I had had my moments of doubt about the validity of the Myers-Briggs Temperament Indicator, but it seems that this is one of those profound matters that cannot be marginalised either by skepticism or blind faith, at least not alone.
If one is to follow the MBTI blindly, one should have a superficial grasp of it. If one is to merely cast it aside as unscientific, it should be equally superficial.
My stance is simple:
1. That human beings live in at least sixteen different worlds of experience according to their personality type, which in turn shape their civilisation. These are, as it were, such markedly profound differences that it is as though we lived on sixteen different planets.
2. That to presume that there are no such distinctions (such as the dichotomies between feeling and thought, introversion and extraversion, et cetera) is akin to being skeptical about the existence of other planets. If one presumes that the MBTI is "hogwash", one is bound to continue seeing things through his or her own personal lens, presuming that all "decent" (by his or her own standards) people are "this way".
To clarify:
An INFP will presume that all people are motivated by goodwill and will, offhand, bet that everyone has markedly "poetic" and "mystical" moments in his or her life, and that the operations of people are motivated by a greater understanding of this, or are otherwise motivated by a selfish perpetuation of one's ignorance.
An ISTJ, on the other hand, will presume that all "decent", "intelligent" people are motivated by logic and simple, incontrovertible facts and practicality, dismissing others as superstitious when he or she lacks insight into their psychology. This may be a shortcoming or weakness on the ISTJ's part, but it is not tragic because it is appropriate to the ISTJ's value system: The way that ISTJ interfaces with the world does not leave much space for the clarity of the "revelation", and should ISTJ become too intent upon his or her causes he/she should dismiss this phenomenon as wishy-washy bull.
The INFP, of course, is not without his or her weaknesses. Logical matters involving "brute facts" may be disregarded where feelings are challenged, putting the INFP into difficult situations.
If the MBTI is bull, either individual's shortcomings should be a tragic scenario. If the world followed strictly the logical, immediate accessible principles that the ISTJ is aware of, then all fallacious and unscientific nonsense should be totally unpardonable. If, conversely, people lived only on the INFP planet, anyone with a lack of Wonder in his or her life should be deprived and his or her life would have little meaning.
Presuming the MBTI is bull and the ISTJ is Right, this sense of Wonder should be merely on par with a drug-induced hallucination. Being illogical, it is pointless recreation and offers no insight. The "reality" of the world is Work and the enjoyment of friends and pleasures within reason.
Presuming the MBTI is bull and the INFP is right, the world has no consistent, observable patterns that can be mapped by the logical mind, and all people who fail to recognise Beauty and Glory suffer from the same problem. If this problem is not easily curable, it is entirely incurable.
Thankfully, this is not the case if the MBTI is true.
Reconsider the two men I had illustrated previously.
Now, these two individuals may agree with one another in polite matters and strike an uneasy and unspoken truce, keeping quiet about their qualms with the other. This would be a superficial peace; I can attest from personal experience that longstanding friendships can be very problematic, although worthwhile, between these types. Problems are good, though, if addressed appropriately.
Let's suppose that my relationship with an ISTJ remains on the superficial level. In this case, we develop no longstanding friendship; this is more akin to the respect that conservatives and liberals show one another whilst sober at a cocktail party.
At the end of my day, I'll go back to my books, to my friends who are like me, usually intuitives, predominantly feelers, for they perpetuate my comfort zone. He, conversely, would gravitate towards people who share his view, SJs.
Presuming that the MBTI is bull, which is, effectively, equal to an ignorance of its existence entirely, we should never acknowledge this division as being significant. His group is his group; mine is mine. We are equal, but we feel justified in hating each other. The in-group, out-group dynamic, defying reason, works under our very noses, needing no further justification to our eyes.
Now consider that as an allegory and not just a probable situation. If I go on a date with an ISTJ girl, what'll happen? I can think of two scenarios: I will try to involve her in Deep matters, sharing my internal psychology with her, or I can gravitate towards Superficial matters which I Know Will Fly (usually).
Most will take the general advice and choose option two, because it makes the other more comfortable, across the table. Presuming either that the MBTI is bull or that I am ignorant of it, I should have little but my own past experience to go off by virtue of which I may "guess" what she is feeling and thinking here, what she may feel and think throughout the day, et cetera. If, however, I can note that she is an ISTJ, I may be more educated in leading the conversation in a direction that we would both enjoy.
Presuming the worst, or perhaps second worst -- that I keep the convo on a shallow level -- we may agree on silly topics: the weather, bands, politics if I'm lucky.
You know the story: Two people end up living together and find they had less in common than they thought they did. J.D. Salinger even wrote a short story about it exclusively.
The problem is that, even if we find that we both like the Beatles, her experience of their music will be different from mine, and thus our whole intellectual lives may be entirely perpendicular where we might assume them to be parallel. I don't "really know her", nor does she know me. Disaster.
This is not a matter of astrology, where we look up to the skies to explain what happens to us. This is a description of her actual psychology and mine, no metaphysics necessary. If the relationship is to be anything but sexual, I need to know Where She is Coming From, not what her "sign" is.
If I acknowledge the MBTI as B.S. ("Bad Science"), I should presume that our agreement is not superficial but profound: That she too is motivated by a search for Truth. The notion that she feels herself to already "have" the truth by virtue of her senses, as an incontrovertible figure rather than a vague but powerful limit to be approached, would be alien to me. We wouldn't ever mention it in words, for each of us would take his or her own frame of reference for fact. I would probably find her drive to help people to be noble, but I might even be awkward in seeing the "clearly dysfunctional ways" in which she implements it, overlooking critical details. She, in turn, would find my attributing value to intellect to be overblown and pretentious (this is, incidentally, an entirely imagined scenario).
There could only be so long that we could ignore our cognitive dissonances without the relationship rupturing and flattening. If I "keep the company of my friends" and treat her as though she were one of my intuitive buddies, I would be doing her a disservice. If she were to insist on driving me around from meaningless encounter to meaningless encounter with the solemn resolve that life is good if she can find at least one person to help through the day today, she would probably do well to know that it is not out of an Obvious, Incontrovertible Selfishness that I would probably do well to stay home and focus on my writing instead.
If, however, we both acknowledge that the MBTI holds validity -- that, rather than being a self-fulfilling prophecy and a testament to "what the thinker thinks the prover proves", it is a mirror by which we may more clearly See Patterns that EXIST REGARDLESS OF WHETHER OR NOT WE RECOGNISE AND ACKNOWLEDGE THEM -- then our relationship should be nourished.
As a fact, I cannot guarantee that it Will be nourished, but I Can say that you do not know until you experiment, and it is Bad Science ("B.S.") not to try. Two people may be equally logical but, based upon incredibly disparate lifestyles, have different premises going into their logic.
If our relationship is to be superficial, I'll stay on my planet, presuming that it is the only one, and that she is here as well. She will remain on hers, with the same presumptions, or otherwise we shall both presume that the other is entirely ungrounded, floating in space and beyond help.
If it is to be deep, We should see that we live on two of at least sixteen unique planets, with their own atmospheres and gravity, and perhaps, in that recognition, interplanetary travel should be possible.
dm.A.A.
No comments:
Post a Comment