• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

Unconscious Tendencies vs. A Method of Understanding People

highlander

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 23, 2009
Messages
26,562
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
6w5
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
I first became interested in Meyers Briggs because there was a particular person that I did not understand. He was an individual that I hired and worked for me. It was early in my career when I was beginning to manage people. There was conflict between the two of us. I knew he was a strong performer and yet there was this dysfunctional dynamic that existed which not only impacted the relationship between the two of us but the broader dynamic of the group I was responsible for leading. I knew I was screwing up. I had always approached conflict in one manner. I tried to put myself in the shoes of the other person. In this particular case, it didn't work. I simply could not understand where the guy was coming from and it led to a great deal of misunderstanding.

So, it was after some personal pain that I discovered typology. It was a revelation, because I was able to understand just how differently people could think. I never did figure out exactly what his type was, though I had some guesses. It was enough though for me to guess how he may approach things and that this approach was different than mine. [MENTION=15291]Mane[/MENTION] describes a story where he had difficulty understanding someone - it was a stimulant for him being interested in the topic. In his case, it was a romantic relationship but at the core, it was a similar motivation.

Now to the topic at hand. There are many ways to look at typology. One way is to use it to understand unconscious tendencies. This is useful in my opinion to the extent that it has practical application. So, I believe the primary value of typology is to help understand people, including yourself. Devoid of that practical application, it is interesting but not particularly helpful. Realize I am not saying it is necessarily a predictor of behavior but it does help you to understand how people think and that by itself is a very worthwhile thing.

Thoughts?
 

RaptorWizard

Permabanned
Joined
Mar 19, 2012
Messages
5,895
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
I think my below quote from the Pathology in our midst thread offers an interesting perspective on Typology dynamics:

Yes, many forum members follow Typology like a religion, not just as a general guiding star, but literally like the letters are their shephard.

What's funny though is that a true INFP or whatever for instance would often be very understanding and accepting of those who are different or even in opposition to them, in which the INFP may try to harmonize and make peace - but under your definitions, the pathological INFPs on this site, which there could be quite a few under those terms, would judge and condemn others who they do not deem to fit in with their type as inferiors and outcasts.

So I would say Typology systems can be taken too far, in which they become tools of separation and misunderstanding, whereas ideally they should help us come to appreciate one another and our unique gifts.

I'm fairly sure enneagram and instincts also play a role in the immense diversity we can see within various individuals of the same MBTI type, so that 4 letter code alone by no means is a sufficient explanation to account for the whole of the individual.
 

Z Buck McFate

Pepperidge Farm remembers.
Joined
Aug 25, 2009
Messages
6,048
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
I tend to think of it more as unconscious priorities more than unconscious tendencies (which is yet another phrase I think I’ve stolen from Kalach- ‘unconscious priorities’). There’s information which stands out as being inherently more important- for whatever reason, it has more affective pull on the individual. And learning about the different personality types definitely helps make sense of why some kinds of information are inherently more important to other people, while other kinds of information stand out more to me. I mean, I’ve always noticed this is true, long before learning about mbti specifically, but mbti helps by providing organization to this and a framework with which to communicate it and better anticipate conflicts related to the differences.
 
S

Society

Guest
to understand unconscious tendencies.
Pretty much (warning: Ti overkill ahead):

The subconscious tendencies:

Connecting new information & patterns with past collection (Si-Ne)
Connecting new information & patterns within its own stream (Se-Ni)

Reflecting upon information to explore the external (Ti-Fe)
Super imposing information to express the internal (Fi-Te)


The subconscious repressions:

Ti & Te specialize in resolving cognitive dissonance.
-> Thinkers repress feelings that don't make sense.
Fi & Fe specialize in resolving emotional dissonance.
-> Feelers repress thoughts that don't feel right.

Te & Fe manifest as an information mapping mechanism, stressed by chaotic stimuli.
-> Judgers pay more attention to the most cohesive information structure (Pi).
Ti & Fi manifests as an information navigating mechanism, seeking maximum stimuli.
-> Perceivers pay more attention to the most stimulating information structure (Pe).

