. . .

Posts relating to Myers-Briggs :

5 years ago


◊ Posted by A β Pseudolonewolf
Categories: Myers-Briggs Personality
I've been thinking more about the Myers-Briggs thing that I keep using to refer to different concepts... and how the terms 'thinking' and 'feeling' can be misleading!

They don't mean the same as the common usage of the words 'thinking' and 'feeling' in the same way that 'theory' in science doesn't mean the same as it does in common use... But, like 'theory', it's likely that they're being misinterpreted using the common meaning ("evolution is just a theory!", "I'm both a thinker and a feeler because I think a lot but also have emotions!", etc).

I'm hardly claiming to know better than people who specialise in Myers-Briggs or anything, and maybe this just shows my own undeveloped understanding of the system, but I wonder if it would clear anything up if I referred to T as 'objective' and F as 'subjective' instead of 'thinking' and 'feeling'.

T is 'objective' in that it tends to lead to seeing things from a distance, without attachment as such; analysing situations, describing solutions, tending not to become emotionally involved and seeing personal judgements as foolish... It can lead to dry analysis of a situation rather than getting emotionally worked up, or describing what's observed rather than 'empathising' and things like that. Conflict and debate are not difficult because of the ease of remaining relatively detached, but personal attacks and emotional appeals are wrong because they distract from the issue in its 'true form'.

F is 'subjective' in that instead, it's driven by personal 'feelings'; often emotions, but not necessarily. It could be likes and dislikes instead, or things like that. They become attached and make their decisions based on how they or others will personally react to them on an individual level, rather than deciding based on what's best as a whole. They tend to communicate by relating their own experiences to what the speaker's describing. It can lead to "I like it because I like it!" sorts of things rather than "I like it because [various reasons]". Conflict is difficult because they take things to heart as personal attacks even if they're not meant as such. Criticising their ideas is like criticising them, because they have attached themselves to them.

An example of the contrast might be something like:
"I can't decide between A and B", says The Speaker.
Mr Objective replies "A seems to have these benefits, but B has these benefits. They each have these drawbacks. You should choose A."
Miss Subjective replies "oh, I hate it when I have to make hard choices like that! Last time I had to choose between A and B, I did X! Hope you make the choice that makes you feel best in the end!"

(So Mr Objective weighs the pros and cons of each option from a distance, then suggests the 'best' course of action in order to solve the puzzle... while Miss Subjective first has an emotional response, relates a similar experience (a sort of empathy), and then doesn't solve the problem (because subjectivity is individual; there's no one solution) but shows interest in the speaker making a subjective choice on their own which will cause the most emotional satisfaction, rather than the 'best' choice based on the merits of each option.)

Of course, this is all a simplification, and maybe I'm being even more misleading (since I know that everyone is both objective and subjective at different times in the same way that they both think and feel), but the point is that the "Thinking" and "Feeling" things that I've referred to in the past don't mean the same as the common meanings of those words! And stuff!!1

Maybe this was at least slightly enlightening... or maybe it's simply all wrong and someone like M  ScintillaPurpose will tell me so!1

On another note, I finished this:

I hope that it is enjoyable and so on.

It's displayed at the right size this time, and I've also apparently included a much cruder sprite on the right, because this monster - Sparkpup (or maybe I'll call it Embark) - was the first one that I designed, and the first one that I tried to draw a sprite for. It turned out badly, but it's interesting to compare it to the better sprite, and to the vector model!
5 years ago

Thinking and Feeling

◊ Posted by A β Pseudolonewolf
Categories: Myers-Briggs Personality
I think that I've probably said most of this stuff in various places before, but I feel the need to explain some things because I don't want to annoy, hurt or offend people, but realise that I no doubt do by using 'Thinker' almost as if it's some kind of hateful slur, or by suggesting to individuals that I think they're T rather than F types.

