In a digression from my usual poem I offer a book review.
In one fell yet skilful swoop, Merve Emre destroys years of personal affinity for the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator in her mindblowingly brilliant work, The Personality Brokers.
Having taken the professional MBTI in undergrad and finding in it out of all other personality tests a deeper understanding of myself and why I got along with certain people better than others, I/E, N/S, F/T and P/J became conversation starters and interpersonal saviours. From fun dinner conversations with fellow INFP's (which, incidentally is the same letter combination of the authors of the MBTI) to arguments with people decrying my I-ness or P-ness, it has in many ways permeated my life until now. In her book, she explores the true history of the test and the pseudo-science that it is based upon, and she does it with such a spoonful of excellent writing that I could not but swallow it.
Emre graciously paints a biography of 2 (or 3 including Mary) women who made the MBTI a quest for their lives in order to bring understanding between people--and what is more noble than that? She almost elicits sympathy for their cause with her generous portrayal of their difficulties and determination, while the simple facts--sketchy Jungian science, making results fit the theories, and racist/sexist roots (perhaps ironically) among many--belie the validity of the test and in the end leave the reader regretfully dismissing it as a true test of personality (if there is such a thing).
Emre's voice comes through as a call to respect individualism, which I can embrace being (since MBTI is discredited) a 4 on the Eneagram (perhaps I should investigate that test as well...sigh). There is something about humanity that naturally looks for similarities and differences--enter personality testing--but the darker side of herding people into convenient boxes disallows growth and change, and has at its heart the shady world of statistics. Using an argument with personality fallacy at its heart, INFP's/4's are perhaps more drawn than others to personality tests because 1) they cannot agree with most yet 2) they long to figure out why they are so unique (and at once hope and fear they are not). The question also lingers...is the fixture on individualism a human characteristic or a Western (read: American) one? Is our need to be unique innate? But I digress.
The Personality Brokers comes at a perfect time when now, more than ever, Americans need to grasp truly what the solution is to individual conflicts. When is what bothers me about you grounds for censure and when is it merely a difference to be respected? Do our unifying tendencies as a society hide darker aspects such as weeding out misanthropes and nonconformists? While she does not answer these questions per se, she makes a profound statement about the current political climate (fitting in light of Tuesday) that is worthy of note on which I will close:
"For even today, politics remains chained to discourses of personality in ways that are as crude as, if not cruder than, Murray's assessment of Hitler. Most people want to like their democratically elected leaders or want them to be likable or, at the very least, presentable and polite--the kind of man you could invite over for a beer, the kind of woman who might read sweet stories to your children. Sometimes it seems that we are more shocked by violations of common courtesy than we are by unfair or oppressive policies."
In one fell yet skilful swoop, Merve Emre destroys years of personal affinity for the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator in her mindblowingly brilliant work, The Personality Brokers.
Having taken the professional MBTI in undergrad and finding in it out of all other personality tests a deeper understanding of myself and why I got along with certain people better than others, I/E, N/S, F/T and P/J became conversation starters and interpersonal saviours. From fun dinner conversations with fellow INFP's (which, incidentally is the same letter combination of the authors of the MBTI) to arguments with people decrying my I-ness or P-ness, it has in many ways permeated my life until now. In her book, she explores the true history of the test and the pseudo-science that it is based upon, and she does it with such a spoonful of excellent writing that I could not but swallow it.
Emre graciously paints a biography of 2 (or 3 including Mary) women who made the MBTI a quest for their lives in order to bring understanding between people--and what is more noble than that? She almost elicits sympathy for their cause with her generous portrayal of their difficulties and determination, while the simple facts--sketchy Jungian science, making results fit the theories, and racist/sexist roots (perhaps ironically) among many--belie the validity of the test and in the end leave the reader regretfully dismissing it as a true test of personality (if there is such a thing).
Emre's voice comes through as a call to respect individualism, which I can embrace being (since MBTI is discredited) a 4 on the Eneagram (perhaps I should investigate that test as well...sigh). There is something about humanity that naturally looks for similarities and differences--enter personality testing--but the darker side of herding people into convenient boxes disallows growth and change, and has at its heart the shady world of statistics. Using an argument with personality fallacy at its heart, INFP's/4's are perhaps more drawn than others to personality tests because 1) they cannot agree with most yet 2) they long to figure out why they are so unique (and at once hope and fear they are not). The question also lingers...is the fixture on individualism a human characteristic or a Western (read: American) one? Is our need to be unique innate? But I digress.
The Personality Brokers comes at a perfect time when now, more than ever, Americans need to grasp truly what the solution is to individual conflicts. When is what bothers me about you grounds for censure and when is it merely a difference to be respected? Do our unifying tendencies as a society hide darker aspects such as weeding out misanthropes and nonconformists? While she does not answer these questions per se, she makes a profound statement about the current political climate (fitting in light of Tuesday) that is worthy of note on which I will close:
"For even today, politics remains chained to discourses of personality in ways that are as crude as, if not cruder than, Murray's assessment of Hitler. Most people want to like their democratically elected leaders or want them to be likable or, at the very least, presentable and polite--the kind of man you could invite over for a beer, the kind of woman who might read sweet stories to your children. Sometimes it seems that we are more shocked by violations of common courtesy than we are by unfair or oppressive policies."