Extroverts experience their own presence faster
-> Subjectively leaving them waiting for their cognitive processes.
- -> Making them underwhelmed by stimuli and left to seek more of it.
- - - > Feel the most comfortable when engaging the leading introverted function.

Introverts experience their own presence slower
-> subjectively leaving them catching up to their cognitive processes.
- -> making them overwhelmed by stimuli and needing to take time away form it.
- - - > Feel the most comfortable when engaging the leading extroverted function.


The unfortunate implications:

As a Thinker, you will be accumulating an ocean of repressed emotional dissonance, shaping your biases and emotional challenges right under your nose.
As a Feeler, you will be digging your heels into as an increasing portion of reality becomes a composition of elements you aren't acknowledging and don't want too.

As a Perceiver (Ji>Je) living on maximum stimuli, you will grow overconfident in yourself & your ability to adapt and handle any new information and situation coming at you.
As a Judger (Pi>Pe) living on coherent stimuli, you will grow overconfident in your conclusions & ability to fully grasp and understand the information and situation you are in.

As a Reflector (Ti-Fe), you will lack a strong connection to your sense of self, everything will feel a bit more distant and a bit less genuine. You'll be susceptible to throwing the baby out with the bathwater, true Scotsman fallacies and ad hominem's.
As a Super-imposer (Fi-Te), a lot of what happens around you will seem counter intuitive, everything will feel a bit more alienating and a bit less reasonable. You'll be susceptible to circular logic, internal contradictions and unnoticed assumptions.


Ideal usage:
  • Relationships: with others, expecting them to follow those principles would rarely be wrong, and it is an interesting case when it is.
  • Growth: with yourself, learn to be aware of those patterns, so that you can overcome the resulting limitations and grow as a person.

In practice:
  • Theory: a large portion of Thinkers & some Feelers become entranced by the theory for its self-contained elegance, an easy to understand science that can not be disproved.
  • Identity: a large portion of Feelers & some Thinkers, utilize typology as an identity, "this is just who I am", embracing their limitations as a crutch so that they don't have to grow.
 

Lark

Active member
Joined
Jun 21, 2009
Messages
29,569
Now to the topic at hand. There are many ways to look at typology. One way is to use it to understand unconscious tendencies. This is useful in my opinion to the extent that it has practical application. So, I believe the primary value of typology is to help understand people, including yourself. Devoid of that practical application, it is interesting but not particularly helpful. Realize I am not saying it is necessarily a predictor of behavior but it does help you to understand how people think and that by itself is a very worthwhile thing.

Thoughts?

I agree with this, I also found it interesting reading about how and why you became interested in it to begin with.

I guess I never saw MBTI as either a predictor of behaviour or a good guide to understanding others, more it was a psychological theory and I like theory, although I do tend to think that it can blinker as much as it can illuminate, especially if you have a certain unwary approach to any theory in particular.

Although typology is a good example of how much diversification it is possible to have in some theoretical fields because there is MBTI, enneagram, socionics, PTypes and all the crazy variations and schools with respect to each of these.

It probably is because of the field, in some ways it does not obey the rules of evidence and scientific method that other more hard or natural sciences do, I've always thought that Comte's ideas about positivism, as a goal or end state for social sciences as it is for natural or hard sciences is a worthwhile idea.

I dont think that subjectivity is on a par with objectivity in producing understanding, I dont really agree with the social constructivists, relativism or post-modernists in this respect. No matter how much good they have produced, and I do indeed think that they have produced good, its not on a par at all.

There's better criticism of post-modernism in sciences than I can produce, the simplist is probably about the garbbled nonsense and cliches which pass for serious academic papers, which is easily spoofed.
 

highlander

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 23, 2009
Messages
26,562
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
6w5
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Ideal usage:
  • Relationships: with others, expecting them to follow those principles would rarely be wrong, and it is an interesting case when it is.
  • Growth: with yourself, learn to be aware of those patterns, so that you can overcome the resulting limitations and grow as a person.