The first thing to realise is that each person certainly does have aspects of thinking and feeling inside them. It's just that one of them is the 'captain' while the other is the 'first officer', so to speak... The first officer is always there providing input, but it's ultimately up to the captain to make most of the decisions or to speak for the whole ship.
In certain individuals, the 'weaker' function is a mere ensign or something instead, rarely called up for duty. (I've been watching quite a bit of Star Trek recently!1)

Both thinking and feeling come in 'introverted' and 'extraverted' forms, too, with the introverted ones relating to the inner world of contemplation, and the extraverted ones relating to gathering data from and making assessments about the real physical world, as well as knee-jerk reactions and general spur-of-the-moment expression.

INFJ for example has extraverted feeling as a primary function, which means that they gather data from the world and make decisions, form opinions, interact with others, etc, all on an emotional wavelength, using empathy, worrying about whether what they say will be hurtful, making decisions based on how things make them feel, and so on, and when they have these emotions, they generally tend to express them openly.
However, they have introverted thinking as a secondary function, so in the privacy of their mind, when pondering or going over the data that they've taken in or reacted to emotionally, they can use their thinking function to assess and analyse it.

INTJs on the other hand have extraverted thinking as a primary function. This means that they tend to analyse and react to real life situations with facts, logic, and objective analysis; this is what leads to them being blunt or giving advice or things like that, or being excellent at solving technical problems and puzzles and so on, or forming strategies and tactics.
They have introverted feeling as a secondary function, so when they go over their actions later on in their mind, they may feel deeply emotional about them. They are unlikely to express this emotion though. They certain will sometimes, but it's not the usual state of affairs; like the first officer taking the captain's chair sometimes but not usually.

All of this is an oversimplification, and different types have these functions in different configurations, but I just want to make clear that everyone has aspects of both thinking and feeling, so if you feel 'balanced', then this is why.

I mention it also to show that yes, I'm aware that people who are 'Thinkers' have feelings... and I probably hurt them, too, by lumping people together in some group I don't like and openly expressing my emotions about it, or suggesting that they're unfeeling robots. I'm really sorry about that... I don't want to hurt anyone.

The difficulty arises though in that 'Thinking' types generally tend not to care about how their words will make others feel... I don't mean to make them sound heartless, because there's no malice behind this; it just doesn't seem to factor into their decision making process, and they feel that it's more important to state the bare facts because that's the way that progress happens... or something. And that anyone who does react with emotional sensitivity to what they said is in the wrong, rather than their words being wrong for being too harsh. Emotional reaction is weakness and immaturity.. or something? I'm speaking about an alien mentality here, so I'm sorry if it's not entirely accurate...

However, feely-oriented people - particularly those with extraverted feeling, like myself - are emotionally sensitive, and easily upset by bluntness and insensitivity... as you've no doubt seen from my own emotional blog posts which must seem 'immature' to many people, particularly thinkers who regard emotional responses negatively.

We operate on such different wavelengths, and there's frustration on both sides. Thinkers give me bare-facts blunt objective analyses or advice, and I find it insensitive and hurtful and express that, leading to them probably feeling offended and irritated because they meant no harm at all and are being portrayed as villains unjustly. I see them as inconsiderate, they see me as immature.

I understand this... but it's just so difficult at times to keep my own emotions 'under control' because they're very much the captain of the ship that is my mind, and when I'm bombarded by these insensitive, objective comments, I collapse emotionally and express it with my extraverted feeling. My outward emotional reactions - like writing blog posts like the last one - are instinctive, quick responses to things, but then my introverted thinking kicks in later and I end up writing things like this, after thinking about what my emotions made me do.

I react emotionally and then later think about it and realise I've not been quite fair...
I suppose thinkers would often be quite hard, blunt, even aggressive, but when going over it internally later, they might feel they'd 'been too hard on him' or something like that. Maybe.

Anyway... I don't hate Thinking people or think that there's anything inherently wrong with them, so I want to be clear about that. However, I do describe certain comments as 'Thinky' because they didn't take my emotions into account, and as such, they often hurt. I have great difficulty dealing with comments like that.
It's also hard being a minority in such things... Most of the people on the site are Thinkers, so I feel sometimes like 'everyone's against me' even though I know it's not exactly like that.
Being able to group insensitive comments as 'thinky' helps to keep me sane... though I know that it's not a very nice thing to openly talk about.

