A Thought on "Personality" Tests

By "personality" test I'm generally referring to something along the lines of Myers-Brigg assessment or the Carl Jung test or something along those lines. Those four random letters that people seem to spout that supposedly tells you everything about them. Are you ISFJ? ENTP? INFP? ESTJ? BXYQ? ASDF? It seems kind of ridiculous after a while, yet a lot of people get really into it and some people make a pretty big deal out of it. I've taken a number of them before, I've been everything from ISFJ to INTP, though most consistently I'm something of an INTP, and I suppose it fairly accurately describes me, but a lot of it seems to something of posturing as well. Honestly, I don't really see how any of this really counts for a whole lot. Certainly it's a form of behavioral sciences to an extent, but simply put it's trying to define us by what we do. I must be an "I" because I am more frequently alone than with other people. I must be an "E" because I enjoy being at the center of attention at times. Sure I think it has its merits, it allows us to understand tendencies and the patterns in which people behave to better help us interact with one another, but honestly, do we really need it?

At what point does it vary from "oh, that's just his/her personality" to being some kind of cop out for a means of behavior? I feel like a lot of times we live in a society where if we can explain something that makes it okay, regardless of the consequences. We live in a society of justification, if you can spout off enough reasons that smatters of legitimacy, if you can convince enough people that your case was something of an exception, or that you were in an extenuating circumstance then anything is permissable then you are always right. If you want it put shortly, we live a society of lawyers. Not to say all lawyers are like that, however, there's that idea that if you can sell your case strongly enough then it's okay, if you can get away with it, it's not wrong. So how does this tie in with a Myers-Brigg assessment? I appear to have deviated onto a major tangent here. To bring it back to my original point, I believe that the more people fall into these "personality" categories the more they pigeon hole themselves into something that they are not. We're a society that likes to label without looking like we're labeling people.

From personal experience I have found that interaction with other people is largely something that is developed. Sure it comes more naturally to some than to others, however, I believe that each person is capable of change. Through the labels of INFJ, ISTP, ESFP, etc... then there creates a sort of boundary. In our attempts to explain ourselves we also devoid ourselves of any reason to change. I believe there is a difference between being accepting of someone for who they are as compared to being a doormat. In any social interaction there is a certain amount of etiquette to be observed, however what these labels successfully do is toss out that etiquette because that's "just who people are". Sure I can buy that, but that doesn't make it okay. For any good thought experiment to work, we need to take it to an extreme, say I'm belligerent by nature and just smack any random person I don't like the look of. That's just the way I am. Doesn't make it right. If that's who I am, and who I am is not right, then I need to change it.

Now before people start bashing me for bashing Myers-Briggs and Carl Jung let me speak in their defense. They are positive for the purposes of self-reflection. In understanding ourselves we can then make that move to improve the areas where we are weaker, to work on being more outgoing if we're introverted, on being more understanding of others feelings if we're more rational and calculating in thought. When it becomes something of, "this is who I am, take it or leave it" I think then that it's a useless label maker that doesn't really do anything except marginalize people.