User Tag List

12311 Last

Results 1 to 10 of 171

  1. #1
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    2,390

    Default Unhealthy versus Healthy - A Failure of Typology

    I note people like to use the unhealthy and healthy labels for functions.

    Personally I loath it; its a case of 'your ideas are different from mine and this makes them unhealthy'.

    They are usually coupled with a few oxymorons, such as 'lack of compassion/understanding/reasonableness/consensus is unhealthy'.

    Of course these factors all have a healthy part to play in any individual. For without them there is no way to deal with the abusive natures of other individuals and to set up the barriers required to live a normal and indeed happy life.

    I would suggest that those who use the unhealthy label are potentially very closed minded as they don't seem to accept that others are allowed to have and express their own opinions and are in effect attempting to use certain fuzzy labels to make things how they view it to be 'right'.

    More importantly I've never seen any sort of typological discourse which discusses unhealthy or healthy states in more rigorous typology discussion and literature. I might say it's a uniquely invented paradox of online typology communities and has little to do with cognitive functioning but everything to do with those who use the labels.

  2. #2
    Senior Member KDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    8,263

    Default

    There's probably a middle ground here. I partly understand what you're criticizing, but Myers herself opened her book with the caveat that it was intended to describe healthy individuals.

    And while Jung didn't explicitly state it, he wasn't exactly abandoning other fields and just ascribing cognitive functions to certain behaviors. From what I can tell, typology was directed more towards his peers. His patients were another thing.

  3. #3
    Striving for balance Little Linguist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    xNFP
    Posts
    6,885

    Default

    Not every behavior that is different is necessarily healthy and unrecognized by "closed-minded" individuals. On the other hand, not every behavior that is different is necessarily unhealthy. So I think the problem here is an unclear definition of a label that's being thrown around at will.

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

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KDude View Post
    And while Jung didn't explicitly state it, he wasn't exactly abandoning other fields and just ascribing cognitive functions to certain behaviors. From what I can tell, typology was directed more towards his peers. His patients were another thing.
    Yes, I don't believe that Jung ever intended to describe the archetypes to be behavioural archetypes, only cognitive ones. I guess Myers and Briggs took the first step out with identifying the 4th dichotomy as representative of external behaviour and Keirsey just ditched cognitive archetypes all together for behavioural archetypes.

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

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by InvisibleJim View Post
    I've never seen any sort of typological discourse which discusses unhealthy or healthy states in more rigorous typology discussion and literature. I might say it's a uniquely invented paradox of online typology communities and has little to do with cognitive functioning but everything to do with those who use the labels.
    still you assume that its part of typology and claim that typology is flawed

    also, you dont even seem to understand what people mean when they talk about unhealthy usage of functions..
    "Where wisdom reigns, there is no conflict between thinking and feeling."
    — C.G. Jung

    Read

  6. #6
    Senior Member guesswho's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    1,983

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by INTP View Post
    and claim that typology is flawed
    are you somehow implying that typology isn't flawed?

  7. #7
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    To switch systems a moment, Riso's version of the Enneagram makes explicit the implict "health/unhealth" aspect of that system. The whole direction of integration/disintegration assumes what is healthy for each type and what is not.

    Obviously, to suggest something is healthy, one must have some idea of what the "ideal" would be for a particular type. While this has a subjective element to it, it's not necessarily entirely subjective. (Note that, while morality itself can be ascribed as subjective, typically various human cultures throughout time have similar broad concepts of what is moral and what is not -- some key behaviors are typically regulated within all of those cultures... i.e., do not steal, do not kill, do not commit adultery, etc.)

    So I think we can probably look at some behaviors and see which ones typically result in someone being entirely inefficient, miserable, unproductive for the type of individual they are.

    To veer off that a moment... I don't think functions can be categorically labeled as healthy or unhealthy in themselves... only their use/implementation can be.
    "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

  8. #8
    He who laughs
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Posts
    1,327

    Default

    Jung used a very generalized/metaphoric language when describing the cognitive processes. So there is no healthy/unhealthy only people that are mentally unstable and those that are stable. Something that Jung spend very little time considering and therefore only looked at cognitive processes from the "healthy" viewpoint, ie people that had no considerable mental issues to distort their preferences.

    So the idea of healthy/unhealthy seems to stem more from Riso/Hudson, which is an entirely different system, than from the works of Jung. (as Jennifer so brilliantly pointed out above) And then tried to be incooperated afterwards. Which makes very little sense.

    I have used unhealthy/healthy before but I have seen the light, so please burn me on the stake of pure typology if you wish.

  9. #9
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    2,390

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by slowriot View Post
    I have used unhealthy/healthy before but I have seen the light, so please burn me on the stake of pure typology if you wish.
    Never - Slowriot, your contributions as every are welcome in any discussion.

    I am also guilty of using it to 'talk other peoples language'. Recently I used it in INFJs because I knew based upon what I had viewed there over several months that they would respond to the label; but it's a false label.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    To veer off that a moment... I don't think functions can be categorically labeled as healthy or unhealthy in themselves... only their use/implementation can be.
    Herein belies the cunning nub of the issue.

    According to what would seem much more accurate and reasonable:

    (Un)healthy Te = Using critical analysis to set boundaries and to interpret the responses from the external work and then to roll that into logical thought.

    The difference is only in interpretation by the viewer; there is no true unhealthy or healthy cognitive state.

    Unhealthy Te = Using critical analysis to indicate dislike or to create distance towards the viewer
    Healthy Te = Using critical analysis to indicate like and or friendliness towards the viewer

    The label is merely indicating that the other does not like the response of the delivery; unfortunately this is not their decision to make - you cannot control the minds of others, but you can provide alternative information to those decision making processes.

  10. #10
    @.~*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 InvisibleJim View Post
    Herein belies the cunning nub of the issue.

    According to what would seem much more accurate and reasonable:

    (Un)healthy Te = Using critical analysis to set boundaries and to interpret the responses from the external work and then to roll that into logical thought.

    The difference is only in interpretation by the viewer; there is no true unhealthy or healthy cognitive state.

    Unhealthy Te = Using critical analysis to indicate dislike or to create distance towards the viewer
    Healthy Te = Using critical analysis to indicate like and or friendliness towards the viewer

    Are you saying that is what OTHERS (not you) would deem healthy vs unhealthy use of Te?

    (Personally, I would define it differently, and more within the Te framework rather than another framework imposing itself on Te.)
    "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

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