Survival Games People Play

[ygolo]

I was reading an old Bulletin of Psychological Type and in it was an article that talked about games people play and the intervention strategies needed to end the game playing.

The author, Mary McGuiness (ENFP) who was in turn using the work of Eve Dulanas's Survival Games Personalities Play describes the games by temperament.

• SJs:nag, gossip, get depressed or sick
• SPs:break rules, binge, throw tantrums, or make violent outbursts
• NTs:question why people want, feel, or do what they want, feel or do --intellectualizing everything including emotions
• NFs:please others, avoid conflict, or repress unpleasant memories

The appropriate interventions for types are:

• for SJs:help them find a sense of belonging, and opportunities to be responsible
• for SPs:honor their freedom to act, and help them make an impression in a socially acceptable way
• for NTs:help them use their competencies to achieve success
• for NFs:help them find meaning and a sense of their unique identity

There is a lot more in the article, and I paraphrased a lot, but I figured this was enough to start a discussion.

So, thoughts, reactions, impression, etc.?

_________

I was struck by the fact that even though I do all the things mentioned as "game playing" from time to time, the NT "game playing" is what I do almost all the time.

It's funny because I don't believe I am playing games. I am just doing what comes naturally to me.

Still, I do feel like my competence is not utilized where I am at work, and what I am doing also seems to stress things I am not as competent at.

 

[Matthew_Z]

This is one of those times where I can fit into the category of any temperament. I prefer to see myself as a little more adaptable than being a constant interrogator of reality.

 

[Ozz]

The only one I can't really relate to is SP's game.

SJ gets sick? Maybe that's why I get sick easily.

 

[Wonkavision]

Holy crap---the cheapest USED copy of Survival Games is 47 bucks!!!

 

[speculative]

So, thoughts, reactions, impression, etc.?

This is MBTI trying to do what the Enneagram does. It's a step in the right direction, but the Enneagram does it better. (To be fair, it's had a lot more practice.) Still, this is what I have always called for within MBTI. MBTI has focused too much on saying that every type is just as good as every other type, which has kept it from delving into how each type is unhealthy and could improve.