G
Ginkgo
Guest
Amen!
I think there should be a thread debating the use of the word "Amen". All against, say "I".
I.
Amen!
Now it's very important to Pi-Je types. We don't draw all conclusion back to our perspectives and label others as unhealthy as a consequence of our perspective gazing upon them. You can label a behavioural consequence as unhealthy 'this malice is unhealthy', but it's not sensible to label a normal form of cognition as unhealthy simply because you dislike it. 'This Fi is unhealthy because it isn't in your top two functions' - The most common experience I have of discussing INTJ-ENTP relations. Of course this merely comes down to their PoLR. Therefore it's not unhealthy, it is what it is.
Hey listen, I understand and by hearing folks give their skewed opinions about what's healthy or not, it makes for a good argument. Which is why it's cool it does get said, so you get the opportunity to educate the novices. I think instead of feeling annoyed by it, you should take it as an opportunity to educate them. There will always be newbies that don't understand the concepts you understand. The reality is, this thread is eventually going to get lost in the shuffle. You've got to deal with it as it comes, when it's appropriate. There are cases when usage of the word healthy/unhealthy is absolutely appropriate, as I've already discussed; as you've already discussed!
From what I've read recently, typology should be related through psychology to the purpose of the psyche and the natural order. Hence a healthy psychology and therefore type would be one which leads to an improved chance of survival (and no we're not talking jungle here but socially as well)
lost in his own imagination is unhealthy because his evaluation of things is hampered by his inability to accept and therefore think about reality as it is rather than as he would prefer it to be.
That's not to say he's suffering from some extreme condition (I lack the training necessary to make such an evaluation) but when he's arguing points and requiring others to validate themselves whist simultaneously defending and avoiding any suggestion that he should validate his position I can see that it is hampering his ability to reason.
As to the incorrect usage of definitions, it is the current trend in culture to overuse and not understand labels. Think the next time you go into a music store what the separate "genres" of music actually mean. Did you just have to check three sections for the new CD you wanted because you're not sure what that particular store would classify them as?
1) I'm not - I just don't shower my posts with glitter, it is not my way.
2) I am - See thread title, eventually when people search for unhealthy or healthy they will see this thread.
MBTI is not an appropriate measurement tool for determining healthiness or unhealthiness.
but jungian typology can be used to describe unhealthy behavior, even tho you shouldnt measure unhealthy/healthy with it.
anyways, saying that a function is unhealthy is bullshit. saying that someone is acting unhealthy in general is ok and explaining the unhealthy behavior with his weird function usage is a good thing, because it gives a perspective to the person so that he can work out the unhealthy behavior. and like i said, you shouldnt say that someone is unhealthy because he doesent use enough Fi, because thats just an opinion whether you should use Fi on that situation. but because its ok to explain unhealthy behavior by lack of some function usage in situations where you need those, its ok to wonder if the functions are used together in unhealthy ways, because thats just pondering while trying to find the solution and make things better for who ever is acting in unhealthy ways.
anyways nerd girl > intj/estp
Quite. There are many reasons we can give to how we act but to believe that we are in some way disconnected from our environment and instincts would be to assume that we are somehow transcending our original existence and the evidence just doesn't hold that up.Are you serious?
To assert that I am in some manner projecting my own inadequacies onto the other person in question would be to assert that I am in some way a certain person possessed of a mind which sees black and white. This would be untrue. I only formulated my concept after observing the subject for extended periods of time and considering other's points of view. It's not a hasty label which I would apply to someone.Did he tell you that or is that the positive perception you have of your dear friend? Is it possible it's the other way around and you're not accepting reality? Think about it. Serious question.
Poor sentence formulation. I missed out several lines of thinking while going from thought to word.How humble of you, "but".
It would still make more sense to just use an alphabetical order (minus any "the" words at the start of the name for obvious reasons). Lex Parsimoniae.It's pretty straight forward 'George Strait'-->'Country'. Don't recall having any problems locating the CD I wanted at the music store. Regardless, I agree with what you said about the overuse of labels.
I think there should be a thread debating the use of the word "Amen". All against, say "I".
I.
