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

[Jon Egger]

a swiss psychologist was sitting next to a really nervous fellow.

can you say 'Yung and the Restless?'


On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 3:53 PM, Lynn Ronkainen <houstonklr at gmail.com>
wrote:

> https://www.opp.com/en/tools/MBTI/Myers-Briggs-history
>
> (snipped)The MBTI questionnaire, first published in 1943, was originally
> developed in the United States by Katharine Cook Briggs and her daughter
> Isabel Briggs Myers. Katharine Briggs was inspired to start researching
> personality type theory when she first met Isabel’s future husband,
> Clarence Myers. Whilst Clarence was a very eligible match for her daughter,
> Katharine noticed that he had a different way of seeing the world to her
> and her family, and was intrigued enough to start an extensive literature
> review based on understanding different temperaments. It was shortly after
> Carl Jung’s publication of Psychological Types (1921; 1923 in English) that
> Katharine realised how closely his theories resembled hers, and how much
> more developed they were.
>
> 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: "Jon Egger" <revegger at gmail.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, July 15, 2015 3:17 PM
> 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
>
>  Agreeing with Eleanor, I have a question for Sally.  This is part of your
>> response to this interesting tool:
>>
>> "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."
>>
>> This leaves me a tad confused.  I was taught that within the MBPI, the I/E
>> are not about how we relate to others, rather I/E are about how we
>> *process*
>> information.  To me, this is critical.  For example, if Dawn and I were in
>> a group of 5 people working on something and our group came up with three
>> ideas, Dawn would talk with the others to problem solve, but I am the one
>> who would leave and take a walk in the woods to ponder things.
>>
>> Or I have missed something completely.
>>
>> Grace and peace,
>> jon
>>
>> On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 12:17 PM, Marion Thompson <
>> marionwhitevale at gmail.com
>>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>
>>  No.   Possible insights into oneself or  the other can be interesting. At
>>> a trivial, even humorous, level perhaps as you say, but not really
>>> seriously to the thinking person.  And knowledge is power, as in knowing
>>> what makes oneself or the other tick.
>>>
>>> Marion, a pilgrim
>>>
>>>
>>> On 7/15/2015 10:18 AM, Jim Guthrie 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
>>>> .
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>