How/Do you assign the label "unhealthy" when speaking in this forum?

[Betty Blue]

I really don't feel comfortable making/taking the desicion of describing what may or may not be healthy or unhealthy.

 

[Coriolis]

From what I have read, MBTI is meant to describe healthy individuals (of all types). It does not account for mental illness or other pathologies (yes, a loaded term which I will not take the time to define). I would assume that an unhealthy XXXX is someone whose fundamental type is overlaid with one or more of these issues: depression, bipolar, insecurities, history of abuse/trauma, etc.

Another way of looking at it: healthy types use their functions, rather than being used or controlled by them.

 

[Hopelandic]

unhealthy and unbalanced I use interchangeably.

They are so far trapped in their ego (mainly their dominant function) they reject anything that does not accord with their own world view. Extending from their dominant function or from a negative dom-tert loop and developing balance between their own introverted and extraverted functions, would see them come out of this ego trap.
Functional discordance may be caused by stress, and ones functions are distrusted or functional order of dependence is somehow disturbed... and one ends up not being able to rely on them.

My conception is that unhealthiness is the result of function imbalance ( a very complex yet perfect interdependence of extroverted and introverted functions); and function imbalance is essentially entropy of Jung's cognitive system.

Sometimes people may never leave this ego trap, which is very sad.

Confounding things are the other 'pathologies' people have suggested, so other things away from functions, like borderline personality disorder, may make someone seem unhealthy from the outside, because they seem to act irrationally etc. Now, this may not be the result of functions, but a complex set of factors leading to this disorder.

 

[highlander]

what, i wonder, is the difference between someone with well-developed aux and underdeveloped dom, and their I/E counterpart?

take, for example, an ENFP with very well-developed aux Fi and underdeveloped dom Ne, and an INFP (dom Fi aux Ne):

i assume it would end up being something like, in the ENFP, instead of Fi helping and guiding Ne, Fi would end up confining Ne. the functional "supportive parent" turning into the overprotective parent. it could make them seem "introverted" but really less introverted and more reclusive.

switching that, for the INFP, well-developed Ne and underdeveloped Fi could lead to Ne pushing Fi every which way and not giving it the chance to stabilize and refine. it could make them seem "extraverted", but really more credulous than extraverted.

It seems unlikely to me that somebody would have an underdeveloped dominant - dunno.

 

[cascadeco]

I guess I tend to tie 'unhealthy' to anything psychologically that resides totally outside of mbti (but due to the nature of the psychological aspect, it of course could easily influence how the cog. functions play out - if we must tie it back to mbti/type stuff)

So, that would be - depression, anxiety, defensive/coping techniques, anger issues, obsessive behaviors or thoughts, narcissism, addiction, avoidance, fear, codependency, and the like..... with this, tends to either keep one in a 'holding pattern', creates some element of denial or really off-kilter/unbalanced relationships or Life imbalances, harms self/others, or prevents the person from being able to hold lasting, beneficial relationships with others or make headway in ones own life.

Basically, every human being is going to be 'unhealthy' at one or more points in their lives.

 

[Eckhart]

I thought about it myself too already, so I am happy you made the thread. I noticed too that the worths healthy / unhealthy are used very loosely here. I had the impression people use it on everyone who has any kind of problems in their life, but it has some effect that it sounds like that person is not really likeable because of it and I don't know how fair that is. But well, maybe it is just me who perceives it like that.

 

[Qre:us]

I guess I tend to tie 'unhealthy' to anything psychologically that resides totally outside of mbti (but due to the nature of the psychological aspect, it of course could easily influence how the cog. functions play out - if we must tie it back to mbti/type stuff)

So, that would be - depression, anxiety, defensive/coping techniques, anger issues, obsessive behaviors or thoughts, narcissism, addiction, avoidance, fear, codependency, and the like..... with this, tends to either keep one in a 'holding pattern', creates some element of denial or really off-kilter/unbalanced relationships or Life imbalances, harms self/others, or prevents the person from being able to hold lasting, beneficial relationships with others or make headway in ones own life.

Basically, every human being is going to be 'unhealthy' at one or more points in their lives.

I agree, but, that was not what I was asking in the OP.

I really want this thread to discuss how it's used in MBTI terms, and in the sphere of OUR forum. As a cultural phenomenon.

My OP:

These words are part of our forum meme: Healthy/Unhealthy

I guess I tend to tie 'unhealthy' to anything psychologically that resides totally outside of mbti

Unfortunately, although I don't have stats to back it up, the general trend in this forum is to throw these words around much more frequently than we're correctly ascribing mental disorders and/or psychoanalysis through the net.

