User Tag List

First 45678 Last

Results 51 to 60 of 124

  1. #51
    Senior Member gloomy-optimist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4w3
    Socionics
    INFp
    Posts
    305

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mlittrell View Post
    lol ok im going to hold my tongue till later...

    just need you to answer a few more questions so i can completely understand your side of things.

    well ive been looking into this a little more and i noticed that you mentioned freud. i was just wondering if you believe most of what freud believes? basically, do you believe that personality is derived from environment and such because of freud or pavlov or just personal experience?

    some more input would be good from others...
    Well, I actually have not studied Freud or Pavlov as indepth as I would like to have, yet anyways, because I don't have the time I would like to do so. However, I know Freud is a bit infamous for his ability to see sexuality in just about everything people do.
    However, what drove me to say that is that Freud also believes that events in early life can be major factors in determining the way a person sees and reacts to the opposite sex. The child learns about sexuality from the parents; he/she sees the way the parents interact, identifies themselves with the parent of the same sex, and learns the behavior that parent exhibits towards the opposite sex. He also theorizes that if the opposite sex parent reacts negatively to the experimentation of the child trying to be like the same sex parent, then the child can be inadvertently taught that they are not right for that role, and that could be the cause of things like homosexuality.
    In other words, Freud shows favor towards developmental psychology
    Now, I also want to state that I am not nearly as sure of the exact outlines and details of this theory; I have been told this by a few people that I believe to be valid sources, but I have not myself had the time (or memory) to check

  2. #52
    Senior Member gloomy-optimist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4w3
    Socionics
    INFp
    Posts
    305

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Wrath Mania View Post
    I've been interested in that pattern for a while, since I've noticed it. What school do you go to? Has he published any of his stuff? I'm very interested.

    As for this discussion...

    There is no doubt temperament is a biological thing. While I'm sure extreme examples and people with illnesses can be exceptions, the evidence that personality generally stays the same in a person throughout their life is overwhelming. And more and more evidence links personality type with biochemistry.

    But there's obviously a difference between biological factors and genetics in particular. Do I believe personality is, to some extent, genetic? Yes, I absolutely do. Do I think there's genes that literally code for, say, being an ENTP or an INFJ? No, of course not. Genetics itself is never that simple, and the biggest problem with that field has always been its reduction of phenotypes to single genes, when a systematic approach shows that can't be possible.

    Such is the case with personality type. Your statement that a person is "born to be a certain type" intrigues me a lot; I think it's a fair proposition and explains what is likely the case. Though I am not at all open to the idea that you can mold a child in any way you want: temperament and type inherently destroy any attempt at a pygmalion project. If true personality, not outward appearance but true type, was so easily influenced by the environment, then there would hardly be any family conflicts to begin with.

    I am certain that the foundation is set in each person at birth, but as you basically said, the intrastrengths of that person's type and how it is manifested outwardly will vary greatly on the environment. Obviously someone with a mental illnesses will see their brain chemistry falter, as will their type (e.g. someone who's bipolar or a schizophrenic). However, an NF raised in a family of Ss will vary greatly from an NF raised under N parents, but that doesn't mean the pattern of their brain chemistry won't be similar.

    The brain is a self-organizing system with hundreds of millions of variables, different in everyone. It's also a two way street, and what happens in nurture will affect the nature (and vice versa). But on a conceptual scale, if we don't take personality types so concretely, they stay the same throughout life.

    That said, the mere fact something like birth order is a recurring pattern with personality proves the biological issues are far more complex than mere genetics. But in the end, nurture is really just another section of nature.
    Well, her name is Vicky Barton, but I'm honestly not sure if she has published anything on the topic; I wouldn't be surprised if she has though. But the school is on the Ball State University Campus.

    Yes, I agree that nature is too elaborate and too complicated to make any definite conclusions without very extensive research of many different fields. That's one of the reasons why people are just "born" with their types; I don't see anything behind that. I know that genetics control the physical characteristics of people, even the chemicals in the brain, which would account for dynamics in temperament. I understand that would help influence some parts of type preferences to a degree; chemical activity could account for questions of who is more emotional, who is more prone to anger issues, who has trouble processing information, etc. There is definitely a chance that that might help to sway a persons preference one way or the other; I would like to see some statistics on whether certain preferences like T/F have certain chemical levels that help to determine that.

    However, I still believe that, ultimately, environment influences preference enough that it is the "deciding factor", if you will. For instance; chemicals, as far as I know about their nature, would not do a whole lot in deciding whether a person is more prone to organization or more spontaneous, more J or more P. Certainly chemicals, in excess, may help that preference, but I think the way you're raised does more for that. The same with introversion/extroversion, N/S. That would explain better the occurance of a certain preference in a family of opposing preferences a bit better than genetics, as that wouldn't make sense unless it was some sort of genetic mutation or extremely recessive trait. But if it were recessive, then that would knock out the dominant trait because you must have both recessive traits present to show the tendency; if P tendencies were dominant and J tendencies were recessive, then two J parents could not give birth to a P.
    Of course, that is in the consideration of it as a single gene, when it would probably be a group of genes, but generally it follows to a degree.

