I actually looked up a few vids on You Tube, and there's one with Carl Jung, who basically created the whole thing, and he states that typing is a good way of explaining certain behavior patterns but not rely on it absolutely.
Personality Hacker is actually one of the better tests that I've done and it does a good job of explaining the typing and how INFJ and INFP differ, and how ENFJ and INFJ differ. What is interesting about it is the whole the idea of how the brain is divided - you have a pilot, a co-pilot, and two backseat drivers.
I'm wondering if Personality Hacker is a cousin of Personality Junkie? [ETA: No, apparently one is free and a lot more detailed and one is not. Look up Personality Hacker, it's interesting - and goes in a lot of depth more than the Please Understand Me - Myers Briggs Books do.]
98% of the tests I take end up with INFJ, and now that I've read the summaries of them, yeah, I fit that type. I started thinking about the discrepancies and realized, no, wait that works. The problem though with it, and this is true of most psychology, is a tendency psychologists have of projecting either themselves or people they know personality onto others. Example: "Oh, my mom was an INFJ, and she could never say no to anyone, and never took time for herself - that's so INFJ." Well, no, that's just your mom. A lot of INFJ's actually can say no, and do take a lot of time for themselves - and have always done so.
Which is what I liked about Carl Jung and Jungian psychology, he was open to the fact that a lot of factors came into play. And how you can't rely on just one. Unlike Freud, who was insistent on it just being the ego, id, and superego. Jung went deeper and said, wait, it's not that simple, and the human mind is rather complex.
I'm frustrated psychology major, can't you tell? And like many frustrated psyche majors, I make the mistake of trying to self-diagnose myself. One should never do that. My mother was a psychology minor - so we discuss psychology a lot.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
branchandroot
no subject
Date: 2016-09-05 02:50 am (UTC)Personality Hacker is actually one of the better tests that I've done and it does a good job of explaining the typing and how INFJ and INFP differ, and how ENFJ and INFJ differ. What is interesting about it is the whole the idea of how the brain is divided - you have a pilot, a co-pilot, and two backseat drivers.
I'm wondering if Personality Hacker is a cousin of Personality Junkie? [ETA: No, apparently one is free and a lot more detailed and one is not. Look up Personality Hacker, it's interesting - and goes in a lot of depth more than the Please Understand Me - Myers Briggs Books do.]
98% of the tests I take end up with INFJ, and now that I've read the summaries of them, yeah, I fit that type.
I started thinking about the discrepancies and realized, no, wait that works. The problem though with it, and this is true of most psychology, is a tendency psychologists have of projecting either themselves or people they know personality onto others. Example: "Oh, my mom was an INFJ, and she could never say no to anyone, and never took time for herself - that's so INFJ." Well, no, that's just your mom. A lot of INFJ's actually can say no, and do take a lot of time for themselves - and have always done so.
Which is what I liked about Carl Jung and Jungian psychology, he was open to the fact that a lot of factors came into play. And how you can't rely on just one. Unlike Freud, who was insistent on it just being the ego, id, and superego.
Jung went deeper and said, wait, it's not that simple, and the human mind is rather complex.
I'm frustrated psychology major, can't you tell? And like many frustrated psyche majors, I make the mistake of trying to self-diagnose myself. One should never do that. My mother was a psychology minor - so we discuss psychology a lot.