J/P Discussion
Do you have a comment about this page?
posted by Vicky Jo at 3:01 AM
Thursday, June 15, 2006
About Me
- Name: Vicky Jo
- Location: Los Angeles, California, United States
I coach people to identify and develop their natural personality strengths in order to maximize their potential.
Please contact me to arrange a free strategy session -- I would be delighted to speak with you.
Previous Posts
- Orientation
- The Stonehenge Test
- Questioning & Wondering
- Don't Worry Be Happy
- Tertiary Talk
- Psychic?
- Two Kinds of Bosses and Jerks
- The Time Machine
- Cognitive Dynamics
- The Self-Disclosure Facet
5 Comments:
This post has been removed by the author.
You wrote No email is no help at all. In fact statistically, i would be surprised to even find an extrovert on an email list unless the person's type is ENFP. I can be very forward on an email list, but if any one on that list ever met me, they would be shocked by how quiet and withdrawn I can be.
Whoaaaa... This kind of stereotype offends me. I know people of practically every type who are hanging out on the internet, and I don't see why extraverts (note correct spelling) can't hang out here too, both on email lists and blogging.
I am distressed by the implication of this broad, sweeping generalization, and it strikes a chord in me that this is the kind of stereotypical thinking around type that I want to eliminate. :-(
An online INFJ friend recently commented that she found it difficult and draining to post online via Fe. I'm not certain exactly how she knows when she is attempting to post via Fe. Perhaps she means when she tries to connect with people via online.
However this seems that it might be at least some evidence of the reason there are so few Dominant Fe types to be found online. I'm not saying it never happens. I wonder if posting online via Se is also draining.
I've been thinking about the categories people use to understand and relate to themselves and each other for quite some time. It's all fine and well when the people's personal qualities have an obvious preference for one side of the scale over the other. For instance, if someone were more extraverted than intraverted. When that happens, it makes it seem as if there are clear and obvious boundaries.
But what if it were more like a scale? The distance from black to white has an infinite number of greys. What if someone were very nearly 50% J/P? It's difficult, then, being in the middle. Because those on the extremes are always pushing you to the other side of the scale, since that's how they percieve you. After all, a 95% P, a 53% P certainly appears like a J to them. Likewise the other way around.
Even more interesting is the S/N scale. I know a few people who are highly N and a few who are highly S. But I also know a good few who are fairly close to the middle of the scale. I think that dichotomy is one of the most difficult and interesting scales in Myers-Briggs.
Still, it seems to me focusing on the differences and boundaries cause more arguments than is really neccessary. After all, it's supposed to be something to facillitate understanding and comprehension, not stereotypes. It's not something that's set in stone or changes who you are (although people themselves certainly can change). Though, I think that it is sometimes something that people fear will change how others see them.
Simply put, I think that I personally like the idea of a scale without boundaries. As for myself, I am an INFx. As long as I've known of Myers-Briggs, I've oscillated on the J/P scale. I've also had my moments of more extraverted tendencies. But those oscillations feel natural to me. I was wondering what you thought of it? Are there indeed boundaries? Maybe I'm just afraid of being split up and put into boxes because then people won't see the sum total of me. And I'm even more afraid of boxing others and ignoring the sum total of them. But isn't that sort of stereotyping the basis of misunderstanding?
What I notice is how you are relying on the model of the MBTI (dichotomies) to make your remarks. I would encourage you to discard that as your "model" and go back to the source, Jung. The cutting edge we are working with is the eight-level model of type -- and in that version, INFPs are VASTLY different from INFJs. It's MUCH MORE than hinging on one stupid letter on a much misunderstand and often stereotyped dichotomy that technically wasn't even part of Jung's original model.
I confess I don't have any interest in debating about the dichotomies because I find it a very superficial and shallow approach to type. Sure, it's great for test construction and Isabel Briggs-Myers was brilliant to conceive of it, but the dichotomies on their own miss the richness of the model that inspired their creation.
Post a Comment
<< Home