    But, in an environmental dynamic, let's say that two people who were extremely disorganized, or extremely uncaring (for the sake of the arguement, we'll say they're unhealthy xxxPs), gave birth to two children, a couple years apart. If the children are left to their own devices and the parents don't pay much attention to them, then one of the children may actually need more organizing skills to help himself and his sibling get by, so they may be more J. Or let's say the parents are unhealthy Exxxs that let the children do their own thing; the kids might rely so much on each other and lack from others, especially if they lack parental affection, that they exhibit Ixxx characteristics instead. In fact, you could probably make changes to this scenario for each trait.

    Now, that scenario showed how type might be brought out in extreme circumstances, but it is much easier to illustrate that way. In a "normal" situation, the influences would probably be much more subtle, much less easy to pin-point, and you'd also have to consider other factors; are the parents the ones doing most of the teaching? If they both work and some one babysits, then there might be a difference in what the child is learning. If they go to a daycare with other children, that might make a difference. If they watch more TV, that might make a difference. But no matter what, in the early years that child is learning what it means to be a person in a society, and they take cues from that society on how they should think and act.
    I mean, genetics and being "born" with type is hard to imagine for me because humans are among the only animals that thing abstractly. If it were only genetics, then how could we think either emotionally or logically? How could we be intuitive or sensing? Nature, as we can see in other examples, does not account for that; it accounts most for instinct and biological build. But how we act as human beings is comprised in amazing degrees on our extraordinary ability to learn and to take from our environments.

    And that's going to be a really long post, but that should kind of explain some of my reasoning on a more extensive level >.>

  3. #53
    Senior Member mlittrell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    9w1
    Posts
    1,387

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Wrath Mania View Post
    I've been interested in that pattern for a while, since I've noticed it. What school do you go to? Has he published any of his stuff? I'm very interested.

    As for this discussion...

    There is no doubt temperament is a biological thing. While I'm sure extreme examples and people with illnesses can be exceptions, the evidence that personality generally stays the same in a person throughout their life is overwhelming. And more and more evidence links personality type with biochemistry.

    But there's obviously a difference between biological factors and genetics in particular. Do I believe personality is, to some extent, genetic? Yes, I absolutely do. Do I think there's genes that literally code for, say, being an ENTP or an INFJ? No, of course not. Genetics itself is never that simple, and the biggest problem with that field has always been its reduction of phenotypes to single genes, when a systematic approach shows that can't be possible.

    Such is the case with personality type. Your statement that a person is "born to be a certain type" intrigues me a lot; I think it's a fair proposition and explains what is likely the case. Though I am not at all open to the idea that you can mold a child in any way you want: temperament and type inherently destroy any attempt at a pygmalion project. If true personality, not outward appearance but true type, was so easily influenced by the environment, then there would hardly be any family conflicts to begin with.

    I am certain that the foundation is set in each person at birth, but as you basically said, the intrastrengths of that person's type and how it is manifested outwardly will vary greatly on the environment. Obviously someone with a mental illnesses will see their brain chemistry falter, as will their type (e.g. someone who's bipolar or a schizophrenic). However, an NF raised in a family of Ss will vary greatly from an NF raised under N parents, but that doesn't mean the pattern of their brain chemistry won't be similar.

    The brain is a self-organizing system with hundreds of millions of variables, different in everyone. It's also a two way street, and what happens in nurture will affect the nature (and vice versa). But on a conceptual scale, if we don't take personality types so concretely, they stay the same throughout life.

    That said, the mere fact something like birth order is a recurring pattern with personality proves the biological issues are far more complex than mere genetics. But in the end, nurture is really just another section of nature.
    he said everything ive been trying to say...but better lol.

    there is nothing more i need to state and i respect your opinion and the good argument you put up (though im still not convinced whatsoever). i also am interested in some of the birth order stuff.

    /thread
    "Honest differences are often a healthy sign of progress. "

    "You must not lose faith in humanity. Humanity is an ocean; if a few drops of the ocean are dirty, the ocean does not become dirty."

    "An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind."

    Mahatma Gandhi

    Enneagram: 9w1

  4. #54
    Senior Member gloomy-optimist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4w3
    Socionics
    INFp
    Posts
    305

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mlittrell View Post
    he said everything ive been trying to say...but better lol.

    there is nothing more i need to state and i respect your opinion and the good argument you put up (though im still not convinced whatsoever). i also am interested in some of the birth order stuff.

