"That's a problem of unhealthy xxxx"

[Ghost of the dead horse]

The popular way to dismiss any shortcomings, whether related to type or person.

 

[garbage]

With type? Maybe. With a person? Probably not.

The difference is that the "unhealthy" label belongs to certain people, not types.

Also, the word is "unhealthy." It doesn't sound like one is dismissing anything, since that word has a severe negative connotation and, to the speaker, hints at some trait that needs to be worked on.

In any case, I've sort of viewed "unhealthy" as akin to the Big Five's Neuroticism axis.. somewhat of a crude way to explain the differences that levels of "healthiness" can cause in each type.

 

[thisGuy]

The popular way to dismiss any shortcomings, whether related to type or person.

what about it?

 

[JocktheMotie]

The popular way to dismiss any shortcomings, whether related to type or person.

I always figured it was a PC way to talk about a type's shortcomings without the NFs getting all pissed at everybody.

 

[garbage]

I always figured it was a PC way to talk about a type's shortcomings without the NFs getting all pissed at everybody.

I think you're right, in a way.

I do very much enjoy threads about functions and types that end up with one group all irate at another, and then someone invariably says not to stereotype people when the forum is discussing archetypes, another says that all types are equally capable of exactly the same kinds of negative behavior, yet another says something along the lines of "we're all just people," so on and so forth, ad infinitum, until world explodes and the forum dies.

Every time I read the same sort of "guys let's all be friends" statements, they get less and less insightful. They're largely unwarranted for those who have a working knowledge of what the theory is supposed to be about, which is.. pretty much everybody here.

But then, I've also seen type used to explain behavior in horribly ridiculous ways, so maybe they've got some merit.

 

[Quinlan]

It's a way of spliting the huge range of behaviours within a type, because there is no point taking the traits of people with huge issues as typical of the whole group.

It's a simple way of saying "just because your crazy Aunty is an ESFJ doesn't mean ESFJs are crazy".

 

[MonkeyGrass]

Or,

1. the beginning of identifying your own issues and growing through them

2. Identifying an unhealthy person, assessing whether they're really worth all the worth you're throwing into the relationship "as is". Keeps you from either getting stuck in an abusive relationship and hoping it'll turn out OK, or helps you to accept the person as they are (warts and all). The call to stay or leave is totally yours, but it at least keeps you from playing the victim in the relationship.

 

[MonkeyGrass]

It's a way of spliting the huge range of behaviours within a type, because there is no point taking the traits of people with huge issues as typical of the whole group.

It's a simple way of saying "just because your crazy Aunty is an ESFJ doesn't mean ESFJs are crazy".

+1