Hopefully this explains some things at least rather than making people MORE annoyed...
5 years ago

Why I like personality models

◊ Posted by A β Pseudolonewolf
Categories: Myers-Briggs Personality
This has nothing to do with games - though Miasmon is coming along rather nicely and I'm getting a significant amount done each day! - so if that's all you're here for, then you might not get anything out of this.

I do want to talk about something that's sort of relevant to this site, though, in a way. It's something that I've been frustrated about in the past, and which I and others have seen from very different angles, which I now better understand and wish to share what I've learned!

I've been reading more about the Myers-Briggs thing lately... It's interesting that mere months ago, I hated it and actively avoided looking into it; I was very much incredulous and unwilling to give it a chance. Once I reluctantly started reading about it, though, I came to find that it didn't necessarily replace the temperaments - which was my main worry, I suppose - and instead, it described different facets and made me aware of significant differences between people, such as the difference between how "Thinkers" and "Feelers" work, for example.

I've been reading about INFJ - my type - specifically, and it's interesting how completely accurate articles like this are: ∞ LINK ∞
(Reading that would go a long way towards understanding how my mind works, if for some odd reason you're interested.)

There's a bit at the end of that article which is of particular interest to me, and it's what led to me writing this. It says:

In their own way, INFJs are just as much "systems builders" as are INTJs; the difference lies in that most INFJ "systems" are founded on human beings and human values, rather than information and technology. Their systems may for these reasons be conceptually "blurrier" than analogous NT ones, harder to measure in strict numerical terms, and easier to take for granted -- yet it is these same underlying reasons which make the resulting contributions to society so vital and profound.

I've had difficulty convincing certain people about the 'validity' of systems like the temperaments before... I openly described the system as 'blurry' and a 'broad-strokes' concept, but they insisted on hearing facts and studies and the science behind it; they wanted it to be solid, structured, clear-cut and technically 'accurate'... which it very much isn't.
Others rejected the Myers-Briggs thing too because it's not 'accurate' enough in a strict, technical kind of way, citing studies that essentially confirmed this 'inaccuracy'.

I suppose it's only now that I realise that this is yet another difference between my type and the T manner of thinking... I'm completely fine with these fuzzy concepts, which aren't clearly defined or '100% accurate', while they don't sit well with people who like hard facts, logic, clear and repeatable patterns to follow...
Systems relating to other people intrigue me greatly; a whole lot more than technical stuff ever does. Like many 'intellectual' sorts of people, I crave to know how things work... But it's people specifically; I crave to know how they work, emotionally, and have much less interest in finding out how, say, machines or science work.
Doing programming is an uphill struggle for me, which drains me quickly, while drawing feels much more enjoyable and free, because it's not clear and structured in the same way...

The combination of the INFJ letters also leads to high empathy (from the N intuition and the F feeling; I can pick up on the feelings and motives of others easily), but other people who don't have this type probably don't understand what that's like and assume I'm putting that on, exaggerating, lying, or things like that; I've certainly heard all of those things before. "I can't do it, so you can't either", basically.

I'm awful at logic though; my mind becomes a foggy blur when people talk about it, and I remember 'test your logic skills!' sorts of quizzes that people have posted in the chatroom before, where every Thinky 13-year-old present got top marks but I very much didn't... It made me feel stupid at the time, but now I understand that feelings are my forte where logic isn't and never will be.
I've also lost at simple strategy games like checkers with everyone I've ever played it with, and I can't play chess and have no interest in learning.

Anyway, I suppose this is yet another attempt at saying "if we don't seem to be seeing eye to eye, this is why", since most people here seem to be T types and I always seem to be having disagreements with them due to our different ways of seeing things...

Those different ways will no doubt be shown in the comments, as usual, as people analyse and lecture and criticise and so on... which my mind never responds well to, even though I realise it's just the way that their minds work...