[MENTION=825]ygolo[/MENTION]
My reaction to what I posted, I think, is that I believe we have a duty to ourselves to define the self as apart from others by understanding how we relate to our own inner state, indirectly defining how we relate to others at the same time. If time is about change and knowledge comes from change, what we hopefully gain in the process is a way to achieve that goal. Truth in a sense, or at least in the sense of identity, can be more like an assertion, as well as a conditioning, except that the dog and trainer are both influencing one another at the same time, fixating their roles, even though from the trainer's point of view, he might believe to have more control over that. But it all depends on the motivations of the dog as well, really. A dog can act like a dog, but it doesn't mean it thinks like one as the trainer believes and sees only external appearances.
I feel someone that has a strong concept of identity will be able to integrate an entity view with an incremental view in order to create a stable understanding of them-self and others.
If one focuses on the incremental view to the detriment of an entity view, what limits of themselves and others will they have in mind or fight for in order to make decisions? Theoretically, none, since the incremental view is that no such things can be determined and they will not know them-self or anyone else either.
If one focuses on the entity view to the detriment of an incremental view, what can such a person do that they have already decided that they can't or shouldn't do? Theoretically, none, since the entity view is quite strict in defining what our roles are to be.
By utilizing both, one can understand momentarily, when it is deemed important, what entity they are, assertively, and use that to guide them in a direction, but roam incrementally in that direction.
So my reaction is that the disconnect people have with the theory is that they are focusing on one over the other and finding the natural problems that arise from that.
(Entity >> Incremental) --> Resistant to necessary change
(Incremental >> Entity) --> Has no concept of their limits or anyone else's
In my opinion then, unfortunately in this light, overall positive reactions to MBTI can indicate a big entity view that allows the person to almost completely define who they are as coming from their type before all else; and unfortunately, in this light, overall negative reactions to MBTI can indicate a big incremental view that allows a person almost no room to define them-self and other people.
I believe integrating both can bring a person a unique kind of peace, as they are both receptive to change and able to discern the more prominent characteristics of themselves and other people, even if those characteristics must change as time goes on.
Yes, to anyone considering, I'm not a psychologist or anything, but this is genuinely how I feel/think about this.