Building freedom-to recommendations by temperament

The "other" ERE. Societal aspects of the ERE philosophy. Emergent change-making, scale-effects,...
7Wannabe5
Posts: 9372
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 9:03 am

Re: Building freedom-to recommendations by temperament

Post by 7Wannabe5 »

jacob wrote:I think one reason that INTJs are prevalent in the FIRE millieu is the right combination of being dissatisfied with corporate normality AND being able to find an exit to the situation... Easiest fix is to leave. Just apply skills.
I think one reason the ENTPs are prevalent in the (smartest kid who dropped out of school in 10th grade, etc. etc.) millieu is the right combination of being dissatisfied with corporate normality AND being able to find an exit to the situation...Easiest fix is to (just) leave. Just apply mix of skills, creativity, and fairly high degree of risk-tolerance (tempered by Ti rationality and Fe concern for the welfare of others.) That's why the notion that you have to be a good student-> good employee for X years to "earn" or "deserve" your way out of the cave seems kind of like a variation on not-completely-rational Protestant Work Ethic to some of us. As in, "Yes, as your fellow rational, I can see how this math works, but why so much respect for the dude in the white coat administering the marshmallow test?"

7Wannabe5
Posts: 9372
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 9:03 am

Re: Building freedom-to recommendations by temperament

Post by 7Wannabe5 »

jacob wrote:This is actually one of the reasons I choose not to have kids. Yes, I think I could be a fantastic parent to an NT-child. It would be some variation of a mini-me. I'd be able to empathize with other parents about "how children sees the world the same way as I do but with new eyes". An NF-child would be hit or miss. But woe, if the dice roll turns up an SJ- or an SP-child. That kid would be so screwed.
It might have gone better than you imagine. I mean, you loved your dog even though that breed isn't really known for its high IQ :lol: OTOH, I agree that I lucked out with two kids who are also members of one of my book groups. Even better is the fact that their book stacks were from age 6 full of titles that I wouldn't have picked for myself. One significant downside of having kids for an ENTP is that being a Mom will kind of force you into maximum conformity/conventionality you can tolerate due to extreme reduction in natural risk-tolerance. So, in many ways my life as somebody who is now 14 years empty-nest-with-no-grandkids is more like my lifestyle as a teenager/college student than my life during the 20 years from 23-43 that I was married and raising my kids. That's why I'm often inclined to caution the youngsters here who are not yet in nesting-phase to not do as I do.

jacob
Site Admin
Posts: 15907
Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2013 8:38 pm
Location: USA, Zone 5b, Koppen Dfa, Elev. 620ft, Walkscore 77
Contact:

Re: Building freedom-to recommendations by temperament

Post by jacob »

Upon further reflection, the list might be too crude. Perhaps I'm extrapolating anecdotally, but I propose that people who retire from a career that likely fit with their dominant and auxiliary functions will seek to explore either their inferior or tertiary functions. IOW, one the driver and co-driver retires, it's time to let the 10- and 3-yos of the CAR model out to play.

I'd also propose that this "fun" is relatively short-lived (a few years) after which focus returns to the top two functions. This is why many early retires return to exactly the same kind of work that they left behind.

Insofar this holds, the list would look completely different in the short term!

AnalyticalEngine
Posts: 949
Joined: Sun Sep 02, 2018 11:57 am

Re: Building freedom-to recommendations by temperament

Post by AnalyticalEngine »

Interesting stuff, @Jacob. I've pondered this for awhile and here are my thoughts.

How to Reinvent Yourself

1. Psychology is a pretty new science still, so there's various models about what temperament is. Nevertheless, I'm going to use my own framework here and say that who "you" are is a mix of genetic, environmental, social, and cultural factors. You can think of these factors as a chaotic vortex that sometimes conflict with each other, and where they mix together, that's "you." And while all four factors can be changed to some degree, some are more static than others. For example, you can change your cultural world by moving countries, your social world by making new friends, your environment by changing your physical surroundings, and your genetic by getting a viral infection, swallowing depleted uranium (not recommended life advice), or epigenetic factors.

