User Tag List

First 12345 Last

Results 21 to 30 of 59

  1. #21
    Senior Member Jaguar's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    12,443

    Default

    Reading this thread is like watching someone bitch about Julia Child while being oblivious to the fact that Martha Stewart exists.

  2. #22
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    MBTI
    ISFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 sx
    Socionics
    SEE Fi
    Posts
    25,301

    Default

    It's hilarious that you criticize us for criticizing Keirsey's subjective personal bias because of our subjective personal bias.

    BTW, I know that Keirsey is old. I realize the effect that had on his writing, just like I realize the effect of Frederich Nietzche's pathetic life on his ridiculous philosophy.

    You'd think an INTP would be more abstract, and not so detailed and socially specific like an SFJ. You would think.

    Mmmhmm.

    Like I said though, I want to believe that Keirsey's intention was to bring personality theory to everyone, so he wrote it in an easier-to-understand and more interesting, story-telling, detailed format. His intentions probably weren't bad, they were probably actually very kind and well-intentioned. That's what I want to believe.

    I wouldn't have been able to even read Jung when I was in my teens or early 20's without getting insanely bored or bursting into tears. Ti blah blah blah STILL kind of looks like Ti blah blah blah to me...Going to college probably partly helped with that, maybe developing functions as I grew up...and I had to get a primer from people who already understood his theories to even start to grasp it. I don't deny any of this. But this is exactly why people who are better with theory shouldn't run around misleading the younger people or people who aren't as natural with abstract theory with this Keirsey shit. It's just like...misinformation. But then if some people were as good as they think they are with abstract theory, wouldn't they see what I see now? It may have taken time, effort, and help...but I'm able to grasp function theory fairly well without tooooo much stereotyping.

    Arrrgh. I sound like Victor.

    I think I'm done with this topic.

  3. #23
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    9
    Posts
    17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marmie Dearest View Post
    I posted this on another type web site, but I think this might generate more conversation here since the site is so much busier.

    I am oft known to complain about Keirsey because I find a lot of his descriptions too binding and stereotyped (like did anyone notice how he describes ISTJs as wearing "homespun" clothes???!! Gimme a break!!)

    But I decided to emphasize today what I like about Keirsey or what I got from his book at all, and that principally applied to the temperaments: NF/SP/NT/SJ.

    I found that I actually related to more SP traits than NF, which caused me to question Se vs. Ne, along with other things over the course of a couple of months.

    I like best the matrices he places in each section: for example, Artisan syntax is "Descriptive" (yes! that's me!) and they find Self-Esteem in being Artistic, Self-Respect in being Audacious (this really resonated with me, again), and Self-Confidence in being Adaptable. I think my Vocation is more applicable to "Equipment" (whether that be cooking tools or using a computer for writing) rather than Personnel, which is the NF Vocation. While some of the NF traits may apply, I found that the SP Temperament characteristics made more sense.

    I also thought that some of the SJ traits really did seem like SJs I know - Seeking Security, Yearning for Belonging, Aspiring to be Executives, and often having a Pessimistic attitude in the Present, while garnering Self-Esteem in being Dependable.

    I found these descriptions less offensive and less overly specific.

    Does anyone else appreciate this aspect of Keirsey, but not others?

    Feel free to discuss any and all of Keirsey (what you like, what you don't) in this thread.

    I got really excited when I was reading it, but I think that's because of the way it's a story...and I like folk tales and archetypal stuff, I was really into astrology as a teenager, blah blah blah.

    But stepping back and looking at it as a source of objective information for personality type? NO WAY. He says things like SJ women see sex as a duty and with some of his quotes makes SPs sound like smart-alecky or "tough guy" characters from mid-20th century movies. All NFs are apparently fragile, non-confrontational social workers (I definitely did not see myself in that) and apparently he claims he fell in love with the first NF girl he ever met as an NT? It's all a bit over the top if you look at it in terms of actually seriously typing people.

    It's entertaining, it's fun, yes there's some useful information in the framework of it (like I do think he does loosely correlate some SJ behaviors to Si, and some SP behaviors to Se, etc.) ...and I find the temperaments much more useful than the individual type descriptions, though I can't really say I'm a fan once he gets into things like sexual attitudes (seems really, really stereotyped beyond belief) even while I think his Parenting styles for the temperaments are kind of spot on.

    Keirsey is a big fairy tale of hit and miss. It's got grains of truth to it, just like a fictional story. Because essentially that's what it is.

    And that's the only way I can appreciate it, is by seeing the usefulness of the grains of truth in the archetypal fairy tale. But when people take it so seriously, I find it offensive. Because it over-simplifies type theory and reduces human beings down to lame stereotypes which may have nothing to do with their actual cognitive functions.

    I've seen some SRS Keirsey fanatics say the dumbest things about people...and a couple of these guys are INTx...you'd think they'd be more intellectually discriminating than that...but I guess not.

    I can totally see where I would have gotten carried away with Keirsey if I had read it when I was like seventeen. Totally. I would have taken it as seriously as astrology, I would have gotten caught up in the artistry and mythology of it.

    It's only because as an adult with life experience that it horrifies me how much it reduces human beings to ridiculous stereotypes. It doesn't seem like any educated adult should take it quite that seriously.
    Keep in mind that the types will tend to define someone more at a young age than an old age, generally speaking, because as most people age they tend to conform to society to some extent, and make up for their shortcomings in order to be "successful".