In practice:
  • Theory: a large portion of Thinkers & some Feelers become entranced by the theory for its self-contained elegance, an easy to understand science that can not be disproved.
  • Identity: a large portion of Feelers & some Thinkers, utilize typology as an identity, "this is just who I am", embracing their limitations as a crutch so that they don't have to grow.

With enneagram, I agree with "overcoming limitations" but with MBTI, I don't agree. I believe we realize our potential when we harness our gifts which includes not trying to be someone other than who we are. If there is something that resonates with you regarding preferences, then you flow with that rather than try to overcome it. Society pressures us to be different than we are. In that respect, MBTI helps us to accept how our individual differences are not flaws.
 

Coriolis

Si vis pacem, para bellum
Staff member
Joined
Apr 18, 2010
Messages
27,230
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
What is the balance between developing one's strengths and addressing one's weaknesses? In a leadership class I took a couple years ago, we were told that no one becomes successful by working on their weaknesses; we do so by developing and harnessing our gifts. On the other hand, advice for those in technical fields often includes the need to develop one's people skills more. I have tended to follow the first recommendation, based on what works.
 
S

Society

Guest
responding to [MENTION=8936]highlander[/MENTION] & [MENTION=9811]Coriolis[/MENTION]

i think it's a false dichotomy - acceptance of your strengths vs. working on your weaknesses.

I.E. the MBTI tells me i'm an ENTP.

acceptance: most of the strengths of it are things i already knew about myself, but if i heard of this in my army time (were i was failing to embody a more ESTPish vision for myself), then yes, it might have being helpful, and i can see how for many this might be the case throughout most of their lives, especially in areas of conflict between your cultural ideal and your type, for example INxx's growing up in ESxx america. I am lucky enough to have grown in a culture one letter removed from mine (ENFP Israel).

growth: after going just a bit deeper into the MBTI, it has revealed to me in what ways my type will likely compartmentalize themselves, by understanding the repression mechanisms. having being in various "blame the type" trials - including my own (on vent) - i have also found that the unhealthy behaviors in most types stem from upholding that repression. thus, my greater potential is in overcoming those repressions, and my ability to embrace my weaknesses (Fe & Si) to complement my strengths (Ne & Ti), and become more whole as a person.

using the gene wolfe definition:
1. a truth.
2. a lie.
3. a vision.
= a mythology

i started entrenching a running gag:
"in every xNTP there's a little xSFJ growing inside"
"in every xNFP there's a little xSTJ growing inside"
"in every xSTP there's a little xNFJ growing inside"
"in every xSFP there's a little xNTJ growing inside"
and vise versa...

basically: embrace yourself, but ALSO embrace the little [opposite function order you] growing inside of you.

there's no need for either of those to conflict.
 

Coriolis

Si vis pacem, para bellum
Staff member
Joined
Apr 18, 2010
Messages
27,230
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
responding to [MENTION=8936]highlander[/MENTION] & [MENTION=9811]Coriolis[/MENTION]

i think it's a false dichotomy - acceptance of your strengths vs. working on your weaknesses.
It is less a false dichotomy than a zero sum game where time is concerned. We have limited time and energy: how are we going to spend it? Time spent developing one's strengths, I'm told, pays richer dividends than the same time spent correcting one's weaknesses. This makes sense when one considers one might need to invest quite a bit of time and effort to bring a weaker area even up to average capacity, never mind real proficiency.
 

Zarathustra

Let Go Of Your Team
Joined
Oct 31, 2009
Messages
8,110
It is less a false dichotomy than a zero sum game where time is concerned. We have limited time and energy: how are we going to spend it? Time spent developing one's strengths, I'm told, pays richer dividends than the same time spent correcting one's weaknesses. This makes sense when one considers one might need to invest quite a bit of time and effort to bring a weaker area even up to average capacity, never mind real proficiency.

This is a shitty argument, imo.

I think it's largely rooted in the fear of releasing the suppression of one's shadow.

There are several individuals on here -- all INTs (including yourself) -- who stick to this story.

One, after much time arguing with him about this fact, finally seems to be turning the corner (at least conceptually).

