Ockam’s razor is intended to be a problem-solving principle based on the idea that among competing hypotheses, the one with the fewest assumptions is likely best. Franciscan friar William of Ockham lived at a time when it could hardly be said that there was wide acceptance that scientific methods and principles would enlighten the pursuit of knowledge; he lived 1287-1347. In his world, if you didn't understand something, just attribute it to the wonder and awe of God. Pretty simple explanation when you didn't understand something or it was "too complex."
In the last six months I have seen a number of articles in our profession posted to claim that if a writer or thinker couldn’t explain something simply, the individual clearly didn’t understand his or her topic. Thousands have clicked “like” to declarations that apply Ockam’s razor to issues or challenges would be ideal. It seems that proponents of “simple means clarity,” and the lack of simple and clarity is someone else’s problem. This is a neat Trump-like trick: assert that your opponent is too stupid to understand that he or she is too stupid to understand, therefore your proposition is obviously right.
In research that continues to unfold about the nature of personality, the evidence mounts that personality is anything but simple. In Persons in Context: Building a Science of the Individual (Shoda, Cervone, and Downey), the research team identified 30 plus variables—internally and externally to an individual’s experience—which interact in ways that produce personality patterns. They suggest that all of these variables fall into categories of “appraising” and “understanding or meaning-making” which prompt behavior patterns. In other words, our patterns in how we “appraise” (or perceive) life experience and our typical ways of “making meaning” (or judge) experience result in a likely and probable pattern of behavior across contexts.
Recently a LinkedIn posting suggested that if the explanation being offered by another professional wasn’t simple, the writer didn’t really understand his subject deeply. The writer then proceeded to make a statement that was intended to be a “simple” explanation and provided a totally incorrect conclusion given the theory about which the individual was talking. Specifically, commenting on personality type, the individual suggested that just plainly focusing on E or I, S or N, T or F, J and P provided all the insight needed, but the situation he described clearly was connected to Extraverted Thinking and the critic didn’t see any value in learning about this complexity. In other words, the drive for simplicity meant the loss of information that could be helpful and clarifying.
Simple explanations for complex human development and relationship issues may make matters worse.
In just about any serious situation, the pursuit of simplicity is dangerous. Quadruple heart by-pass surgery is never simple and lives depend on surgeons managing complexity. Psychologists dealing with various clients with deeply imbedded behavioral problems do not assume a simple solution will address the cluster of issues individuals have. In daily interactions, we may simplify or categorize the elements of the interaction to affirm judgments about the others involved but these may be entirely wrong—just read Nobel Prize scientist Khanman’s Thinking Fast, Thinking Slow to see the point.
It is hard work to consider that in everyday activity, complex processes are engaged and if we are to begin to know our own mind, simplifying and categorizing may produce a feeling of understanding but provide no real insight about what psychological resources that may be available and are unrecognized.
It seems that philosophers through history and developmental researchers and writers have consistently suggested that the examined life in all its complexity yields deep and rich insights and possibilities. Knowing how your psychological system works is hard work and promises to yield incredible outcomes—well-being, wellness, and overall personal effectiveness.
Carl Jung gave us a system that looks at the main elements of perception and judgment, and the interdependent factors associated with conscious and unconscious awareness. Jung further anticipated that the ability to use your psychological system requires an individual to both know the fullness of his or her system and recognize that an individual can flex in order to be more effective and fulfilled.
Learning to know what form of the psychological process or function to use is an elegant use of flexibility. Jung’s psychological system provided a rich way of looking at living and learning that requires the use of various psychological resources, which could be experienced and expressed at various levels of complexity within themselves.
Jung’s system reminds us that we are inclined to over rely on some processes at the expense of other processes. The individual who is most comfortable Extraverting Thinking seems least interested in the meaning-making complexities of Introverted Feeling. And yet, to be an individual fully attuned to the depth of available capabilities, knowing about those unrecognized psychological energies will enhance well being.
