M is for MBTI.

MBTI - short for Myers-Briggs Type Indicator - is a psychology-based system that describes personality traits.

I've been using it for many years, in my job as well as my personal life, and it's proven so useful that it has become a part of my way of thinking about and dealing with the world.


MBTI

The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator is based on quite a complicated system, but it can be simplified for personal use or use in your writing, which is what I'll do here.

However, if you'd want to use the insights with other people, e.g. in a professional or therapeutic setting, I would advise you to study the system in more detail.

When I talk about the MBTI to my students, I compare it to the systems we use every day to describe what a person looks like on the outside:

'Hm, I can't think of her name right now, but you know who I mean: the tall woman with the short, blonde hair.'

For efficiency's sake, we focus on a limited set of observable characteristics, and describe them in the form of opposite pairs. E.g. short/tall, bald/long hair, pale skin/dark skin, etc. For each pair, some people will be on one end of the spectrum, and most people will be 'somewhere in between'.

Psychologist Carl Gustav Jung formulated similar 'opposite pairs' for personality. Later on, Katharine Cook Briggs and her daughter Isabel Briggs Myers developed this further into the MBTI system as it is now used, with 4 pairs of opposing characteristics.

Here, too, some people will show up on one end, with a more extreme preference, while most are 'somewhere in between', to varying degrees.


The Opposing Pairs

These are the 4 pairs of characteristics the MBTI takes into account:

• Extraversion (E) - Introversion (I)
• Sensation (S) - iNtuition (N)
• Thinking (T) - Feeling (F)
• Judging (J) - Perceiving (P)

Extraversion vs. Introversion

This pair of characteristics looks at where you direct your attention and where you draw your energy from.

Are you more focused on the people and the world around you (Extraversion), or on your inner world (Introversion)?

Do you get energy from interacting with people (E), or from being by yourself (I)?

Read more about Extraversion vs. Introversion.


Sensation vs. iNtuition

The second pair of characteristics looks at the kind of information you take in, and the information you naturally focus on.

Do you mainly notice information that is tangible, measurable, concrete and factual (Sensation) or do you focus on patterns, possibilities and 'the bigger picture' (iNtuition)?

Do you prefer to deal with the world as it exists (S) or are you constantly looking for ways to improve, to innovate and to 'boldly go where no one has gone before', at least when ideas are concerned (N)?

Are you a person who will most often ask questions beginning with: 'what', 'how', 'when', ... (S) or is your main question: 'Why?' (N)

(It is interesting to note here that the majority of people reside on the 'Sensation' side of the spectrum, so if you're undecided, statistically you're more likely to be on the S-side.)

Read more about Sensation vs. Intuition.


Thinking vs. Feeling

The third pair looks at what you base your decisions on.

As far as making decisions is concerned, do you place more value on logic, facts and objective truth (Thinking) or on people, values and personal or social concerns (Feeling)?

Do you consider truth more important than tact (T) or tact more important than truth (F)?

Do logical inconsistenties drive you crazy (T) or do you get nervous in situations where the harmony between people has been disturbed (F)?

Read more about Thinking vs. Feeling.


Judging vs. Perceiving

The fourth pair gives information about how you live your life towards the outside world, and how you structure your life and deal with your time.

Are you more comfortable after you have made a decision (Judging) or when all options are still open (Perceiving)?

Do you prefer to / are you more efficient when you plan your time and activities beforehand (J) or do you prefer to improvise and adapt your priorities according to the situation at hand (P)?

Do you like making / having to do-lists (J) or do those lists make you nervous (P)?

Read more about Judging vs. Perceiving.


The Letters

When you take MBTI-based tests, you usually end up with letters and scores. The letters are the ones I've used before: (I)ntroversion - (E)xtraversion, i(N)tuition - (S)ensation, (T)hinking - (F)eeling and (J)udging - (P)erceiving. If you get other letters, chances are you've taken a different test. ;-)

The Kisa test in the links below gives you scores for each end of the spectrum, so you get 8 scores in total, which helps to create a more complete picture.

I want to point out here that there are no 'bad' letters and no 'bad' scores. The diversity of our species is a strong factor in our success, especially when we learn to understand our differences and cooperate.

If you get low scores for certain letters, that's okay too. It usually means you don't have a strong preference for either of the characteristics - or you have a high preference for both. This, too, is useful in a team, family or community. These people can often take on different roles, depending on which skills are lacking and needed. They can also act as mediators between the more extreme team or family members to keep everyone focused and working together.


