Hello everyone!
Welcome to the MindFacets blog! Here I will be discussing the investigation I have been doing into personality typing and how the mind works. As some of my friends and acquaintances know, I have been compiling this kind of information for a while, and I will be sharing parts of it here.
Where I’m coming from
I started learning about personality type theories since 1998, and the ones that sparked my interest were Carl G. Jung’s Personality Types, and the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI). Millions of people take the MBTI® every year, you may have seen it or one of the other similar type systems, which I call “16-type models”. In this school of thought, there are 16 personality types, and as an example, mine is INTJ, which stands for Introverted, iNtuitive, Thinking, and Judging, and you can find profiles of the types on sites like http://typelogic.org.
In 1998, I came across a brand new school of thought created by Tim Miller, tentatively called the Miller Cognitive Systems Inventory (MCSI), which aims to add some more layers of depth and also remedy some issues some people have with the MBTI and other 16-type models. I explored these ideas with Tim Miller and a few others until around 2001, and then for the last 8 years, I have been working further to refine my understanding of the mind while integrating other systems of thought, in the fields of psychology, cognitive science, and philosophy.
My formal education background and work experience is software engineering, which involves making technical sense out of very complex and sometimes chaotic computer programs. People often think that is a long way from personality, but since the mind is in many ways such a computer, I have found the world of software very helpful for relating to how the mind organizes and processes information. Just as there are different styles of processing or “thinking” in a computer program, individuals also have a preferred way of thinking, and a personalized toolbox of mental tricks that they reuse over and over. In this regard, architecting software and reverse-engineering the mind (a goal of personality psychology, cognitive psychology, and cognitive science) are similar in many ways. Since the comparison to computers may sound cold and robotic, I also should mention that I also believe emotion is very closely linked to these styles of thought, and individualized personality.
Soft vs Hard Science and Descriptive vs Definitive Models
Personality models often tend to be very descriptive. This can be good – personality described in practical terms is often more easy to apply to in real life. But when the goal is to understand more about the workings of the mind, understanding based on descriptions can be weak if it lacks specificity. When descriptions of personality are too easy to relate to and everyone can be fit into every category to some extent, and things become muddled.
I believe the 16-type models like the MBTI can be a valid and meaningful categorization of people’s personalities, especially as applied by its experts with one on one consultation. I believe that it captures a part of our identities and a facet of a primary type preference that does not change throughout our entire lives.
However, in day to day practice, when 16-type quizzes are applied as an unofficial self-assessment, they have a reputation for being somewhat wishy-washy, subject to tainting by several factors such as environment or mood or momentary preferences, and this leads to questionnaires producing different type results, raising concerns of validity, reliability and usefulness.
Another concern is how personality profiles can be vague and tend towards charicatures and stereotypes that, while useful rhetorically, are oversimplifications that always leave all people out some of the time, and some people all of the time. Talented authors may be able to capture the essence of each type, but since it is descriptive, it is very hard for people to hold this rich understanding in their minds. Since it is not something concrete that can be pinned down, like mathematics, it is a difficult topic to discuss or apply with specificity and confidence.
My hope is that the field of personality typology can be advanced by making it more rooted in specific definitions rather than descriptions, and in concrete mechanisms rather than general patterns of behaviour. I hope to see answers to the questions of how we think and emote, in terms of the style of our personality, and where the multifaceted nature of our personalities come from, and this blog exists to be an exploration of these topics, as does the open forum.
Preview of Upcoming Blog
I am not sure where this will go, and want it to be explorative and influencable by the whims of me and whoever might read or discuss. Feel free to email me questions or start discussions in the forum. If there is interest in a topic, I may move more in that direction.
On the other hand, there are already several advancements in theoretical models of personality and how the mind works, I believe, and I would like to bring them up here, starting with a different perspective of the 8 Jungian function-attitudes, which I believe are very interesting, important, and satisfying for understanding both personality types and how the mind works.
I would also like to describe the MCSI, which adds a great deal of important understanding of the structure of human personality, although I have agreed to hold off on publishing anything myself until the originators of that model get to publishing their information.
Here is a rough list of avenues that I may go down at some point:
-
Intro to Personality vs Temperament, and the angle I take to understand people
-
Workings of the mind: The building blocks of thought styles
-
Personality Structure: Where does our multifaceted nature come from?.
-
Personality Dynamics: the Mixing of personalities
-
Emotion: How thought and emotion intertwine
-
Deep Logic & Philosophy: Flows of information, Abstracting logic
-
Science: Validity of personality models, Approaches and Biases in Personality Psychology
-
Applying Personality to Specific Topics: Relationships, Software Engineering, Politics
-
Discussions of Existing Models: Socionics’ ‘j/p’ vs MBTI’s ‘J/P’ and other arbitrary categories
Fast Track to Understanding
If some of the first entries seem short and to the point, it is because I want to get you up to speed in the fastest time possible. These ideas have their value in how they empower you to understand people, so my goal is to empower you as quickly as possible in this blog, and leave more flowery discussions and examples for a later time better suited to pondering with more verbosity.
What’s Next:
I will start with a brief discussion of personality vs temperament, so that we know what I mean by personality. After that, I will begin a series on the simple building blocks of thought, that, once assembled, constitute what we can recognize as personality type.









