Hello
This may be a relatively obvious point, but the word personality doesn't actually really mean anything at all. It's a concept to group a load of adjectives together. Since this is a personality forum, I thought it would be good to suggest what we think of the concept of personality and whether we think it's important to have a theory of personality - or how useful a theory of personality can be (although interesting).
My words on it:
- Personality appears through MBTI to be described according to how information is processed (ie. cognitive functions). I agree with this position.
- Reality is subjective (necessarily, as we are trapped by the limitations of consciousness). Different personalities simply see the world in a different light, due to the fact they are processing information in a different way.
- I like this because it rids us of the idea of soul, authenticity and individualism - which are all ideas that just don't make sense to me. I wouldn't be able to say why they feel illogical to me (yet - I'd have to do some research) - it's just that the whole idea of authenticity feels very flimsy to me.
- Jung's theory is an interesting way of trying to categorise and describe personality - which, of course, is unknowable in the end - but it should remain in the realms of academia, because I can't really see any use for it in the outside world. In fact, were it to be read as gospel or used as a practical theory, I think it would do more harm than good.
- Binary opposites do not and cannot exist. You are not one or the other. Nothing is one or the other. Some people seem to miss this point out, but we all use all eight functions. If we didn't, the theory would fall down straight away.
- You do not suppress functions. I don't know if Jung said that or not, but I keep seeing that around here. This does not fit with the theory. Remember that functions are simply a particular way of processing information. There would be no need, nor any trigger, for these to be suppressed. In fact, the other functions wouldn't really work if one was suppressed anyway. If you feel you're not good at judging character, it is not that you have a suppressed Fe or that you need to develop it, or whatever, it is that the theory was not extended enough to make sub-categories within the categories. Processing information in one particular way will not have the same effect on everybody. This is another one of those "It's just wrong" things going on in my brain but I don't have evidence. I can't explain what I mean. The whole idea of suppression and development doesn't work.
- Loops are not personality disorders. Loops are an interesting way to describe how someone may react under stress. They are also a good way of theorising how personality disorders may come about (although I think psychosocial development theories are a better way to look at it). People with personality disorders are:
- recluses
- sociopaths
- Incredibly violent people
etc.
People with personality disorders are very extreme. A serial killer, for example, is likely to have a personality disorder. Someone who goes into the woods to live alone and never comes out is likely to have a personality disorder. Somebody who never feels guilt is likely to have a personality disorder. Although an extension of normal experience, I think it could be unhelpful to bind loops and personality disorders together, as it may be misleading (i.e. - if you're like this you have a personality disorder).
But I have ranted too much! Please discuss! What do you think - agree, disagree, have your own way of looking at it?
This may be a relatively obvious point, but the word personality doesn't actually really mean anything at all. It's a concept to group a load of adjectives together. Since this is a personality forum, I thought it would be good to suggest what we think of the concept of personality and whether we think it's important to have a theory of personality - or how useful a theory of personality can be (although interesting).
My words on it:
- Personality appears through MBTI to be described according to how information is processed (ie. cognitive functions). I agree with this position.
- Reality is subjective (necessarily, as we are trapped by the limitations of consciousness). Different personalities simply see the world in a different light, due to the fact they are processing information in a different way.
- I like this because it rids us of the idea of soul, authenticity and individualism - which are all ideas that just don't make sense to me. I wouldn't be able to say why they feel illogical to me (yet - I'd have to do some research) - it's just that the whole idea of authenticity feels very flimsy to me.
- Jung's theory is an interesting way of trying to categorise and describe personality - which, of course, is unknowable in the end - but it should remain in the realms of academia, because I can't really see any use for it in the outside world. In fact, were it to be read as gospel or used as a practical theory, I think it would do more harm than good.
- Binary opposites do not and cannot exist. You are not one or the other. Nothing is one or the other. Some people seem to miss this point out, but we all use all eight functions. If we didn't, the theory would fall down straight away.
- You do not suppress functions. I don't know if Jung said that or not, but I keep seeing that around here. This does not fit with the theory. Remember that functions are simply a particular way of processing information. There would be no need, nor any trigger, for these to be suppressed. In fact, the other functions wouldn't really work if one was suppressed anyway. If you feel you're not good at judging character, it is not that you have a suppressed Fe or that you need to develop it, or whatever, it is that the theory was not extended enough to make sub-categories within the categories. Processing information in one particular way will not have the same effect on everybody. This is another one of those "It's just wrong" things going on in my brain but I don't have evidence. I can't explain what I mean. The whole idea of suppression and development doesn't work.
- Loops are not personality disorders. Loops are an interesting way to describe how someone may react under stress. They are also a good way of theorising how personality disorders may come about (although I think psychosocial development theories are a better way to look at it). People with personality disorders are:
- recluses
- sociopaths
- Incredibly violent people
etc.
People with personality disorders are very extreme. A serial killer, for example, is likely to have a personality disorder. Someone who goes into the woods to live alone and never comes out is likely to have a personality disorder. Somebody who never feels guilt is likely to have a personality disorder. Although an extension of normal experience, I think it could be unhelpful to bind loops and personality disorders together, as it may be misleading (i.e. - if you're like this you have a personality disorder).
But I have ranted too much! Please discuss! What do you think - agree, disagree, have your own way of looking at it?