  4. #24
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    MBTI
    ISFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 sx
    Socionics
    SEE Fi
    Posts
    25,301

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Frenetic Tranquility View Post
    Keep in mind that the types will tend to define someone more at a young age than an old age, generally speaking, because as most people age they tend to conform to society to some extent, and make up for their shortcomings in order to be "successful".
    OH yeah...you're right. Sixteen year old ISTJs always wear homespun clothes.

    There's a lot of years between young age and old age, too, bro.

    But it's true that it's easier for anyone who is at least 25-30 to look back to their teens and early twenties to see themselves in a purer form.

  5. #25
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    MBTI
    ISFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 sx
    Socionics
    SEE Fi
    Posts
    25,301

    Default

    P.S. I'm actually looking forward to going off to paint in the mountains.

    No, really.

  6. #26
    The Eighth Colour Octarine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    MBTI
    Aeon
    Enneagram
    10w so
    Socionics
    LOL
    Posts
    1,366

    Default

    Don't get us wrong, Keirsey totally deserves criticism like this, considering when PUM II was published.

    It's just that the criticism should not just be limited to Keirsey, but typology in general.

  7. #27
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    MBTI
    ISFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 sx
    Socionics
    SEE Fi
    Posts
    25,301

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Catbert View Post
    Don't get us wrong, Keirsey totally deserves criticism like this, considering when PUM II was published.

    It's just that the criticism should not just be limited to Keirsey, but typology in general.
    The original point of the OP was actually to say how much I prefer the temperaments over the individual type descriptions, and I like the matrices of traits in each section - you know, that chart thingy.

    It's clear, it makes sense in a lot of ways, and that's the main thing I value about Keirsey is his temperaments, but even they are carried too far into specifics, i.e. attitudes toward sexuality, come on, please, give me a break.

    I like personality theory in general, or I wouldn't be so comfortable hanging out here.

    Painting in the mountains does sound pretty cool. It reminds me of my great-grandmother. We had several of her landscape paintings hanging in our log cabin when I was a child, one of which was a mountain in the distance.

    Of course, I am from West Virginia, so it's not a huge stretch that I actually envisioned myself up in the mountains out in nature, writing novels because I didn't have to work anymore before I ever read the Keirsey description.

    I just don't think people take some of it very well, though, and they shouldn't. It's ridiculous how far Keirsey takes it.

  8. #28
    Senior Member guesswho's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    1,983

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Catbert View Post
    Don't get us wrong, Keirsey totally deserves criticism like this, considering when PUM II was published.

    It's just that the criticism should not just be limited to Keirsey, but typology in general.

  9. #29
    Intergalactic Badass mujigay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    1w9
    Posts
    532

    Default

    Keirsey drove me nuts.

    I made the mistake of reading Please Understand Me II when I first got into typology. The first thing I thought was "HOLY HELL I AM CERTAINLY NOT AN INTJ. OR AN INFJ. OR ANYTHING HERE FOR THAT MATTER." Plus, the way he described SJs in general seemed...faintly condescending.

    Yes, I think that's the best way to put my impression of Keirsey's stuff. Faintly condescending.
    1w9 sx/sp
    A little song, a little dance, a little seltzer down your pants.

    All that is gold does not glitter
    Not all those who wander are lost

  10. #30
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    MBTI
    ISFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 sx
    Socionics
    SEE Fi
    Posts
    25,301

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mujigay View Post
    Keirsey drove me nuts.

    I made the mistake of reading Please Understand Me II when I first got into typology. The first thing I thought was "HOLY HELL I AM CERTAINLY NOT AN INTJ. OR AN INFJ. OR ANYTHING HERE FOR THAT MATTER." Plus, the way he described SJs in general seemed...faintly condescending.

    Yes, I think that's the best way to put my impression of Keirsey's stuff. Faintly condescending.
    One thing I do find interesting about Keirsey is that I am still an FP there even without taking cognitive functions into consideration. It was only through reading his book that I realized I'm just as much of a Keirsey FP as an Fi type.

    My Keirsey/MBTI scores are also the exact same: xNFP.

    However, things go terribly wrong when we start looking at temperaments, where I seem to fit more in the SP temperament.

    But then it helped me to examine Se/Ni vs. Ne/Si.

    As far as Keirsey's individual type descriptions, I would be most likely to go with ENFP, ESFP, or ISFP...except that both ExFPs sound too extroverted and ISFP sounds just a little too quiet. I'm not a Keirsey INFP, and neither NFJ type sounds like me AT ALL.

    So it's a mixed bag. I really feel that function theory is ultimately better, though. I would hate, for example, to test xNFP on some public career exam and be "placed" in a career like personnel or similar. I'm less diplomatic and non-confrontational than one would hope, no matter my consistent dichotomy scoring. If I had to be placed anywhere I'd rather be placed in the SFP professions (which is what Keirsey ultimately is: a career sorter).

    I do think the ISTJ I know *is* kind of an Inspector...and I see a lot of fictional ISTJs in books/movies as detective inspectors.

    Like I said: mixed bag, but too faulty in the long run.

Similar Threads

  1. A Libertarian Builds Low-Cost Private Schools For The Masses
    By asynartetic in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: 02-09-2017, 10:29 PM
  2. The real cause for the mass shooting on America.
    By jixmixfix in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 106
    Last Post: 10-13-2015, 04:38 PM
  3. One for the experts.
    By Xander in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: 07-03-2008, 05:29 PM
  4. [MBTItm] A Question For The Domiant Type At This Forum?
    By "?" in forum The SP Arthouse (ESFP, ISFP, ESTP, ISTP)
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 06-03-2007, 10:55 AM
  5. [INFJ] sympathy for the despicable
    By Eileen in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 51
    Last Post: 06-02-2007, 06:38 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