are you interested in psychology?
Do you have any thoughts on Keirsey Temperament Sorter (KTS) vs Jungian Briggs-Myers for personality assessments? I studied social psych in school and have recently started researching some personality and role-based theories for an educational project I’m working on. It would be great to help kids find their natural tendencies of what roles would fit their personalities – since most people when getting out of school have no idea what they want to ‘do’. However, matching personality types to occupations would probably create a much higher satisfaction rate in society, and hence a more satisfied country. Any thoughts?
I found the Keirsey sorter easy enough to take, was introduced to KTS by a friend, and find that, the descriptions and being able to observe for temperament is incomparable. I’m sure others may have another opinion. Joe: “However, matching personality types to occupations would probably create a much higher satisfaction rate in society, and hence a more satisfied country”-I’m unsure how matching people to occupations would go, I am a great believer in self determination, and that it is okay to make your own mistakes, to be honest I could see problem solving, resourcefulness and resilience being useful,along with Temperament awareness also, but it’s a big call to then assume a more satisfied country. I know of people that are in their chosen occupation (and whom is to say it is their suited occupation anyway?) but lacking life skills, maturity, along with other traits and character developments. Would Charlie Sheen be considered in his desired occupation?
I too am a great believer in self determination, however I would say that many people don’t have a ‘path’ in which to guide themselves. To your point, teaching the concepts of problem solving, determination as a characteristic, and the notion that failure is not a ‘nail-in-the-coffin’ (ie. get up and try again) would produce more intelligence in society. I ask myself still though if people were given at least a hint to say ‘your personality matches with an artistic type – and here are some great things/jobs you can do that would fulfill you’.
If most people were completely happy with their jobs, I would say that some type of guide would be unnecessary; but it seems in any study many people are not really happy with what they do. I would agree that just because something is ‘chosen’ does not assume a match. Writing might really fit my personality (ie. make me happiest), but it’s just ‘easier’ to take the first job that pays what I want to make. As for Charile Sheen – I’ve never met the man, but perhaps he could have been a brilliant mathematician and he could have helped develop new theories, or new cures, etc.
One other question that I ‘ve had on personality scales – how does the concept of intelligence some into play? For example, on KTS there is concrete vs abstract thought – however I am tempted to equate ‘abstract’ with more intelligence; since looking at Piaget’s developmental paradigm these two words related to themselves in a linear fashion. Do you have any thoughts on the matter?
I don’t know that abstract thought therefore suggests or follows a greater intelligence, what good is thought if not accompanied by action or results, or a desire to learn, sometimes even re-learning, and what would your definition of intelligence be, entail? I would suggest, (borrowing from Please Undertand Me II) that we are each of a particular kind of intelligence, designed perhaps to complement each other, (and yes, competitive also). Ideally it would be more than likely advantageous to have awareness of Temperament, I do agree. How we achieve this is another matter.
Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:
You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. ( Log Out / Change )
You are commenting using your Twitter account. ( Log Out / Change )
You are commenting using your Facebook account. ( Log Out / Change )
You are commenting using your Google+ account. ( Log Out / Change )
Connecting to %s
Notify me of new comments via email.