is personally deemed as inappropriate.

    But I understand the human need not to be labeled or judged so I'll back out of your thread. Just wish you would be honest, if not with everyone else, with yourself.
    Well then, why don't you set a good example and start by telling us why you are getting defensive over this word? What stake do you have in the ability to call others' behavior healthy or unhealthy without criticism?
    Artes, Scientia, Veritasiness

Similar Threads

  1. Evolution of typology
    By SolitaryWalker in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 150
    Last Post: 01-31-2013, 05:33 AM
  2. Principles of Typology
    By SolitaryWalker in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 39
    Last Post: 08-20-2012, 08:20 PM
  3. Depression as a failure of creativity?
    By ygolo in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 03-27-2009, 03:52 PM
  4. Overview of Typology
    By SolitaryWalker in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 49
    Last Post: 03-07-2009, 03:10 PM
  5. Problems of Typology
    By SolitaryWalker in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 36
    Last Post: 04-26-2008, 11:12 PM

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