The elements of the psychological system are:
(Perceiving processes)
Extraverted Perceiving
Extraverted Perceiving processes provide for a full awareness of what is happening in the moment and identification of emerging patterns and possibilities in a situation. While Extraverted Sensing (Se) serves to scan the immediate environment, prompt awareness of how you are physically moving in your setting, Extraverted Intuiting (Ne) serves to bring into awareness possibilities and patterns not immediately apparent.
Extraverted Sensing (Se)
Basic: Momentary focus on situations; Complex: identifying interrelated facts in a situation
Extraverted Intuiting (Ne)
Basic: expressing a hunch; Complex: brainstorming by linking ideas and possibilities, and seeing interrelationships
Introverted Perceiving
Introverted Perceiving processes provide for gaining clarity and specificity about details and seeing possible choices in a situation. While Introverted Sensing (Si) serves to identify reliable and realistic information that can be verified and is stored in accessible categories, Introverted Intuiting (Ni) serves to anticipate next choices, to see a pattern or image that gives a hunch about the situation.
Introverted Sensing (Si)
Basic: verifying information; Complex: tagging information for multiple purposes and using ways to categorize information into various modes of utility
Introverted Intuiting (Ni)
Basic: seeing a pattern; Complex: seeing multiple scenarios, identifying key symbols and layers of meaning in situations
(Judging or meaning-making processes)
Extraverted Judging
Extraverted Judging processes provide for expressively sharing your logical analysis of gaps among choices and causal linkages to desired outcomes, and using empathetic strategies for connecting people with one-another and with value-oriented choices. While Extraverted Thinking (Te) serves to debate and critique to find the most suitable option, Extraverted Feeling (Fe) serves to express the importance of aligning mission and values with available choices and to find personal connections for those responsible for implementing the decisions at hand.
Extraverted Thinking (Te)
Basic: identifying what is illogical; Complex: exploring multivariate possibilities, elements, and underling factors that contribute to a situation
Extraverted Feeling (Fe)
Basic: being inclusive of others; Complex: engaging others to explore ideas, initiating with others to find common groups and aligned ideals
Introverted Judging
Introverted Judging processes provide for internal reflection and processing of information that is analytically reviewed, and in evaluating the alignment of ideals and values with perceived options and choices. While Introverted Thinking (Ti) serves to identify logical outcomes of available options in a situation, Introverted Feeling (Fi) serves decisions by insuring that choices reflect “the rightness” of options being selected.
Introverted Thinking (Ti)
Basic: listing pros and cons in a situation; Complex: exploring underlying principles and multiple possible theories or perspectives that influence a situation
Introverted Feeling (Fi)
Basic: rejecting options because of perception of misalignment; Complex: finding an interplay of ideals and values, looking for underlying dynamics to promote well being and personal meaning
The eight mental functions make up a system for perceiving and judging experiences. We toggle between these unconsciously and there are times when we need to truly understand how to shift our mental energies to be more effective as conditions change.
If you only looked at the overall general pattern resulting in labels like Extravert, Sensor, Thinker, etc, you miss the fullness of the overall system and the possibility of “owning” the psychological resources that are in the architecture. You could well extend the meaning of these labels far beyond practical value and attempt to explain everything from this conscripted view. This would be a serious error because it denies the extensive nature of the system (as Jung described) and ignore the complexity that is inherently present in each individual. You cannot “own” what you cannot identify; otherwise, it is unconscious content that is more in control of your psychology than you are. Coming into recognition of these psychological forces within you is precisely a key aspect of what Jung meant when he said you need to “bring light to the darkness.”
We are a messy complexity and I fear we do great harm to ourselves and others trying to simplify our psychology for the ease of explanation which seems to almost always lead to declarations of causation and false judgments about the capabilities and potentials of ourselves and those around us. I have come to appreciate that when it comes to human beings, the wisdom of focus perception on the world and judgment on ourselves tends to produce useful information. Or as my Cherokee grandmother used to say, “those with answers are imprisoned in their minds, and those with questions are free to discover.” We may be wired for and seduced by simple as it appears to give suitable answers and therein lies great peril.
Comments
Post a Comment