Types as a Survival Strategy

[Raver]

In the end, I think psychological types are merely survival strategies devised by nature to ensure you survive and reproduce. The way you act is merely an outer reflection of that overall strategy. The reason they're so different is because in order for society to be the most productive, personalities must be designed to be better at certain things, while being worse at others. Any thoughts on this?

[Ave]

This seems kind of obvious.

[Raver]

This seems kind of obvious.

I'm completely aware of that. The goal of this thread was not to state some incredible new insight, but to look at personalities from a different perspective.

[Anglas]

Disagree. It's because god made mistake.

[Raver]

Disagree. It's because god made mistake.

[Ave]

This seems kind of obvious.

I'm completely aware of that. The goal of this thread was not to state some incredible new insight, but to look at personalities from a different perspective.

ok

[force my hand]

In the end, I think psychological types are merely survival strategies devised by nature to ensure you survive and reproduce. The way you act is merely an outer reflection of that overall strategy. The reason they're so different is because in order for society to be the most productive, personalities must be designed to be better at certain things, while being worse at others. Any thoughts on this?

It's an idea worth exploring, but do disparate personality types really employ equally successful survival strategies? Seems to me they wouldn't, keeping in mind that specialization is a relatively recent phenomenon in human evolution.

Assuming there is a correlation in the first place, I'd offer that technological and societal progression has opened up previously inaccesible 'personality niches'.

[Raver]

It's an idea worth exploring, but do disparate personality types really employ equally successful survival strategies? Seems to me they wouldn't, keeping in mind that specialization is a relatively recent phenomenon in human evolution.

I see your point, some types are more beneficial in survival than other, but that is highly dependent on the kind of society you're living in. Perhaps genetics just takes a gamble with a personality type.

Assuming there is a correlation in the first place, I'd offer that technological and societal progression has opened up previously inaccesible 'personality niches'.

Perhaps, it has resulted in certain personality types that were previously the minority are now becoming much more prominent as a result.

[silverchris9]

Same conclusion, opposite approach.

Rather that approaching it holistically (society requires x for the society to succeed), I approach it individually (individuals much specialize in order to survive). But yes, I do consider type a reflection of the fundamental necessity of the human brain to specialize (in the psychic/mental area, Nietzsche would call it a reflection of the human need to limit information or to avoid the truth; Freud would call it the drive against increased sensation I suppose the death drive). I've detailed that opinion in a metaphor I posted a while back about robots and mountains and shit.

[Igxfl]

Wouldn't the most beneficial arrangement be if our brains were configured so that there were only two types, A and B, and all men were A and all women were B, and As were good at, say, all Nx and Tx and Bss were good at all Sx and Fx?

Then there would still be the drive to dualise, and any male/female combination would be ideal, and we wouldn't be in this stupid situation where only 6.25% of people you meet of the opposite gender are going to be your dual and provide ideal psychological conditions for procreation, and you would be an ideal fit for 50% of jobs rather than 6.25%.

I agree with Anglas, personality psychology is one of those places where evolution screws up, unless you think of it as Nature's way of controlling exponential population growth.

Problem: If you have both TI and Te as ego elements, you simultaneously need and avoid both Fi and Fe. You'd probably snap. Besides, we need STs and NFs too...

[ClownsandEntropy]

Problem: If you have both TI and Te as ego elements, you simultaneously need and avoid both Fi and Fe. You'd probably snap. Besides, we need STs and NFs too...

I'm assuming that's what he meant: if only evolution had allowed us to use both Ti and Te when the situation called for it, and be able to accept both ethical elements. And all NFs are useless.