2. The corollary to #1 is that there is no actual separation between "you" and "the world" (non-duality). The corollary to that is that there is no "authentic self" waiting to be discovered because who you are changes every second as the world changes. This is an important distinction because the way I see "authentic self" used in many self-improvement circles seems like a reinvention of the notion of the Christian soul, that is, it's supposedly the perfect version of you that is untainted by the world or your social environment. This is not a useful way to think about things because it sends you on a journey that can never be reached, that is, you will never separate the "real you" from the rest of the world.

3. Nevertheless, the four factors can be in conflict with each other, and when this happens, it can cause personal misalignment and suffering. As an example, I am very unlikely to become the next professional basketball superstar at age 32 with a height of 5'3". Thus my genetic factors (my height) and my environmental factors (my age) are in conflict with my social goals (become a famous basketball star). This causes personal suffering that I must overcome in my quest for self-actualization (how can I achieve what I was hoping to achieve with basketball some other way?)

4. Because of social and cultural incentives, there is pressure to "self-actualize" along socially normative lines. This is essentially the problem of a socially acceptable subpersonality gaining dominance and pushing someone to "self-actualize" along social and cultural metrics while ignoring environmental and genetic factors. As a personal example, I am 100% fine being single and enjoy my independence and ample free time. But because cultural and social norms are so strong in favor of romantic/sexual partnering, there is a lot of pressure for me to "do the work" and become more "liberated," even if that might be at odds with genetic or environmental temperament factors.

5. That being said, because of #2 (no authentic self), it's not like there's some "real" version of me who is going to "innately" prefer being single or being coupled. Thus untangling what personal habits I can change vs the ones I'm better simply accepting is very difficult. I've yet to find a perfect solution to when you should seek change vs simply accept the present.

6. Using stack theory, personal growth is going to happen when you develop your shadow functions/lesser functions. But this is also difficult and requires constant energy to do. One may be able to become more extroverted, for example, by developing extroverted functions (Fe), but doing so is going to be more draining for an INTJ and may not always be the best use of time. Because there is a lot of social and cultural pressure to express Fe, one may fall into the trap of continually trying to develop shadow functions instead of using one's already developed functions (Ni) to solve problems everyone else is blindsided by.

7. Self-actualization, therefore, often becomes a game of aligning the four factors of your personal vortex such that they are as aligned as possible. For an INTJ who does not meet social or cultural norms, one may attempt to navigate this either by conforming to social/cultural norms intentionally and painfully or by withdrawing from them as much as possible to focus on things that bring more value to one's genetic/environmental world.

8. But is this the only way to look at the problem? If we use Hegel, conflict between one's temperament and the cultural/social world presents a dialectic that one may be able to transcend by reframing the problem. This is the arena of true self-transformation (Kegan5).

9. Likewise, by the time one reaches 30+, the social/cultural world you grew up with starts to change, and because of #2 (no authentic self), throwing oneself into a radically new social/cultural context might dramatically change your life and therefore "you" because you've changed the factors of the vortex. This is also hard to do because you become a creature of habit the older you get, and changing your life so dramatically requires a lot of energy (opportunity cost) that might be better spent elsewhere.

10. A lot of people go back to work after FIRE because our entire social and cultural world is designed around work, and most of the interesting things you can do as an adult are locked behind the world of work aka the "if you want to ride in an aircraft carrier, you need to join the navy" problem. Even doing things like dropping out of work to raise a kid or write a novel are still "socially approved" non-work activities. Going full early retirement the younger you are is going to require a tremendous capacity to buck social/cultural pressure by either being extremely self-directed that most people just don't have.

