Best Book On Typology

[highlander]

What is your favorite book on typology or MBTI and why do you think it is the best?

 

[gromit]

Ah good. I am glad you began this thread!

 

[highlander]

I'll vote for Lenore Thompson - best combination of depth, insight, and practicality.

 

[highlander]

I guess none of them are very good based on the pathetic lack of votes

 

[Spamtar]

I think Monkey Zoo would be a good title of a book that has yet to be written on the subject. Because really when you think about it most humans are not much different than monkeys.

 

[JocktheMotie]

My favorite was Psychological Types. I did not like Lenore's book, and Please Understand Me 2 was good, but Keirsey should not have adopted MBTI nomenclature at all. Just leads to confusion; he bases his types on observable behavior and language, while MBTI uses the cognitive function model.

 

[JocktheMotie]

I'll vote for Lenore Thompson - best combination of depth, insight, and practicality.

Wasn't a fan. Basically just because I hate the functions lasagna analogy. I fucking hate lasagna.

I guess none of them are very good based on the pathetic lack of votes

The amount of members who have actually read any of these books is probably pathetic too. Far easier to take an online test and then be a pro.

 

[Salomé]

They pretty much all suck equally.

 

[Lotr246]

I'll vote for Lenore Thompson - best combination of depth, insight, and practicality.

In my opinion, Thomson's is for sure the best. I've never read clearer or more refreshing descriptions of the types. Everything about the INFJ description resonated with me. And it's great for explaining unhealthy types and the ways one can engage in all of his or her functions. I think if anyone is skeptical about typology, then they should read this one.

 

[highlander]

Until I read Thompson, I always thought Gifts Differing was the best. Anybody else a fan of this book?

 

[Salomé]

Somebody should probably mention SolitaryWalker's book.
Before he does.

 

[Salomé]

Until I read Thompson, I always thought Gifts Differing was the best. Anybody else a fan of this book?

I thought the stats were interesting. Overall, a bit insubstantial and fluffy.

All the pop culture references in Thompson's book get on my nerves a bit, but there is more depth around cog func usage and development than I've encountered elsewhere.

I have a few others you haven't listed:

Do what you are: Tieger & Tieger (career-focused)
The Art of Speed Reading People: Tieger & Tieger
Just My Type: Tieger & Tieger (relationship focused)
I'm not Crazy I'm Just Not You: Pearman & Albritton
Survival Games Personalities Play:Eve Delunas

All kinda meh. The last one is the most interesting of the bunch.

 

[highlander]

I thought the stats were interesting. Overall, a bit insubstantial and fluffy.

All the pop culture references in Thompson's book get on my nerves a bit, but there is more depth around cog func usage and development than I've encountered elsewhere.

I have a few others you haven't listed:

Do what you are: Tieger & Tieger (career-focused)
The Art of Speed Reading People: Tieger & Tieger
Just My Type: Tieger & Tieger (relationship focused)
I'm not Crazy I'm Just Not You: Pearman & Albritton
Survival Games Personalities Play:Eve Delunas

All kinda meh. The last one is the most interesting of the bunch.

Gifts Differing fluffy? Really? I always viewed it as concise and insightful when compared to everything else - until the last five years or so when more has come out.

On SW's book - I thought it had some of the best type descriptions I've ever seen. It was really a very good book IMO. On the critique side - there are some typos and it looked like he may have gotten a little lazy with the the INFJ description. There may be some opportunity for a bit of editing.

"Do what you are" is pretty good for what it is. "Speed reading" didn't do it for me. "Survival games" - just realized I have this and have never read it. Thanks!

Yes, I've read a lot of these.

 

[Salomé]

Gifts Differing fluffy? Really? I always viewed it as concise and insightful when compared to everything else - until the last five years or so when more has come out.

On SW's book - I thought it had some of the best type descriptions I've ever seen. It was really a very good book IMO. On the critique side - there are some typos and it looked like he may have gotten a little lazy with the the INFJ description. There may be some opportunity for a bit of editing.

"Do what you are" is pretty good for what it is. "Speed reading" didn't do it for me. "Survival games" - just realized I have this and have never read it. Thanks!

Yes, I've read a lot of these.

Fluffy in the "everyone's a special snowflake" NF kinda fluffy.

I always want more substance and theory.

 

[highlander]

Wasn't a fan. Basically just because I hate the functions lasagna analogy. I fucking hate lasagna.



The amount of members who have actually read any of these books is probably pathetic too. Far easier to take an online test and then be a pro.

Love lasagne IRL but didn't like the analogy either. The stuff on the shadow functions seems pretty speculative to me though it's a reasonable attempt.

 

[Quinlan]

Carl Jung's Illustrated Big Book of Types for Children (Edition 1)

 

[highlander]

I really don't know what people see in Psychological Types. It seems worth reading from a historical perspective and understanding the origin of the ideas but it not very practical reading.

 

[JocktheMotie]

I really don't know what people see in Psychological Types. It seems worth reading from a historical perspective and understanding the origin of the ideas but it not very practical reading.

I find its highly technical presentation and language far more accessible to my own thought; like MLF I don't like the fluffy, pop culturey language that plagues most of these books, which tend to take on a "self-help" vibe. I prefer an analytical focus.

Not to mention, Thomson's book was just garbage. She had so many "This is a typical XXXX thing to do" followed with a specific instance that could apply to anybody. And I almost set the book on fire when, upon reading the description for INTP, she said [I'm paraphrasing here] INTPs have difficulty in school because it's an Extraverted Thinking institution and they don't like too much abstract reasoning. WTF!?!?!

 

[wolfy]

Carl Jung's Illustrated Big Book of Types for Children (Edition 1)

I have the NZ edition. Carl Jung's Illustrated Big Book of Types for Tamaleki (Edition 1)

Though my personal favourite is Type the Whanau with Carl Jung.

 

[ObliviousExistence]

the one and only, Psychological Types by C. G. Jung. Almost every other typology book is based on his ideas and theories. I wouldn't waste my time on any other typology book. Every Tom Dick and Harry is making a book on typology by trying to capitalize on Jungs work by purporting to clarify or systematize his theories.