MBTI and writing

I use the MBTI in my writing in different ways:

• To build real and multi-layered characters.
  MBTI allows me to build 'real' characters efficiently. E.g. when I write down: "character X: INTP", it tells me so much more than those 4 characteristics; it summons a whole group of real, existing people in my mind, with real characteristics to pick and choose from.
• To keep my character files clear and concise.
  My character files contain names, basic practical data, and personality types. It's so much easier to type "INTP" than: "recluse; appears ice-cold to outsiders but has an incredibly rich inner world; hates being misunderstood and will do everything to establish clarity; has an extreme ability to focus; needs to be independent; distrusts emotions because they've proven to be unreliable in the past; if someone appears on their radar in a good way, they'll do almost whatever they can to make them happy; etc.". For me, the word "INTP" conjures that image, without extensive character worksheets or interviews. 
• To create tension and believable interaction.
  If I need a character to interact with another one in a certain way (antagonistic, soulmate, envy, distrust, practical misunderstandings, etc.), I'll pick a character with a particular personality type that tends to have that kind of interaction with the other character's type, and then I just stay true to the characters while I'm writing. Most of the time the desired interaction just happens.
• To avoid gender stereotyping.
  Personality types aren't gender-specific. There may be more women with a Feeling preference than men, but I don't want to fall in the trap of assuming this is the case for everybody. By setting the types for my characters, I can add more variation and keep their behaviour consistent.

I know it all sounds very mechanical, but through the years it's become an automatic and intuitive process.


Useful Links

• A number of my other posts on MBTI and related topics:
  http://thewomancondition.blogspot.com/search/label/MBTI
• One of the better online personality tests:
  http://kisa.ca/personality/
• The Wikipedia entry about MBTI:
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mbti
• Website of the Myers & Briggs Foundation:
  http://www.myersbriggs.org/

Have you come across the MBTI before? Do you know your type? Have you used MBTI in your writing?


--------

Image: 'Diversity Cupcakes' by Clever Cupcakes. Available under a creative commons license. © 2008, Clever Cupcakes.

♥ Bookmark or share this post ♥

I is for Introverts.

I am an extravert. Sometimes I show introverted behaviour, especially in loud and lively environments with lots of other people, but at heart, I am an extravert.

'Wrong letter and wrong post,' you may say, but bear with me.

My husband is an introvert, and so are several of my closest friends. Many years ago, I thought introverts were shy, reserved, absent-minded or aloof. Now I know better. They're just different. And fascinating.

I want to dedicate today's post to the wonderful introverts in my life (lives). I hope it will contribute to a better understanding and higher appreciation of introverts all over the world. In other words: to World Peace *beatific smile*.

The main thing we need to know - and accept - about introverts is that their attention is focused on what's happening inside their minds. While we extraverts are 'out there', interacting and observing everyone and everything around us, an introvert is doing something similar in his or her own inner world. And that inner world doesn't necessarily look or feel like the world outside.

Now, we extraverts do this as well - to a certain degree. We, too, have our inner worlds. But we attribute a different value to them. For an extravert, the outside world comes first. We often put other people's beliefs, interests and concerns before our own. Our thoughts and emotions are triggered by factors around us, and then we internalise them.
Sometimes we need to process what happened by being alone and digging in, but more often we'll process by talking to other people (or pets, or imaginary others).

Introverts process what happens in their lives by being on their own, undisturbed. They don't need to talk about something in order to deal with it. To the contrary. Often they can only communicate something after they've worked it through.


What we Should Know about Introverts:

• Introverts are not necessarily shy. In fact, I have the impression shyness occurs more often in extraverts, because they are more aware of the people around them, and place higher value on their opinions.
  Introverts don't prefer solitude because they're anxious about interaction with others, but because they don't feel a strong need to.
  (It's interesting to note here that many shy extraverts - and extraverts with non-mainstream beliefs - like to think they are introverts, because it gives them a less emotionally charged term to identify with. If you would like to interact with people, but you're anxious about it or don't really know how, you're probably an extravert.)
• Being around other people costs introverts a lot of energy, especially in larger groups and when they are forced to interact. They will do it for the people they care about, but be aware that it drains them, and they'll need to be alone afterwards to recharge.
• Introverts don't hate people. They are not anti-social. They just need to spend a sufficient amount of time on their own.
• Because introverts don't feel the urge to interact, when they do, they prefer to talk about ideas and feelings that matter, rather than small talk and social chit-chat
• You cannot turn an introvert into an extravert. (Besides: why would you want to? Our world needs diversity!)
  You can make them act in a more extraverted way, but it will still drain them and they'll need to be alone afterwards. You can change some of the behaviour, but not the person.