It comes down to marginal returns. If, after 25-30 yrs of developing your dominant and auxiliary, you think you wouldn't reap more benefits from putting some time and energy into developing your tertiary and inferior, you have a problem. The blind spots that not developing these areas creates will do more damage (perhaps unrealized) than further development of one's top two functions will do for the positive (in fact, at that point, returns on developing your top two functions may very well have turned to zero [or even negative]).
 
S

Society

Guest
It is less a false dichotomy than a zero sum game where time is concerned. We have limited time and energy: how are we going to spend it? Time spent developing one's strengths, I'm told, pays richer dividends than the same time spent correcting one's weaknesses. This makes sense when one considers one might need to invest quite a bit of time and effort to bring a weaker area even up to average capacity, never mind real proficiency.

Except that in this case, 'working on your weaknesses' IS developing your strengths, the more you resolve the needs to repress the lower functions the more complimentary they become, while working on your "strengths" has inherit diminishing returns.

for an Se-ish analogy, imagine if you had a car exterior which was very aerodynamic & lightweight - built for the speed, while someone else had a car exterior built for endurance. you can say "i don't care about doing the later, its a mean speed machine and that's all that important", and they can say "i don't care about doing the first, i have a car that keeps me safe while i go from A to B and that's all that important"...
and the result? the speedy-car owner working on making their car faster will encounter decreasing returns as they try to decrease the affects of the physical barriers, and their speed will become less meaningful as more and more turns become too dangerous for them to survive. the strong-car owner working on making their car more durable will become so encumbered that the fuel cost of going form A to B will increasingly not be worth the drive for a larger and larger number of destinations.
if either car owners took some of what the other was doing, mr. speedy would be able to drive faster more effectively and mr. strength would be able to drive safer more effectively.


for example, you me highlander & lark (edit: and now zara) are all Tx>Fx user, or in other words, we are more stressed out by cognitive dissonance then emotional dissonance, and have specialized in resolving the first at risk of repressing the later. BUT, emotional dissonance still affects our judgement, it's still working it's way in our subconscious, and the less you take care of it the more power it will have to do so.
by overcoming that and being able to more easily accept emotions that don't make much sense, we become better able to understand the nature of our own judgement and thus make better judgement within the level of cognitive dissonance as well.

for a more specific example, Ti>Fe users acting without Fe will often navigate blindly away from the positions where their Ti analysis can be of any use, and Fe>Ti users acting without Ti will often generate more and more situations in which the reality of the consequences of their actions conflicts with their their warranted preference of how they'd rather have others see them.
in contrast, users coming from either direction able to break the dam will often be able to gain the best to accommodate both Ti and Fe.

and yes - the exact same principle is applicable to Fi>Te users and Te>Fi users.

this is because the function pairs are each two sides of the same coins:
NiSe, SiNe, TiFe, FiTe
...are each one "object" - one subconscious activity - respectively:
streaming, collecting, reflecting, projecting.

by resolving the repression mechanisms within them, you are getting better at using them.

(p.s. as might be apparent from my posts, my understanding of the T/F repression mechanism is better then the N/S mechanism, perhaps because the later hits closer to the home of an N dom, it is taking me longer to fully grasp the later... <- which in itself would be a perfect example of repressed emotional dissonance sabotaging the need to resolve cognitive dissonance).
 

Coriolis

Si vis pacem, para bellum
Staff member
Joined
Apr 18, 2010
Messages
27,230
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
There are several individuals on here -- all INTs (including yourself) -- who stick to this story.

One, after much time arguing with him about this fact, finally seems to be turning the corner (at least conceptually).

It comes down to marginal returns. If, after 25-30 yrs of developing your dominant and auxiliary, you think you wouldn't reap more benefits from putting some time and energy into developing your tertiary and inferior, you have a problem. The blind spots that not developing these areas creates will do more damage (perhaps unrealized) than further development of one's top two functions will do for the positive (in fact, at that point, returns on developing your top two functions may very well have turned to zero [or even negative]).
I think my use of the word "development" may be clouding the issue. I am including the day-to-day use of preferred functions and not just activities expressly devoted to their improvement or expansion. In this sense, I may actually agree with you, in that time allocated for the deliberate improvement of abilities may be spent more on weaknesses than strengths, since they are more in need of the focused attention, while strengths will continue to develop through practice/use.