    /thread
    Yes; you provided a lot of interesting points I'm not convinced either, but I definitely think this conversation has intrigued me a bit more about the topic, and I'm glad we had it~

  5. #55
    Senior Member Ilah's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    274

    Default

    A question for the it's mostly nurture side:

    My mother put pressure on me to change my type and was extremely unsuccessful. She didn't word it in terms of type (as far as I know she is not familiar with MBTI) but the criticisms seem to correspond to my type: too "daydreamy" (strong Ni), not social enough, too much time by myself reading (introvert), wasn't good at reponding to other people's feelings (weak Fe).

    So if nurture is the primary factor, why was she unsuccessful? Did other factors in my environment that guided me toward my type? Was my type unconsciously selected as an act of rebellion against the pressure to act a certain way?

  6. #56
    Senior Member gloomy-optimist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4w3
    Socionics
    INFp
    Posts
    305

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ilah View Post
    A question for the it's mostly nurture side:

    My mother put pressure on me to change my type and was extremely unsuccessful. She didn't word it in terms of type (as far as I know she is not familiar with MBTI) but the criticisms seem to correspond to my type: too "daydreamy" (strong Ni), not social enough, too much time by myself reading (introvert), wasn't good at reponding to other people's feelings (weak Fe).

    So if nurture is the primary factor, why was she unsuccessful? Did other factors in my environment that guided me toward my type? Was my type unconsciously selected as an act of rebellion against the pressure to act a certain way?
    Well, first of all, if anyone pressures you to change types when you've already have one fully established, then it's just not going to work. In developmental psychology, although habits may change while you get older, the basis of your personality is developed in the early stages of life; in other words, you were who you are probably by the age of 5, maybe earlier. If you try to change that later...well, it's probably not going to work. You can strengthen functions, but unless there's some very drastic changes, you probably won't deviate preferences.

    I don't believe type is based on "unconcious rebellion" because it is basically learned at a very young age, before any real pressure of the type you're describing is probably put on.

    As for environment, here's a few questions; were you an only child, or did you play a lot on your own? Did your parents give you a lot of rational exercises (like certain toys), and are your parents, guardians, or caretakers (such as babysitters or whatnot, if your parents work a lot) prone more towards rational thinking, or did they encourage those behaviors when you were very young?
    There's a lot of things to consider when you're talking about developmental psychology; it's not really a case of "this happened, so now I'm like this." There are many factors that contribute.

  7. #57
    Senior Member gloomy-optimist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4w3
    Socionics
    INFp
    Posts
    305

    Default

    Okay, so I did a little bit of research because I actually had time today (hallelujah!)
    Here's a good site about the development of a child's brain:
    EDUCARER.org WORLD OF INFANTS - ARTICLE - EARLY BRAIN DEVELOPMENT

    When a child is born, the brain has all the parts it needs, but the connections between those parts aren't yet established. "The brain is the only body organ incomplete at birth. " The "nurture" part comes in to make and establish these connections and is most crucial in the first three years of life.

  8. #58
    Senior Member mlittrell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    9w1
    Posts
    1,387

    Default

    lol at above link
    "Honest differences are often a healthy sign of progress. "

    "You must not lose faith in humanity. Humanity is an ocean; if a few drops of the ocean are dirty, the ocean does not become dirty."

    "An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind."

    Mahatma Gandhi

    Enneagram: 9w1

  9. #59
    Senior Member mlittrell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    9w1
    Posts
    1,387

    Default

    "An SP is apt to be an active baby, although the introverted SP will be less so than the extraverted SP. Attempting to change an SP in any fundamental way leads only to maladjustment. He is not an SJ, nor an NT, nor an NF. His desire to perform supersedes his desire for responsibility, competency, and self-realization..."

    -David Keirsey

    once again, thanks dave.
    "Honest differences are often a healthy sign of progress. "

    "You must not lose faith in humanity. Humanity is an ocean; if a few drops of the ocean are dirty, the ocean does not become dirty."

    "An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind."

    Mahatma Gandhi

    Enneagram: 9w1

  10. #60
    Senior Member gloomy-optimist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4w3
    Socionics
    INFp
    Posts
    305

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mlittrell View Post
    "An SP is apt to be an active baby, although the introverted SP will be less so than the extraverted SP. Attempting to change an SP in any fundamental way leads only to maladjustment. He is not an SJ, nor an NT, nor an NF. His desire to perform supersedes his desire for responsibility, competency, and self-realization..."

    -David Keirsey

    once again, thanks dave.
    How old is the baby of question?

Similar Threads

  1. Each type in 3 words.
    By SolitaryWalker in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: 11-02-2016, 07:32 AM
  2. No Type
    By paulwhy in forum Welcomes and Introductions
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 01-05-2015, 09:01 PM
  3. Help figuring out your type?
    By SolitaryWalker in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 354
    Last Post: 09-25-2012, 12:12 PM
  4. My type flip flops
    By mooseantlers in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 05-28-2012, 10:38 AM
  5. [NF] What sort of topics are NF type topics?
    By Alienclock in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 39
    Last Post: 06-23-2007, 09:39 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