What Introverts should Know about Extraverts:

• When extraverts talk, they're not doing it to be loud, to dominate the conversation or because they believe what they think is more important than what everybody else thinks.
  Often they're just responding to an urge to get something off their chest. Once that's done, and when they notice they've been heard, they can listen to what others have to say.
  (So yes, introverts, giving feedback by means of facial expressions and 'uhuhs' is a good idea - we're not mind readers, and aren't you happy about that!)
• Extraverts structure their thoughts, make sense of emotions and form their opinions in interaction with the outside world. When they are confronted with issues or questions, they'll start talking about it. This is a way to bounce off ideas, gather feedback and see which responses resonate.
• Extraverts are not shallow. They might spend less of their mental time in their inner world, but that doesn't mean they think or feel less. They have a keen interest in the world and in other people, and are often aware of different layers and subtleties in social interaction that introverts would miss.
• Extraverts are energised by being around people, but not just anyone. Interaction with people they can't identify with or with whom they don't have much in common, can wear them out as well.
• Everything else you need to know about extraverts: don't worry, we'll tell you.

Interesting links.

• Caring for Your Introvert.
• Top Jobs for Introverts.

Are you an introvert? How do you deal with the people around you?

-------

Photo 'Alone he sings' by Luis Humberto Molinar Márquez. Available under a creative commons license. © 2009, Luis Humberto Molinar Márquez.

♥ Bookmark or share this post ♥

Writing and the Power of Vulnerability.

I have just sent out the reworked first 4 chapters of my manuscript to a select number of betareaders.

These are people whom I love and trust, who all have a particular outlook on different aspects of my writing and who I know will give me honest and useful feedback. They are aware of how writing is a craft I will forever be learning. I can be (quite) sure none of them will think any less of me when they spot the awful bits in my writing and the flaws in my thinking. Still, every time I send something out, I have to call on a deep layer of courage to get myself to click that 'send' button.

Of course, being me, I had to dig my teeth into that feeling. Find out about its nature and its origins. I didn't have to look far. I've written about perfection before, I've hinted at the human fear of 'not being good enough', of what could come back at you when you put yourself out there.

As if by cosmic accident, I found this video a few days ago. It's a TED talk by Brene Brown, a professor at the University of Houston, Texas, who has spent the past 10 years researching courage, authenticity, vulnerability and shame.

Some of what she says is probably (MBTI-) J stuff (the measuring stick, etc.), which I can only relate to from a distance, being far out on the Perceiving scale. But for the most part, what she talked about was very recognisable. And insightful. Take out the banana nut muffins and stuff in dark, Belgian chocolate, and we're talking very, very recognisable.

The talk is about 20 minutes long and well worth that time. As a bonus, Brene is an excellent speaker with a great sense of humour.

♥ Bookmark or share this post ♥

The Times They Are A-Changing.

As I've confessed in a previous article, in another part of my life I'm a teacher. I'm also a huge fan (and advocate) of student diversity, since long before 'diversity' turned into the stale, nausea-inducing term it is now. But somehow, being a fan of 'multifariousness' or 'heterogeneity' doesn't sound much better, so I'll stick with diversity for now.

Fact is, we are all individuals. Some of us even more than others (hah!). We're part of a diverse and specialised but social species. We're born and bred to cooperate.

For that reason, I'm a firm believer that education should focus a lot more on:

1. helping pupils / students to understand their individual talents
2. showing them in which ways others are different
3. providing them with plenty of opportunities to combine their efforts and work towards better results.

I am convinced that this approach is much more effective in order to teach them to deal with the challenges real life is throwing / will throw at them.

It's a simple truth that most of our students / pupils / ... are going to end up in different jobs, different personal lives, different careers, different locations, situations and quite possibly different countries and cultures. How could we prepare them for that any better than by helping them develop a healthy and realistic confidence in their own talents? In their personal, individual ability to contribute to the world?

To avoid misunderstandings: I'm NOT pleading for educational pampering. To the contrary!
We all learn by being challenged. We feel better after we've tackled something that was really difficult. What is important is that we were able to tackle it.
The challenges we present to our kids / pupils / students / trainees should be tailored to their level and their needs. Not to a standardised programme or idea of what a person should be able to do at a particular age.