I do not entirely deny the benefits of working on one's weaknesses. There are only so many hours in a day, however, and doing this must compete with many other goals and activities for time and attention. I know what I will lose if I drop some other activity from my agenda. To replace it with working on some weakness, I must have an idea of what I will gain. The highlighted above points to the answer, namely understanding what one's blind spots are and their effects. This is something I have spent time considering (and have mentioned on several other threads), since it provides the information needed for assigning priorities, but I have yet to find an effective method of determining this.

Except that in this case, 'working on your weaknesses' IS developing your strengths, the more you resolve the needs to repress the lower functions the more complimentary they become, while working on your "strengths" has inherit diminishing returns.
Are you sure it is an issue of repression of lower functions, rather than one of simple neglect?

for an Se-ish analogy, imagine if you had a car exterior which was very aerodynamic & lightweight - built for the speed, while someone else had a car exterior built for endurance. you can say "i don't care about doing the later, its a mean speed machine and that's all that important", and they can say "i don't care about doing the first, i have a car that keeps me safe while i go from A to B and that's all that important"...
and the result? the speedy-car owner working on making their car faster will encounter decreasing returns as they try to decrease the affects of the physical barriers, and their speed will become less meaningful as more and more turns become too dangerous for them to survive. the strong-car owner working on making their car more durable will become so encumbered that the fuel cost of going form A to B will increasingly not be worth the drive for a larger and larger number of destinations.
if either car owners took some of what the other was doing, mr. speedy would be able to drive faster more effectively and mr. strength would be able to drive safer more effectively.
I appreciate this analysis; it is definitely something worth considering. I'm not sure the analogy is apt, though, since vehicle design must be based on the requirements: is it a race car (speed paramount), or an armored personnel carrier (durability/protection paramount). If you're building, say, the batmobile, you might want equal amounts of each, but either way, there is a spec driven by the function. To follow the analogy, I would need to ask "what is my function"? Through my choice of education, profession, and avocations, I have developed a spec that emphasizes certain parameters over others, which should be OK as long as I don't try to use the product (myself) for an unsuited purpose (enter an APC in the Indy 500).
 

UniqueMixture

New member
Joined
Mar 5, 2012
Messages
3,004
MBTI Type
estj
Enneagram
378
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
I think it is most useful for rational types especially when they are young because they tend to see everything as equations and they want something that is formulaic to predict outcomes. However, at some point it ceases to be useful because it stereotypes human behavior as being "caused by" their "inner personality" which is unchangeable. The truth of the matter is that personality is fluid and changes dynamically as people go through different life experiences and move through different stages in life. I think in order to really understand people you need an understanding of psychology, biology, sociology, neuroscience, etc and even then, there are some more abstract problems that have too many elements to solve, though we can begin to approximate them using agent models and game theory. So, I think of mbti as perhaps a step to indulge curiosity that once one begins to become more curious and excited about this strange world around them they can use as a springboard to something much deeper, richer, and more complex that parallels reality much more accurately.
 

uumlau

Happy Dancer
Joined
Feb 9, 2010
Messages
5,517
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
953
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
I believe it is important to work both on strengths (Ni Te for the INTJ) and weaknesses (Fi Se for the INTJ). Why? Because as an INTJ, it annoys the heck out of me that there is something I don't really understand, but it seems simple for so many other people to understand. What am I missing? How am I looking at things wrong?

I found the answer, but it was so very difficult to describe in words. It was more of an "ohhhh" and I could see why it couldn't be explained to me, and why I couldn't explain it. But I could "be it."

