Skip to main content

Posts

Showing posts from December, 2015

Changing Frames

“Won’t this be confusing to people who have learned about their type as a four letter code?,” was the question put to me as I was talking about the Pearman Personality Integrator.   Of course, there are loads of assumptions and questions behind this question which are worth considering if you want to approach psychological type from a different frame. Let’s celebrate the use of well developed and substantial self-awareness strategies that invite an individual to consider how he or she behaves and affects the world around them.  And, most importantly, let’s celebrate any self-awareness strategy that enhances how an individual perceives and judges events in everyday life. The four letter code produced by the MBTI ® and similar tools approach psychological type from a very specific perspective.  Keep in mind that the assessment tools are NOT the same thing as Jung’s theory of psychological types. The four letter code tools seek to provide a fundamental sort between various polar

Having A Growthful Conversation

A Growthful Conversation One of the many splendid outcomes of Carol Dweck’s work on Fixed and Growth mindsets is that she provided guidance as to what these are all about and how to shift the perspective.  She points out that a “fixed” mindset is one where intelligence is perceived as fixed and so are other traits or qualities.  The view is you have a certain amount of an attribute and that’s what you have—-there isn’t any good reason to try to grow.  Challenges are avoided in that these may expose a ‘lack of the intelligence’ required. Effort is seen as fruitless. Getting things wrong and receiving feedback reveals limitations or problems that must be avoided.  A “growth” mindset seeks feedback because learning is assumed to be possible and achieved with effort; is patient with discomfort while learning; is more interested in learning than “checking the box”; enjoys complexity, and asks more questions than declares answers.  For sure, as Dweck notes, there are some conditions in

A Judgment System: Thinking

Thinking—Logical, Analytical, and Outcome Oriented (or so the rumor goes) Ever wonder what all the fuss was about when it comes to being analytical?  Some folks are very basic in their use of thinking—-meaning they are quick to see gaps or problems and they think their job is done.  A more complex use of thinking is to begin with a perspective of multi-variate factors and exploring the underlying and intersecting systems in a situation.  It isn’t so much about finding the gaps as understanding the logic of factors, or as Jung put it, “following its own law s, [Thinking] brings the contents of ideation into conceptual connection with one another” (pp:830, page 481).  You have these ideas that you connect in a way that seems logical. Judging functions serve to provide a way to evaluate information and experiences so there is a basis for action or conclusion.  While the completeness and quality of all decisions begin with the kind of information that is used which the perceiving