This is something that game designers have understood a long time ago. They throw challenges at players that educators can only dream about. And players overcome them. Game designers create difficult circumstances based on clever insights like risk versus reward, or team effort.
Their customers choose the roles they naturally prefer: some of them play healers, others pose as fierce warriors and still others manage and organise their fellow players. These game events, like life, wouldn't succeed without either kind of participant.

We simply can't expect everybody to be good at everything. It's unrealistic and above all unneccessary.
Instead, we should offer our kids, pupils and students opportunities to shine at what they're good at, and show them ways to use those talents for the greater good of society, (wo)mankind, industry, ...

After all, isn't that what so many adults these days are desperately trying to find out about themselves? Wouldn't it be more efficient if we'd start working on that before frustration and disappointment have already clobbered people down?

I wanted to share a great (animated) speech from author and educational advisor Sir Ken Robinson. It deals with a lot of these aspects. It's only 11 minutes long and even if you don't care about the message, the animations are fun to watch.

♥ Bookmark or share this post ♥

Downtime and the Danger of (its) Extinction.

I wanted to share a blog post over at 'the99percent' that has really struck a chord with me. It's an article about the importance of interruption-free space for creative thinking.

These past few days, I've been trying to focus exclusively on my novel. I found it impossible. There were phone calls, text messages and an annoying letter in the mail that needed urgent attention. And of course: the Internet. Facebook, Twitter, emails, mailing lists that always seem to explode when it's really cold outside, etcetera.

Still, I am painfully aware how easy it would be to avoid many of those distractions. If I really wanted to. And ay, there's the rub: something inside me keeps drawing me back to my technologically-induced connections. For some reason, they seem very important.

It made me wonder: are they, really?

Would my real friendships or family bonds fade if I didn't see these loved ones' status updates? Or they mine? Would the quality of my life diminish if I didn't read every single email or tweet shared by the communities I feel part of?

I'm so sure they wouldn't. So I thought a bit more about it: if this constant connectivity doesn't make a fundamental difference, why do our brains keep directing us there?

The article I mentioned above pointed out a number of very plausible reasons:

• 'space is scary': having time to think about possibly anything, having time alone with our minds, can be very confrontational. So we look for distraction to avoid the confrontation.
• 'interaction with others affects our self-esteem': I am sure this is a lot more true for extraverts than introverts, but that doesn't make it any less relevant. The constant connection and quick feedback to our walls, tweets or blogs, makes it possible to feel valued, reassured, part of a greater whole and even loved: instantly, and nearly all the time.

I wanted to add another reason of my own, that ties in closely with that last one:

Because of the internet, and the possibilities of connecting with people far away, our communities have expanded, not necessarily in numbers (because we only have so much awareness, attention and other brain capacity), but geographically.

As a result, we are no longer just relying on our immediate physical environment for good conversation, friendship, mental and emotional connection, a sense of 'family'. We can cherry-pick those people we 'click' with most, regardless of where they live.

And because this extended family is often not around during the more tedious bits of everyday life, they're less likely to stuff up or be associated with mundane matters, and more likely to be a great doorway to the 'charged' and intense and deeper interaction we crave.

Add to that the huge holes in the information that's actually conveyed in online communication (we miss out on tone of voice, body language, facial expressions, etc.), which means that our brain needs to fill in many more blanks in the message. Our brains do that from (reconstructed) memory and imagination, which i slikely to confirm the ideas we already have and to reinforce us in who we are. And yay: more good vibes!

And really, this is great. It's extremely valuable and I am incredibly grateful for all the people I have met and got to know this way. I've had several of my best conversations and most precious experiences with some of them. This connectivity can expand our horizons and make our minds more free.
But there is a downside: it can make our minds less free as well, if we allow it to take up our 'sacred space', our 'creative pauses', our much needed downtime.


Central Park, NY. October 2004

I've certainly been thinking about that a lot, these past few days. I'm trying to be a lot more conscious about that sacred space, being my own best friend by reminding me to shut down my laptop regularly, to make plans to meet up 'for real', to go for walks, take bubble baths, and read more (Edgar Allen Poe, for now). And what's interesting: I still have just as much time for writing!


You can find Scott Belsky's original article here, and there are some great tips and ideas about this topic at the Sabbath Manifesto!