From what I have read, MBTI is meant to describe healthy individuals (of all types).

But, it does talk about "strengths and weaknesses".

How well are we, as a forum, seguing from evaluating ^ to "healthy"/"unhealthy" of a type, in general?

And the "whys".

Jock's answer in the first page I liked, cuz it was refreshingly honest, as I've seen that occur, and have partaken in that myself. And, plus, forum cultural memes are lazy easy potential for jokes.

I thought about it myself too already, so I am happy you made the thread. I noticed too that the worths healthy / unhealthy are used very loosely here. I had the impression people use it on everyone who has any kind of problems in their life, but it has some effect that it sounds like that person is not really likeable because of it and I don't know how fair that is. But well, maybe it is just me who perceives it like that.

This was where I wanted the discussion to go. Thanks. I agree. I don't easily call people IRL "unhealthy" or "unbalanced"....maybe cuz of my surroundings? maybe because it's the rare few cases, and not the norm? maybe because irl I can see them more holistically than forum affords?

Even in the forum, for me personally, I rarely use the terms "unhealthy" seriously towards a person. Although I theoretically talk of what XY function mix togethers' pitfalls would be - its "unhealthy" state. Not at a particular person, just at theory.

How much are we losing out on depth of discussions of type theory [the blindspots, the weaknesses in all of us], if we speak in these distancing terms?

 

[KDude]

So, that would be - depression, anxiety, defensive/coping techniques, anger issues, obsessive behaviors or thoughts, narcissism, addiction, avoidance, fear, codependency, and the like......

Sheesh.. I have most of these problems.

 

[cascadeco]

I really want this thread to discuss how it's used in MBTI terms, and in the sphere of OUR forum. As a cultural phenomenon.

Unfortunately, although I don't have stats to back it up, the general trend in this forum is to throw these words around much more frequently than we're correctly ascribing mental disorders and/or psychoanalysis through the net.

Well, I utilize mbti with a large dose of salt anyway, so what I wrote IS what I mean when I use the words 'healthy'/'unhealthy' on this forum. I don't believe I've done it recently (although maybe I have), but for example in the past I've referenced an 'unhealthy' former ENTJ friend of mine. When I used the word 'unhealthy', it wasn't in reference to her type of ENTJ - it was what I said above -- other psychological things going on that effectively overrode, or impacted the presentation, of her type. She was an unhealthy *individual* - had nothing to do with her type specifically. But, now that I'm typing this out, it begs the question whether there's even a point at all in bringing unhealthy individuals into a talk of type -- as depending on what's going on with them, they'll differ greatly from other unhealthy individuals of the same type, and will have more in common (in some ways) with individuals having the same issues, but of a different type. But that's just me. Can't speak for others and what it means when they use the term.

I suppose you could say there are general 'trends' when it comes to how unhealthiness might manifest in each type (there are threads on that - i.e. INFJ's with avoidance, ESTP's with blah blah blah, etc).

Or, theory-wise, many will deem 'Shadow' behaviors as 'unhealthy' signs of a given type. That's a common one when you're talking just mbti. Another one would be over-reliance on, say, the primary function without really dipping into anything else.

 

[Lark]

From what I have read, MBTI is meant to describe healthy individuals (of all types). It does not account for mental illness or other pathologies (yes, a loaded term which I will not take the time to define). I would assume that an unhealthy XXXX is someone whose fundamental type is overlaid with one or more of these issues: depression, bipolar, insecurities, history of abuse/trauma, etc.

Another way of looking at it: healthy types use their functions, rather than being used or controlled by them.

I'm thinking about this thread and not sure I have my final answer but I will say that I this this post comes very close to what I think.

The only thing that I would add would be to do with Jung's conceptualisation of shadow, which as I understand it would be the "disowned" or estranged cognitive function sets, asserting itself over the psyche and taking someone for a ride. I would think that would be unhealthy as it corresponds to MBTI typology.

I'm trying to think of some of the things Jung said about archetypes developing into complexes in the psyche or when that process went awry but I cant remember it exactly. I would think that would be unhealthy as it corresponds to Jungian psychology.

Personally, I would give consideration to both Karen Horney's theories about neurotic trends and underlying character structures or Eric Fromm's social character theories when reaching conclusions about whether I thought someone was healthy or not. I would do that in real life as much as on a forum, any forum, not just this one.

And Fromm makes the point, Horney does too but in a different manner, that to be unhealthy isnt to be unsuccessful, unpopular or necessarily troubled or distressed, some states of mind which objectively could be considered neurotic, or perhaps myopic instead, are highly adaptive. They're just ultimately bad for you or others around you.