Then I discovered typology, and it used words to describe what I had found and couldn't describe. It described how I was very good at figuring out anything that could be analyzed, but that there were other things in the world to which analysis would never apply. That instead, I had to listen (Fi) and pay attention (Se) and understanding would arrive in that manner. That way, I could process those things I couldn't analyze, digesting them in such a way that I could take that understanding of "how things are" and use it to inform my analysis of those things that could be analyzed. Typology still isn't a perfect language for describing it all, but it comes rather close. The issue is one's personal experiences. I can describe a strawberry, and say that something has a strawberry smell, but if the strawberries another person has experienced typically grew in different soil in different conditions or perhaps were of a slightly different species, that person's understanding of "strawberry" will be close to mine, but not identical to mine. These are qualities, not quantities, and it takes time and effort to share experiences and come to a common, if imperfect, mutual understanding.

As for teaching technical types (INTx's especially) how to be more social, I do tend to agree with Coriolis a bit. Especially at an early age, there isn't much bang for the buck, and there is still a lot of technical and analytical learning to do. My experience on INTJf showed me that there was only so much I could teach other INTJs about Fi and Se: they resist it because they're mostly blind to it. Interestingly Fe makes more sense to them, because it (superficially) has a code of rules to follow, which they then follow in an analytically rigorous Te way, usually missing the subtleties. It appears to me that Fi in an INTJ needs to "wake up," first, and only then can a teacher nudge the poor INTJ out of his NiTe nest and teach him to fly.

So early on, socialization for the INTx types really needs to consist of a list of seemingly arbitrary dos and don'ts, which they'll mostly remember to follow, and which will mostly keep them from seriously offending others, but will be insufficient for them to actually socialize on a "more human" level that omits the habitual technical analysis of everything. Later on, when they discover that NiTe or TiNe just doesn't seem to be working right, and their tertiary and inferior wake up, then they can fill in the blanks that have been ignored for decades.
 

Coriolis

Si vis pacem, para bellum
Staff member
Joined
Apr 18, 2010
Messages
27,230
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
I believe it is important to work both on strengths (Ni Te for the INTJ) and weaknesses (Fi Se for the INTJ). Why? Because as an INTJ, it annoys the heck out of me that there is something I don't really understand, but it seems simple for so many other people to understand. What am I missing? How am I looking at things wrong?
The world is full of things that any one of us will not understand. How then do you prioritize which you are going to try to understand first? The simple fact that lots of other people understand something is not enough to make it worthwhile.

Interestingly Fe makes more sense to them, because it (superficially) has a code of rules to follow, which they then follow in an analytically rigorous Te way, usually missing the subtleties. It appears to me that Fi in an INTJ needs to "wake up," first, and only then can a teacher nudge the poor INTJ out of his NiTe nest and teach him to fly.

So early on, socialization for the INTx types really needs to consist of a list of seemingly arbitrary dos and don'ts, which they'll mostly remember to follow, and which will mostly keep them from seriously offending others, but will be insufficient for them to actually socialize on a "more human" level that omits the habitual technical analysis of everything. Later on, when they discover that NiTe or TiNe just doesn't seem to be working right, and their tertiary and inferior wake up, then they can fill in the blanks that have been ignored for decades.
This description of socialization is very familiar. As I get older, though, it just seems I feel more free not to follow the arbitrary rules in more and more circumstances. How does the highlighted happen, or how does one become aware if it has??
 

uumlau

Happy Dancer
Joined
Feb 9, 2010
Messages
5,517
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
953
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
The world is full of things that any one of us will not understand. How then do you prioritize which you are going to try to understand first? The simple fact that lots of other people understand something is not enough to make it worthwhile.
That's the NiTe thinking. "Oops, can't prioritize. Never mind." To me, the key was that certain things were obvious to others, but the explanations were unsatisfactory.


This description of socialization is very familiar. As I get older, though, it just seems I feel more free not to follow the arbitrary rules in more and more circumstances. How does the highlighted happen, or how does one become aware if it has??

It's like waking up. Seeing things that you didn't see before. Letting go of preconceptions and forcing things into your old lines of thinking, and just seeing where the thoughts go instead.

The end result is what you see, here. Let's just say that quite a few people commented that it was rather amusing to see an INTJ resolving INFP and INFJ issues with each other that that recent INFP/INFJ thread. I see how the pieces fit together now. It doesn't come completely naturally, but it's way more natural than Fe for me. I socialize by finding the proper "vibe", and attuning to it, and communicate on those levels.
 