11. The greater the misalignment between your genetic, environmental, social, and cultural worlds, the harder it is to self-actualize. I'd conjecture that easy-mode is being able to self-actualize along Kegan3 (high alignment, you easily conform to norms and find meaning in it), medium-difficulty is self-actualizing along Kegan4 (low-alignment, you swap scripts by changing careers or social groups to find better alignment), and hard-mode is trying to self-actualize by solving the Hegelian dialectic at Kegan5 (high misalignment, you need to radically rearrange your entire life along completely novel lines to find alignment). Note that the harder it is to find alignment, the harder it is to self-actualize and the more likely one is to simply fail to self-actualize and accept a lesser prize (going back to work, withdrawing from society, whatever). Note that I don't think there's any shame in failing to self-actualize because Kegan5 hard-mode is a barrier most people are not going to be able to cross.

ertyu
Posts: 2893
Joined: Sun Nov 13, 2016 2:31 am

Re: Building freedom-to recommendations by temperament

Post by ertyu »

I'm an authenticity person but my idea of what authenticity is is different. Whether a stable essential self exists is irrelevant to authenticity. Authenticity is about being radically honest with oneself about what's there at any moment. It sounds very simple and most people reading this would probably go, "oh well yeah of course i already do that." But I would argue that allowing the whole of what's there to be there isn't trivial at all. It includes seeing what's there, as it is, and opening up to it, allowing it to be there. Admitting to oneself that it's there even when you wish it weren't or when it being there would make you a XYZ person when you really don't want to be like that. Authenticity is being able to stay with what is and accept it without trying to hate it and yourself. If includes seeing when you resist seeing what there - both good and bad - and it includes seeing how you resist it, and why. It includes, when you crave things seeing that you crave things, and why. It includes feeling the full extent of your joy and your fear - both the positive and the negative aspects of both, without shoving two thirds of your experience into your shadow. And so forth.

From this pov, it doesn't matter if the self is essential or not. In fact I dearly hope it's not :lol: because I hope that the act of seeing my own experience and staying with my own experience will change the self in directions i deem desirable -- towards greater inner simplicity and less neuroticism, basically. Towards being bigger as a person. And so forth.

AnalyticalEngine
Posts: 949
Joined: Sun Sep 02, 2018 11:57 am

Re: Building freedom-to recommendations by temperament

Post by AnalyticalEngine »

@ertyu - That definition of authenticity is something I could support. Much of my personal philosophy and practice comes back to the simple idea of "the unexamined life is not worth living." Really the goal is to be as present and intentional about your life as possible. Many different things can hijack that, so it's no easy task being present and intentional in your own life.

guitarplayer
Posts: 1301
Joined: Thu Feb 27, 2020 6:43 pm
Location: Scotland

Re: Building freedom-to recommendations by temperament

Post by guitarplayer »

I just imagined the eight stack functions in a circle and superimposed on it a a semi translucent Cskiszentmilahyi's flow diagram where 'Flow' is completely see through while 'apathy' is obscure. You somehow (I don't have that imagined) get to the state where dominant function is in Flow, and then move the diagram so that dominant is in 'control' and auxiliary in flow, then goes on and on. Apathy (the obscure), other than being sad or depressed can be also seen as unconscious (never explored or learned and forgotten).

jacob
Site Admin
Posts: 15907
Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2013 8:38 pm
Location: USA, Zone 5b, Koppen Dfa, Elev. 620ft, Walkscore 77
Contact:

Re: Building freedom-to recommendations by temperament

Post by jacob »

Tangentially relevant. Sternberg has a taxonomy of thinking styles which may be of particular relevance to this thread; especially as it supports the Peter Principle in terms of "where do people go next" with freedom-to representing a hard break towards a next position of competence rather than incompetence. There's a book: https://www.amazon.com/Thinking-Styles- ... 52165713X/

Overall, people's style fall into a space of (executive, legislative, judicial) x (monarchic, oligarchic, hierarchic, anarchic) x (local, global) x (internal, external) x (liberal, conservative) for a total of 96 different combinations, also called "styles"... thus creating a giant map space for exploration and master theses projects ;-)