♥ Bookmark or share this post ♥

The Power of Procrastination.

It struck me the other day how often I see or hear people complain about their tendency to procrastinate.
Do Facebook statuses like 'must...get...to...work' or 'aaarrrgggh, hunted by deadlines... again!' sound familiar to you too?

I used to think I was a procrastinator. I hated how I always had to rush school or other projects because I didn't start until the deadline was breathing in my face. It's not that I was lazy, I was just really busy chasing other interests that seemed more urgent or more important than what I was supposed to be doing.

Still, I haven't missed many deadlines in my life. I'll gladly admit to the all-nighters, improbable stunts and miraculous bursts of energy it took me to get there, but I (nearly always) managed to deliver on time. Sometimes I was on my last edit a minute before presenting, on other occasions I was still swapping slides around while already smiling at the audience, but I made it.

I even notice that, the older I become, the better I seem to be getting at pinpointing that crucial moment: the last possible minute you have to start on something in order to finish on time. In recent years it's even happened that I've completed a task before its deadline. Several times!

For years I thought I was just really bad at planning and organising my time. Until I discovered the MBTI.
(I"m not going to go into the specifics here, but if you want to know more you can find an introduction here and do a personality test here or here.)
Getting deeper into the MBTI helped me to understand that I am by no means a bad planner, or hopeless at making decisions.

Instead I learnt that I have a natural preference to consider all possible options before deciding what I want to do and how I'm going to do it. And just like any other personality trait, this has advantages and disadvantages, depending on the situation at hand.

Unless there is something really urgent and important going on, my priorities will be variable. If there is no clear "best option" I'll try to avoid final decisions and continue taking in information, letting it simmer and crystallise. This is not a skillset that will ever make me a brilliant planner, but it does make me a great improviser - or crisis manager. And when I do make a decision, it has a million different small and bigger elements factored in, often leading to a better decision in the end.

Our world needs diversity of skills. We seem to be a species that specialises and then cooperates to get a better result. Our social units need people who can make decisions quickly, ànd others who consider the 'what ifs'. It's when we learn to value each other's strengths and understand which skillset to apply to which situation, that our tribes can thrive.

Therefore, next time you notice you're procrastinating: don't fret about it. Instead, ask yourself why you're postponing action or decision. There's always a reason. Maybe what seems urgent or important in one part of your life isn't all that pressing in the grand scheme. Maybe you can't decide to change jobs because you haven't got a clear view of your true talents or how you want to use them. Or you're putting off writing your next chapter or article because you're subconsciously aware that your current idea has holes the size of Jupiter that need to be sorted out first.

There will be times where you have no choice but to kick yourself into gear. But even then, if you can spare a minute to think what is holding you back and what still needs to be fixed, you'll likely end up with a better view on the situation and ultimately with a better result.

Procrastination is not a flaw. It might occasionally get you into trouble in this fast-result-driven world we live in, but really, it is your secret superpower.

♥ Bookmark or share this post ♥

So Your Partner's a Rational Creature ... - Part Three.

Continued from: Rational creature - part 1 and Rational creature - part 2.

Fundamental difference #2:

Rational people process (nearly) everything in their head first.

On top of that, the rational part of our brain is significantly slower to respond than our emotions.

This means that, when confronted with new information or an unfamiliar situation, a rational creature will usually do nothing. At least, that's what it will look like, while their brain is working like crazy. On the inside, they're looking for similarities to known situations, considering different responses, looking for the appropriate way to react, etc. On the outside, we see ... nothing.

Of slippery slopes and minefields:

Feelers often misinterpret that lack of immediate response as not caring. We tend to consider Thinkers cold fish, and this can cause quite a few conflicts, especially in romantic relationships.
(For more info on the Jungian or MBTI terminology 'thinkers' and 'feelers', have a look here.)

The rationale behind this suspended reaction is that, by a certain age, thinkers have already learnt that their first response to a situation, especially one that is emotionally charged, is a bad idea.

When dealing with feelings, logic's usually not the way to go. For someone who bases their decisions on logic and observable data, emotional situations are minefields. They don't have enough information to go by. They have no idea how to respond, because the observable data are limited to: 'she's acting strange,' or 'he seems upset.'

Back to Angela and Bob:

Angela and Bob are talking about an article she's been reading, about how microwaving your food is bad for you.
Bob, being his rational self, points out - quite sharply - that microwaves don't do anything but make water molecules in food vibrate rapidly, thus creating friction and therefore heat, and in that sense microwaving isn't all that different from other forms of cooking.

