|
As someone who prefers intuiting, I tend discover new things about my environment over time instead of right away. For example, I’ve lived in our house for almost two years, but just recently realized that the light over the shower gradually brightens the longer it’s on. I had always thought that my eyes were just fuzzy when I first woke up and that they adjusted better once I was in the shower. It wasn’t until I happened to look up at the light and see it getting brighter that I finally figured out what was going on.
I like the cartoon I saw of an intuitive type who’s on his computer, smoke and flames are coming up from the roof, and he’s reading email that says “your house is on fire.” Having sensing as an inferior function makes one prone to miss the obvious. I was wondering if intuiting children tend to potty train later since they aren’t as in tune with their physical self. That’s been my experience with my first two children, whom I suspect are intuiting types. My oldest potty trained at 3.5 and learned to read shortly thereafter. My middle child is three and is already reading (at least sight reading), but is just getting started potty training. I’ve read that early readers are usually intuitives because of their penchant for the abstract–rather than just seeing literal letters, they get that they are symbols.
0 Comments
It occurred to me that here I am, spouting off my ideas about personality type without any sort of credibility, so I thought I'd provide a window into my background as an armchair personality theorist.
It all began in college when I was given a variant of the MBTI (Myers-Briggs Type Indicator). I don't think it was the real deal (pretty sure it was the Keirsey Temperament Sorter)--nonetheless it pegged me accurately, though I was tied on I and E, and it wasn't until after graduation when my social life slowed down that I realized I was truly an introvert, though I suspected that all along. Anyway, that initial exposure to personality typing made me eager to learn more, and that's what I've been doing (on and off) for the last 15 years. In addition to reading about personality types, doing a few seminars for church and school groups, last fall I took a workshop to become a qualified MBTI practitioner, so now I can finally administer the authentic assessment and do it correctly (one of the major reasons why people reject personality typing is because they've had an experience where essentially they had their fortune told--i.e. 'take this test, here's your four-letter type, that's what you are, end of story'). It's a much more complex process than that. It's also not one-dimensional, which means those four letters actually need to be expanded into the 8 functions they comprise. Despite all my research, I really didn't get a full grasp of the 8 functions until I took the workshop, and I'm still learning more about what each one means. When I say 8 functions, I mean this (we all use all of them, but our four letter types determine the order in which we prefer--consciously and unconsciously--to use them): introverted sensing, extraverted sensing introverted intuiting, extraverted intuiting introverted feeling, extraverted feeling introverted thinking, extraverted thinking I recommend these websites: A Christian Perspective of Myers-Briggs Personality Types Brain Types Cognitive Processes Motherstyles My Personality Type It occurred to me that here I am, spouting off my ideas about personality type without any sort of credibility, so I thought I’d provide a window into my background as an armchair personality theorist.
It all began in college when I was given a variant of the MBTI (Myers-Briggs Type Indicator). I don’t think it was the real deal–nonetheless it pegged me accurately, though I was tied on I and E, and it wasn’t until after graduation when my social life slowed down that I realized I was truly an introvert, though I suspected that all along. Anyway, that initial exposure to personality typing made me eager to learn more, and that’s what I’ve been doing (on and off) for the last 15 years. In addition to reading about personality types, doing a few seminars for church and school groups, last fall I took a workshop to become a qualified MBTI practitioner, so now I can finally administer the authentic assessment and do it correctly (one of the major reasons why people reject personality typing is because they’ve had an experience where essentially they had their fortune told–i.e. “take this test, here’s your four-letter type, that’s what you are, end of story”). It’s a much more complex process than that. It’s also not one-dimensional, which means those four letters actually need to be expanded into the 8 functions they comprise. Despite all my research, I really didn’t get a full grasp of the 8 functions until I took the workshop, and I’m still learning more about what each one means. When I say 8 functions, I mean this (we all use all of them, but our four letter types determine the order in which we prefer–consciously and unconsciously–to use them): introverted sensing, extraverted sensing introverted intuiting, extraverted intuiting introverted feeling, extraverted feeling, introverted thinking, extraverted thinking I've seen charts galore that correlate the various personality systems with each other, and while I do see patterns (I'm all about patterns), whoever translated David Keirsey's four temperaments (derived from the Myers-Briggs) into the classic four temperaments (melancholic, phlegmatic, sanguine, choleric) must have wanted it to fit in a neat package, and I don't think it does.
The charts I've seen show this: NT=Melancholic NF=Phlegmatic SJ=Choleric SP=Sanguine Does anyone not see the glaring problem here? The classic types are based on introversion and extraversion. Melancholic, Phlegmatic = Introvert Sanguine, Choleric = Extrovert My research and experiences with both systems has resulted in major mind spinning analysis, only to come up this obvious and simple conclusion, which basically says that the classic four temperaments describe how we relate to the world (first and last letters of the Myers-Briggs types): IJ=Melancholic IP=Phlegmatic EJ=Choleric EP=Sanguine Who are the controlling types? The cholerics and melancholics (I know because I am the latter, of the NF variety). Who are the laidback types? Sanguines and phlegmatics. Or to use Gary Smalley's original terminology: The beavers and the lions are the intense Type A personalities, while the otters and golden retrievers are light and fun loving. That's not to say they don't have depth/passion--they definitely do but it's expressed differently--that's where Myers-Briggs personality typing fills in the gaps, i.e. the two letter void in the middle that says oh-so-much about our personalities. |
Categories
All
|
RSS Feed
Photos used under Creative Commons from SteveNakatani, epSos.de, 柏翰 / ポーハン / POHAN, Rob Shenk, nirats