Two important points:
  • Matching up one's personal style to the style of one's environment (school, teacher, job, boss, environment, ...) is more likely to lead to success and happiness.
  • Styles can be taught. Like MBTI they're more of a preference, albeit one that people tend to stick with out of familiarity or neurochemistry, than an absolute insurmountable barrier.

guitarplayer
Posts: 1301
Joined: Thu Feb 27, 2020 6:43 pm
Location: Scotland

Re: Building freedom-to recommendations by temperament

Post by guitarplayer »

Ha, I always thought that Sternberg was older than that. Anyway, a big shot in the psych world so using his framework will not ever raise anyone's eyebrows like MBTI. Mostly known to me for intelligence research though.

Also, overrating the field, this would likely be plenty for a PhD or even a PostDoc somewhere, depending on the detail to which it would be drilled down.

I may not have much to add, but I recognise the gravity of this thread.

jacob
Site Admin
Posts: 15907
Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2013 8:38 pm
Location: USA, Zone 5b, Koppen Dfa, Elev. 620ft, Walkscore 77
Contact:

Re: Building freedom-to recommendations by temperament

Post by jacob »

One interesting thing from the book was the discussion of learning styles. For example, "external judicial" prefer to critique things in groups. "External executive" likes to meet in groups like the MMGs to hold each other accountable. Whereas an "internal oligarchic" style does better with forum-style interaction.

7Wannabe5
Posts: 9372
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 9:03 am

Re: Building freedom-to recommendations by temperament

Post by 7Wannabe5 »

Hmmm...I like forum style interaction, but I also like more of an "external anarchic" environment. For instance, I prefer teaching in chaotic inner city schools (interesting) to teaching in sedate, stereotypical suburban environment (boring), but I also like teaching the gifted or home-schooled kids in affluent, uber-educated environment (interesting.) I also prefer teaching kids who are in chaotic stage of development (3 year olds) vs. kids who are in conformist stage of development (second graders.) However, the combination of chaotic inner city environment with chaotic junior high phase of development is too much for me to handle for more than a few months max.

AnalyticalEngine
Posts: 949
Joined: Sun Sep 02, 2018 11:57 am

Re: Building freedom-to recommendations by temperament

Post by AnalyticalEngine »

I just had a realization that should have been 100% obvious in retrospect but I am sharing here because it's a good lesson in intra-temperament communication.

Namely, after interacting with a bunch of kegan3 ESFPs (my anti-type), I have come to realize they use the words "authentic self" and "tribe" to describe a function stack/Kegan interaction that I do not readily experience.

An ESFP uses FeSi. As extroverts, they experience the external world first, internal world second. For an FeSi/Kegan3 individual, the term "authentic self" means they can use their dominant function with their social group because Fe drives them to experience things with others. An FeSi/Kegan3 doesn't experience themselves first; they experience the world first. So they need very high FeSi/Kegan3 milieu alignment by virtue of their experiential orientation. A tribe for them refers to the individuals they are using Fe to experience the world through.

This is a very alien mindset for me, an NiTe/Kegan4 because my Fe is at the level of an angry child who wants ice cream for dinner and my Si is at the level of "I miss going to Blockbuster Video." As such, I am simply not experiencing "authentic self" or "tribe" because I experience Te alignment first and foremost, hence why people being "wrong" causes me distress. The closest thing an NiTe/Kegan4 is going to get to "tribe" is a bunch of smart people to bounce ideas off.

I'd figure I'd add this here because it's a good example of how people may just be having 100% totally different subjective experiences, but trying to use terms everyone has a different understand of to explain it, thus causing confusion.

User avatar
Ego
Posts: 6359
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2011 12:42 am

Re: Building freedom-to recommendations by temperament

Post by Ego »

The question is.... is it something that is happening to you or is it something you (and they) are doing?