Angela, unable to detect a caring tone in his voice - probably because there wasn't one - feels like he's calling her stupid. He discards what she said based solely on factual arguments that she can't counter with facts of her own. This feels very unfair and disrespectful of who she is as a person. (For a Feeler, nearly everything is about people because that's what we're focusing on.) As a result, Angela gets angry and, because she doesn't want to start a fight, she shuts up.

Bob notices her change in behaviour, but has no idea what happened. After all: he was just correcting an incorrect assumption. It wasn't personal. He asks Angela if something's wrong, but she denies.
Shortly after, Bob goes to watch TV, only to notice that there's significantly more rattling and smashing of pots and pans than usual.

(Again, pardon the gender stereotyping, I'm going for maximum recognisability here. Please adapt names, characters and situations at will.)

Bob now has every reason to suspect something's wrong, but he sees no way of finding out what. Until he gets more information, he does nothing, hoping it will pass.

In the meantime, Angela is still angry and winding herself up to boiling point. Bob can be such an uncaring arsehole sometimes. She bottles those emotions up on top of everything else, and we've got great potential for future self-combustion.

In the meantime it should be quite clear what the basis for this conflict is, and that there's no point in trying to blame either one of them. Each person reacts in their own way, and the conflict doesn't come from either one of the individuals, it comes from the mutual misunderstanding of the other person's social language.
In so many people's everyday lives, a lot of energy is wasted in situations like this one, energy that we could spend on something that's actually fun!

Now, let's look at what we can do to avoid this in our own lives:


For the Emotional Creature:

- Be aware that lack of feedback or response doesn't equal that your partner doesn't care.

- Your partner is not a mind reader. Try and express yourself as clearly as you can, especially when strong emotions hit you.

- When a particular feeling comes up, it's usually triggered by something. Every feeling is a valid response, you're not being silly (most of the time, anyway). It means there's an issue that needs to be dealt with.

- Don't waste mental energy blaming the people around you for not understanding. You are not a victim. Once you've calmed down, as you always will, analyse what has happened and talk about it.


For the Rational Creature:

- Be aware that a feeling is often difficult to analyse, especially for the person who's experiencing it (and while they're still feeling it.) It's an automatic response coming from an old part of our brain, pointing out that something's not right.

- Know that, when you notice in the feelers around you that something's off, you're probably right. However tempting it might seem to ignoring the situation, in the long run that's not a good idea, as it will keep coming back. The longer you wait, the bigger the fallout - and the damage.

- We all function in a social context. Roughly 50% of people are Feelers. That means you can't avoid them no matter how hard you try. And believe it or not, it would seriously reduce the quality of your life if you could.

- However unjustified or unintelligible you think emotions are, don't belittle them or treat them as unimportant.  While the feeling is 'active', it's very real and extremely important to that person.

- It's important to be there to listen, consider and offer comfort. If you don't know what to say, that's okay. You don't have to say anything, just be there.

- Even if your partner repeatedly tells you they're fine, if you have sufficient clues that that's not true, don't believe them. Feelers tend to put up a brave face. Don't pressure the matter either, just let them know you're there, and plan a joint activity for the (very!) near future. Chances are by then the feeling will have gone through its first processing rounds, and your partner might be ready to talk about it.

- Make use of Feeler friends and relatives. They can often help you to translate. Be careful with delicate topics, though, your partner might not like other people to know the specifics!


To keep in mind:

Once the strong emotional response has cooled down, conversation is possible again. It's important to find out what triggered the problem. Usually it's some form of misunderstanding related to how a message was communicated.
Thinkers have a way of giving factual information in a very cool way, deprived of emotion. Because to them it's about the facts.
Feelers read a lack of emotion as coldness, and tend to associate it with disrespect, disdain, disagreement, etc. Mainly because when they try to keep emotion out of what they say, it usually means they don't agree or don't approve and try to spare the other person's feelings.

We're really not that different on the inside, but we do speak a different social language. In order to understand each other, we need to learn to translate.

[Might be continued in the future.]

--------
Image: 'Close Up of The Thinker' by Todd Martin, available under a creative commons license. © 2005, Todd Martin.

♥ Bookmark or share this post ♥

So Your Partner's a Rational Creature ... - Part Two

Welcome to part two of my attempt to explore the rational mind, in which I want to discuss fundamental differences in how ratio-driven and emotion-driven people approach everyday life.