More recently theories about attunement, theory of mind, attachment and trauma and in particular the emotional and social intelligence writers have risen in my estimations but I still consider the neo or revisionist Freudians to be pretty good.

 

[highlander]

In a balanced person, the functions play off of each other. Some overlapping concepts that I recall from different places that seem to represent a lack of balance:
- One function excessively dominates a personality or, rather than being used as a compliment, the other functions become enslaved by it.
- A person's auxiliary is not sufficiently developed to counterbalance the dominant function and/or the tertiary is overused.
- The inferior function excessively erupts or dominates in someone's day to day life (see Quenk).
- One or more of the shadow functions move into an area of prominence, usurping the auxiliary.

There was also a fascinating thread here about how unbalanced/unhealthy individual's Ennegram type (the defense mechanisms) overrides their MBTI type, which could indicate that somebody is out of balance.

http://www.typologycentral.com/foru...ng-article-about-mbti-enneagram-relation.html

Finally, I think Case Study #3 in the the link in the following post gives a great example of somebody who is not balanced .

http://www.typologycentral.com/forums/1299786-post34.html


Edit: But I am loathe to ever assign a label of being unhealthy because I think we all are in certain ways.

 

[OrangeAppled]

I see unhealthy as someone who has significant emotional problems which affect their thought process so that they can't be considered a reliable reflection of their type. I'm not sure if these people should be typed, but usually some part of their personality is recognizable as a type. In any case, they aren't the poster child for XXXX type.

I tend to see it as more of a scale.....which is why a generally healthy person can sometimes exhibit unhealthy behavior or attitudes.

I think it's interesting to consider how certain types tend to be unhealthy. There seem to be patterns in how people disintegrate.

Since I'm far from an expert on this, I use the term casually. Yes, I use it to avoid offending people, but also because I truly do not see that person as representative of a whole type, but possibly how that type may tend to "go bad".

More & more, I appreciate that MBTI focuses on the "normal" and "healthy" types. It emphasizes that differences in personalities is a positive thing, instead of focusing on the possible negative flaws which reinforce unfair bias against certain types.

 

[highlander]

I see unhealthy as someone who has significant emotional problems which affect their thought process so that they can't be considered a reliable reflection of their type. I'm not sure if these people should be typed, but usually some part of their personality is recognizable as a type. In any case, they aren't the poster child for XXXX type.

I tend to see it as more of a scale.....which is why a generally healthy person can sometimes exhibit unhealthy behavior or attitudes.

I think it's interesting to consider how certain types tend to be unhealthy. There seem to be patterns in how people disintegrate.

Since I'm far from an expert on this, I use the term casually. Yes, I use it to avoid offending people, but also because I truly do not see that person as representative of a whole type, but possibly how that type may tend to "go bad".

More & more, I appreciate that MBTI focuses on the "normal" and "healthy" types. It emphasizes that differences in personalities is a positive thing, instead of focusing on the possible negative flaws which reinforce unfair bias against certain types.

I was thinking several of these exact things on the drive home tonight after I wrote the last post.

 

[Wonkavision]

I really don't feel comfortable making/taking the desicion of describing what may or may not be healthy or unhealthy.

Same here.

Unless you're some sort of professional dealing with an actual client/patient, then being comfortable with it = serious assholery, in my opinion.

 

[highlander]

Same here.

Unless you're some sort of professional dealing with an actual client/patient, then being comfortable with it = serious assholery, in my opinion.

I think you might be missing the point of the OP. We're talking about functions and balance.

 

[highlander]

Good link on Enneagram and different levels of "health"

Enneagram Levels of Development: Presentation at IEA Conference '04

Levels of Development Chart
Healthy
1 Level of Liberation: Ego Transcended — Balance & Freedom
2 Level of Psychological Capacity: Ego is Identified with as the basis of a Particular Mode of Being
3 Level of Social Gift: Ego Operating in a Constructive Way, Successfully Sublimating
Average
4 Level of Fixation: Losing Contact with Presence and Awareness, the Beginning of “Sleep” — as Ego-Role assumed
5 Level of Interpersonal Conflict: Ego Controlling Environment to get its needs met — Manipulative & Defended
6 Level of Overcompensation: Ego Inflation, Aggressive defense of Ego-Identity. Demanding that others/reality support the ego-agenda
Unhealthy
7 Level of Violation: Ego willing to violate self and others to maintain itself. Abusive, Devaluing, Desperate (Serious pathology arises)
8 Level of Delusion and Compulsion: Ego-self out of Control and Out of Touch with Reality (Major Personality Disorders)
9 Level of Pathological Destructiveness: Extreme Pathology or death (Psychosis)