If it is happening to you, then that's that. Forget I asked. No need to answer.

If on the other hand you are doing it, then maybe you can try to do it a little differently the next time and see if anything interesting happens.

User avatar
Ego
Posts: 6359
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2011 12:42 am

Re: Building freedom-to recommendations by temperament

Post by Ego »

In other words, is it possible that one of the ultimate Renaissance skills is the ability to fine tune the optimal introversion/extroversion for the given situation?

Could a person learn to switch between experiencing the internal world first in situations where the internal orientation produces the best outcome and then experience the world through others when external is best?

Growth is painful. One of the downsides of great intelligence is the temptation for really smart people to use it to rationalize avoidance of pain.

guitarplayer
Posts: 1301
Joined: Thu Feb 27, 2020 6:43 pm
Location: Scotland

Re: Building freedom-to recommendations by temperament

Post by guitarplayer »

Ego wrote:
Mon Mar 06, 2023 9:16 am
In other words, is it possible that one of the ultimate renaissance skills is the ability to fine tune the optimal introversion/extroversion for the given situation?

Could a person learn to switch between experiencing the internal world first in situations where the internal orientation produces the best outcome and then experience the world through others when external is best?
I think it is, in it I follow one contrarian giant of psychology Walter Mischel (aka the Marshmallow Test guy), e.g. here.

one can think of personality (arrangement of traits) at a point in time as a special case in a field covering all possible arrangements of traits.

OutOfTheBlue
Posts: 295
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2022 9:59 am

Re: Building freedom-to recommendations by temperament

Post by OutOfTheBlue »

Not necessarily a downside of great intelligence, but more generally, of overreliance on thinking to the expense of other modes of knowing.

AnalyticalEngine
Posts: 949
Joined: Sun Sep 02, 2018 11:57 am

Re: Building freedom-to recommendations by temperament

Post by AnalyticalEngine »

@Ego - An interesting observation. Our greatest strengths are often also our greatest weaknesses. An introverted temperament is an advantage in certain situations, but can also lead to a tendency to internalize problem or invoke intellectualization as a mechanism to avoid experiencing present reality. Likewise, an extroverted temperament may lead to externalizing problems or trying to merge with groups to avoid experiencing present reality. Making peace with the present moment, including the pain therein, is a powerful skill. The fear of fear is often a bigger problem than the problem itself.

An advantage of developing your shadow side is that it allows you to experience the world in ways you never have before. To that end, it can be a more powerful altered state than any meditation or psychedelic experience.

User avatar
Ego
Posts: 6359
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2011 12:42 am

Re: Building freedom-to recommendations by temperament

Post by Ego »

guitarplayer wrote:
Mon Mar 06, 2023 9:28 am
one can think of personality (arrangement of traits) at a point in time as a special case in a field covering all possible arrangements of traits.
If personality is the thing we use to interact with the world then I would imagine the traits that make up personality would rearrange depending on who/what/where/when we are interacting.
AnalyticalEngine wrote:
Mon Mar 06, 2023 9:37 am
The fear of fear is often a bigger problem than the problem itself.

An advantage of developing your shadow side is that it allows you to experience the world in ways you never have before. To that end, it can be a more powerful altered state than any meditation or psychedelic experience.
Well said.

guitarplayer
Posts: 1301
Joined: Thu Feb 27, 2020 6:43 pm
Location: Scotland

Re: Building freedom-to recommendations by temperament

Post by guitarplayer »

Yeah but then if the traits can rearrange ad infinitum then what is the point of the idea of personality in the first place, that was the point I was trying to make. After all this is the ultimate edge of us humans is that we are flexible and adaptable.

It feels nice to have a label (reduces anxiety), and sometimes useful, for example trying to sort people into different categories to know how to then deal with them, we do it all the time.

I think applying the same logic to oneself can be crippling and a disfavour, because it is limiting.

Post Reply