[Magdalen] What Each Myers-Briggs Type Does In A Rut (The Rise Of The Inferior Function) | Thought Catalog

[Lynn Ronkainen]

I found it particularly revealing many years ago when my former husband and 
I took it under supervision of a professional... who then helped us look at 
why 'opposites' sometimes attract (as we had) and how we admired/were 
attracted by the 'differences' (well some of them) between us, and how 
knowing more about ourselves could help us better communicate.

All useful information if it is acted upon.

Lynn

website: www.ichthysdesigns.com

When I stand before God at the end of my life I would hope that I have not a 
single bit of talent left and could say, "I used everything You gave me." 
attributed to Erma Bombeck
 "Either Freedom for all or stop talking about Freedom at all" from a talk 
by Richard Rohr

--------------------------------------------------
From: "Sally Davies" <sally.davies at gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, July 15, 2015 11:26 AM
To: <magdalen at herberthouse.org>
Subject: Re: [Magdalen] What Each Myers-Briggs Type Does In A Rut (The Rise 
Of The Inferior Function) | Thought Catalog

> I'm fascinated by the Myers-Briggs.
>
> On the one hand, it is regarded with at best distrust and at worst 
> contempt
> by those who believe that "personality" measurement can and should be a
> science. For example:
>
> http://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/the-myers-briggs-personality-test-is-pretty-much-meaningless-9359770/
>
> And the point is well made in that article, that if businesses are in any
> way relying on MBTI for HR decisions, it could be at the expense of
> fairness to individuals or benefit to teams.
>
> It's neither used nor taught in clinical psychology, at least in my 
> limited
> experience.
>
> And yet...what other "personality" test - except perhaps "star signs" - 
> has
> such wide currency and is so well loved by those who take it? What other
> test is so free of pathologising and normalising tendencies?
>
> You don't find groups of people online talking about their MMPI or Millon
> scores or the intricacies of their Rorschach tests (though the Rorschach
> USED to be a parlour game in the days when people enjoyed divergent
> thinking more than blowing up one target after another).
>
> I even used to have a book (on loan) called "16 ways to love your lover"
> which explored how the different combos of "types" do intimate
> relationships. And people identified with that, too.
>
> So for me there is something about MBTI that people really do like, that
> helps us explain ourselves to ourselves and perhaps to accept  - and even
> like! - things about ourselves. For example, the idea of "introversion"
> (not unique to MBTI) is of tremendous help to people who prefer a quieter,
> less socially engaged way of life and work, in a culture that tends to
> value (and promote) the opposite.
>
> Does it matter whether these things are "real" or not in the eyes of the 
> so
> called experts? I tend to think, not. We are all many selves and that's
> another thing MBTI kind of allows - that growth and change can occur, as
> Jon said about getting sober. Migration of identity does occur and MBTI 
> can
> help track it. It's become a tool that people can use to re-present
> themselves, and so far I haven't noticed any harm coming from that. Unlike
> pathologising tests which contribute to the labelling of persons and their
> lives, and can have devastating consequences.
>
> The one thing I really don't like about it is the commercial exploitation.
> Our local test supplier charges a small fortune to offer the "course" for
> learning how to implement and report on the test - which is basically
> common sense. It's easily pirated however and there's not much they can do
> about that.
>
> Theoretically, it has some links to Jungian personality tests like the 
> JPQ,
> and there's a scaled down version, the Keirsey Temperament Sorter, which 
> is
> free online.
>
> Other than the I/E, the "type" that I find most helpful to explore, is the
> J/P. I haven't (so far) found there to be much of a "spectrum" on that -
> people seem to be one or the other, although with varying intensities of J
> or P.
>
> N/S and F/T, I think, are far more contextual in their expression,
> reflecting culture, education and so on; and F/T has shown a gender bias
> which always makes me suspicious of what's going on with that.
>
> Last time I tried it I came out as ENFP, though I wasn't very E or very F.
> I don't think of myself as an E really, just an I who likes to talk
> with other people, until I don't any more.
>
> Keith was an off-the-scale I, but he's fantastic with people and never
> seems to avoid personal engagement with others, only noisy, crowded 
> places.
>
> Sally D
>
>
>
> On Wednesday, July 15, 2015, Christopher Hart <cervus51 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Uh, Jim, the Myers-Briggs type indicator may not be perfect, but there IS 
>> a
>> bit more science to it than astrology has to offer.
>>
>> On Wednesday, July 15, 2015, Jim Guthrie <jguthrie at pipeline.com
>> <javascript:;>> wrote:
>>
>> > Is looking for quantification of one' own behavior a way of 
>> > rationalizing
>> > away certain outré personal habits?
>> >
>> > "I'm an ABCD and she's a WXYZ and that explains everything." I suspect
>> all
>> > this is an intellectual version of "What sign are you?" "Oh, I could
>> never
>> > get along with a Gemini because I;m a Capricorn. Good Bye!"
>> >
>> > But it's the age we live in, I suppose.
>> >
>> > Cheers,
>> > Jim
>> >
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Christopher Hart
>>
>> List Mail Address: cervus51 at gmail.com <javascript:;>
>> Personal Mail: cervus at veritasliberat.net <javascript:;>
>> Twitter: @cervus51
>>