I said a lot more than that. I spent quality time reading and giving lengthy responses. I prodded for a logical argument that takes into consideration the facts: the denotation of the word "unhealthy", the context of the word, the source of the "judgment", etc. I still struggle to understand some of the responses where the assumptions are emotionally-based and not fact-based. Orobas's response today is a good example of that. Many of her assumptions about functions are not correct; they are not facts. So my conclusion today is summed up nicely by your quote.
Edit: That doesn't mean I didn't want to hear what others had to say. On the contrary, I needed to hear others' opinions in order to draw that conclusion. It also doesn't mean I'm not open to hear what you have to say now. I stated in a previous post earlier today that "I am open". I meant that.
I'm sure if we spent 3 hours discussing the details of it, we would discover that we agree with each other.I didn't say unhealthiness didn't exist (though I'm skeptical when people say that they "turned into XXXX type" because they're unhealthy...I mean, yeah, you may exhibit SOME behaviors that individuals of your shadow type would if they were unhealthy, but you don't really become that type, nor would you ever really be confused for that type), just that it's kind of a meaningless term when it's applied to others. You can feel free to call yourself unhealthy all you want, but when it comes to calling OTHER PEOPLE unhealthy (especially those known only through limited interaction on the internet) it's kind of, well, bullshit.
...
My friend sent me the below link today which is much like this discussion in the thread. Granted, it discusses true mental illness, not simply labels of "healthy" and "unhealthy", but the findings are quite interesting and highlight the damage labels can do as well as the very subjective nature of even medical diagnosis by experts. Just some food for thought.
Link with some quotes below: http://psychrights.org/Articles/Rosenham.htm
“If sanity and insanity exist, how shall we know them?â€
I'm sure if we spent 3 hours discussing the details of it, we would discover that we agree with each other.
Perhaps we should call it "shadow behavior" instead.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shadow_(psychology) said:In Jungian psychology, the shadow or "shadow aspect" is a part of the unconscious mind consisting of repressed weaknesses, shortcomings, and instincts. It is one of the three most recognizable archetypes, the others being the anima and animus and the persona. "Everyone carries a shadow," Jung wrote, "and the less it is embodied in the individual's conscious life, the blacker and denser it is."[1] It may be (in part) one's link to more primitive animal instincts,[2] which are superseded during early childhood by the conscious mind.
According to Jung, the shadow, in being instinctive and irrational, is prone to projection: turning a personal inferiority into a perceived moral deficiency in someone else. Jung writes that if these projections are unrecognized "The projection-making factor (the Shadow archetype) then has a free hand and can realize its object--if it has one--or bring about some other situation characteristic of its power." [3] These projections insulate and cripple individuals by forming an ever thicker fog of illusion between the ego and the real world.
From one perspective, 'the shadow...is roughly equivalent to the whole of the Freudian unconscious';[4] and Jung himself considered that 'the result of the Freudian method of elucidation is a minute elaboration of man's shadow-side unexampled in any previous age'.[5]
Jung also believed that "in spite of its function as a reservoir for human darkness—or perhaps because of this—the shadow is the seat of creativity.";[6] so that for some, it may be, 'the dark side of his being, his sinister shadow...represents the true spirit of life as against the arid scholar'.[7]
Isn't this entire thread all about "don't judge or label me"? Wouldn't it be less disingenuous to just state this?
My friend sent me the below link today which is much like this discussion in the thread. Granted, it discusses true mental illness, not simply labels of "healthy" and "unhealthy", but the findings are quite interesting and highlight the damage labels can do as well as the very subjective nature of even medical diagnosis by experts.
The thread is about the inappropriate use of labels; labels and judgements are entirely appropriate in situ when it is appropriate to use them.
Psychology is a form of pseudo-science and typologycentral, less about psychological theory and more about what happens around the water cooler or coffee maker at work. Most on TypeC aren't professionals in the psychiatric field, more casual inhalers of knowledge in general or students. To then suggest that the label "unhealthy" is inappropriate for usage around the water cooler, would be inappropriate indeed. Very much a defensive reaction against criticism of any form that is personally deemed as inappropriate.
But I understand the human need not to be labeled or judged so I'll back out of your thread. Just wish you would be honest, if not with everyone else, with yourself.