(Continued from part one.)


Fundamental difference #1:

Rational people are problem-focused rather than people-focused.

When confronted with a difficult situation, they will either avoid it or tackle it, but they'll be concentrating on the issue, not on the people or potential emotions involved.

Example:

(I've stuck with the male-female clichés for stereotypical clarity. Please substitute names and genders as fits.)

Angela's had a horrible day at work and comes home feeling frustrated and sad. She starts telling her partner Bob about all the things that happened that day. Halfway through her 3rd sentence (this Bob is an extravert) he interrupts her and starts giving her advice. Angela gets even more frustrated, lashes out at Bob because "he never listens and doesn't even try to understand what's going on inside her", and stomps off, leaving Bob puzzled on the couch.

What just happened?

Angela:

First of all, Angela wasn't talking about her problems so much as sharing how she felt. She wasn't looking for a solution. Not yet. That might/would come later, after the initial emotions had been processed.

Actions that would have helped her: just listening, nodding, asking a few supportive questions to show he was paying attention and did care. How? Well, plenty of options: cuddles, getting her something to drink, opening a box of (carefully hidden) emergency chocolates, or taking her out to dinner. Or all of the above. (Feel free to share below what would work for you!)

Bob:

Bob on the other hand didn't want Angela to feel bad, was listening for facts about the problem and looked for solutions. His main intent: to prevent this from happening again. Ever. Like I said: problem-focused. He contributed with what he does best: analysing the situation, considering possible solutions and picking the most appropriate one. Angela's response comes out of the blue and seems completely irrational and unnecessary. It leaves him confused and frustrated. When this happens a few times, he's likely to conclude that it's a woman thing and that they're fickle creatures who are impossible to please.

Now, there are things Angela could have done to help him, like telling him that what she really needed was comfort and emotional support, and that even though she appreciated his help in trying to fix it, she couldn't focus on solutions until much later, once she'd got over the initial emotional reaction.

Reality check:

I know this sounds much easier than it is, but don't despair: it's okay to get it wrong a number of times. We are amazing learners with flexible and versatile brains. As long as we keep analysing afterwards, and put in the effort to look beyond feeling wronged, hurt or misunderstood, we will soon discover that after the temporary unpleasantness has died down, our rational partners are very willing to look at what went wrong and even more to find ways to prevent this from happening again.

Continued in Rational creature - part 3

--------
Image: 'Close Up of The Thinker' by Todd Martin, available under a creative commons license. © 2005, Todd Martin.

♥ Bookmark or share this post ♥

So Your Partner's a Rational Creature ...

Throughout our lives, many of us have close relationships with rational people.
(I deliberately use gender-neutral words here, because it's by no means so that all rational people are male, or that all men are rational.)

Interaction with people who are vastly different in their decision-making process isn't easy, especially in romantic settings, and this often results in big misunderstandings that accumulate and sometimes lead to the end of the relationship. However ...

It's great to be different.

Being different is great for a relationship ánd for our personal growth, especially when we have at least a few  important characteristics and interests in common. Those help us overcome the inevitable misunderstandings.

Good communication requires a basic understanding of why our partners do what they do. So, what lies beneath a rational person's seemingly cold, uncaring or confrontational behaviour?

It's taken me a few years, lots of observations and possibly thousands of conversations with my wonderful (rational) partner and many of my / his / our friends, to understand them better. In the interest of world peace, I'll gladly share my unscientific and premature conclusions with you.

First of all ...

All rational people are different.

That sounds like bad news, but it isn't, really. It makes our lives and our quest for understanding of life, the universe and everything much more interesting - at least when we care enough about that person to put in the extra effort. But bear with me, I'll try to make it worth your while.

It's good to know that, on an abstract level, rational people have a few characteristics in common, the most obvious one being ...

Logic.

In my next few posts I'm going to try and dissect our rational partners' minds and look at the practical implications. I will focus on the bits that drive us nuts until we apply our own wonderful and talented brains to them and really try to understand.

Most of all, however tempting it can be to discard the rational creatures in our lives as detached cold fish, they're quite complex, fascinating and worthy of our love. They make amazing partners and can add tremendous value to so many aspects of our lives.

Continued in: Rational creature - part 2

--------
Image: 'Close Up of The Thinker' by Todd Martin, available under a creative commons license. © 2005, Todd Martin.

♥ Bookmark or share this post ♥