Il Morto Che Parla

New member
Joined
Oct 9, 2012
Messages
1,260
MBTI Type
xxTP
People's self-descriptions are pretty useful, but usually only because if you can invert them, you can see the person's shadow and real guiding force.

The only time I really trust a self-typing is when the person bases it on their weaknesses, not their strengths.

i.e., opposed to "I know I am N because my iNution is damn good"; I would instead trust "I know I am not an Se/Si type because I have real trouble relating to details, immediate cues or thinking realistically".

or opposed to "I know I am T because my logic/efficiency is great"; "I know I am not F because I have real trouble explaining my feelings to myself, let alone acting on them consciously or protrayign them to others".

These kinds of self-descriptions show the person has actually faced up to the semi-conscious or subconsicous aspects of themselves, their "shadow", and can give a reasonably realistic account of the way they function.

So yeah sorry I don't buy into the happy clappy "anyone can be whatever they feel" view, neither do I buy into the superficial "vibe" typings which you might get (though if the person is honest enough to admit it's just a vibe typing, then that is legitimate).

Resumé: Unconscious is everything.:jew:
 
G

garbage

Guest
If and when your shit stops working, start doing other shit.

We're not necessarily made to be generalists, but we might face situations where we're forced to develop our weaknesses to some degree. However, while a good portion of learning how and when to apply which skills can happen naturally, but.. well, best to short-cut it and get some exploration and self-development out of the way before situations arise. Personally, I agree with [MENTION=8413]Zarathustra[/MENTION] on the idea of diminishing returns, Jung on the whole "embrace your damn shadow" thing, and so on.

Being scattered to the point of being absolutely useless isn't exactly fruitful, either. Honing existing skills and developing mastery can be beneficial, so long as you don't paint yourself into a corner.

On the tech side, I've known people who were, say, experts on such-and-such a part for some rocket engine that flew on such-and-such a space module decades ago; their specific expertise worked for them until their programs got canned and their skillsets became obsolete. Good on them if they were able to apply their skillsets somewhere else; bad news bears if they weren't. If they were too focused, they were dead.

To reconcile this mess, perhaps integration of the self can help us view specific problems from a variety of perspectives, so that we're able to form a more complete solution. Becoming an expert on, say, the J-2X rocket engine's cryogenic tubing structure will undoubtedly involve understanding the relevance of that tubing--at least a cursory understanding of how it connects with other parts of the engine, perhaps even how design teams work and how the contract funding stream allows you to keep your job in the first place.


Standpoints such as

"I fear not the man who has practiced 10,000 kicks once, but I fear the man who has practiced one kick 10,000 times."
--Bruce Lee (stolen from [MENTION=15886]jontherobot[/MENTION]'s signature)

and

"A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects."
--RobertHeinlein​

are both worth consideration.
 

AphroditeGoneAwry

failure to thrive
Joined
Feb 20, 2009
Messages
5,585
MBTI Type
INfj
Enneagram
451
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
"A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects."
--RobertHeinlein​

I challenge that. We live in a family and community for a reason. It's so we don't have to do everything, but can do what we are best at. This interconnects us. One man bands are never as enthralling as symphonies.
 

Coriolis

Si vis pacem, para bellum
Staff member
Joined
Apr 18, 2010
Messages
27,230
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
That's the NiTe thinking. "Oops, can't prioritize. Never mind." To me, the key was that certain things were obvious to others, but the explanations were unsatisfactory.
But that's just it: I can and do prioritize. I spend my time learning to understand those things that I need in order to accomplish something I want to do. If I wanted to work as an exchange scientist in Spain, for instance, I might decide I need to learn Spanish. I really don't care how many others understand it, except that if many people do, I have many opportunities for help/teaching.

If and when your shit stops working, start doing other shit.
But then the corollary would be: if things are working for you, keep doing them.

"A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects."
--RobertHeinlein​
Sounds like the epitome of a jack of all trades, master of none.
 
Top