Showing posts with label Keirsey. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Keirsey. Show all posts

Monday, August 10, 2009

The Mating Game: Rationals and Idealists

Sorry I've taken so long to post this. I can blame two distractions: children (need I say more?), and the discovery of another personality scholar, Dr. Katherine Benziger. I've been delving into her book and ideas, and I can't wait to share her findings-- very exciting stuff! But for now, here's the post about personality theory I've promised...




I remember when I was young, maybe 11 or 12, how I used to imagine what my "soulmate" would be like. I used to walk through my day, speaking to him in my mind. I used to pretend that he was just outside the window, and that he could hear my thoughts. Naturally, I imagined that he was responding to my needs perfectly. And I intuitively "knew" that I'd know him when I found him.

For Idealists (members of Keirsey's Idealist temperament, or those with NF in their Myers-Briggs personality type), the soulmate bond is more than having common interests, more than enjoying time spent together, more than a chemical attraction, even more than best friends. A soulmate is one's other half. When together, they create a whole. They are part of each other. Once found and devotion confessed, they would be together forever. With undying commitment. Always keeping each other as first priority. (I'm sure you Idealists are vigorously nodding your heads right about now, while others of you are thinking "whoa! I'd be suffocating"...)

And, I always believed (since girlfriends and movies and books all seemed to provide sufficient evidence) that everyone wanted the same thing from their mate. Right??

Wrong!-- wow-- I had no idea how wrong I was!

The truth is that all personality types (Idealists, Rationals, Guardians, and Artisans) are mostly "self" centered. That is, although we recognize that others have different interests, beliefs, and values, we tend to assume that others basically think the same way we do. If we aren't aware there are other ways of seeing the world, what else can we think, really? For example, don’t we all want to be loved? And, we know what that means, right?

Again, wrong! Let's take a look at Idealist and Rational pairings.

Idealists seek "soulmates," while Rationals seek "mindmates."* The Idealist soulmate connection is based on a deep spiritual bond, the search for wholeness, and the merging of two individuals. In contrast, the Rational mindmate connection is based on shared interests, the search for truth, and the connection of two independent individuals. For an Idealist, the bond "is" and always will be, because both partners choose it to "be." For a Rational, the connection is only as real as it is objectively present at any given moment. So, for an Idealist the bond is formed at the start. Subsequent positive interactions simply reinforce that they are soulmates, and negative interactions are brushed off as the imperfection of human nature. Whereas, a Rational uses objective observation to determine whether a relationship achieves mindmate status, and subsequent interactions may reinforce or nullify the bond (clearly they allow for everyday rubs, but the overall belief in the bond is more transient.)

So, what happens when an Idealist and a Rational come together?

This is where things get interesting. They have a common preference for abstract language, so communication feels easy. So easy in fact, that I propose that (thanks to self centered thinking) the Idealist believes that he/she has found another Idealist who is remarkably grounded and has figured out how to translate visions into reality (in other words, a super Idealist!) And the Rational believes that he/she has found another Rational who has mastered the uncomfortable realm of emotion (in other words, a super Rational). Interestingly, I found a theory online called the "Grand Miscommunication Theory" (by IgaNoKami). He rather succinctly sums it up as thus (I changed his terminology to match "Rational" and "Idealist"):
It is my theory that within the relationship between the (Rational) and the (Idealist), there is a grand accident that lends itself to compatibility between the two types.

The (Rational) is most happy when allowed to rationally examine, explore, and explain his motivations and self-analysis and observation to an intimate partner. This is simply because the (Rational) loves self exploration, loves to gather knowledge and insight into his own actions, not for the sake of emotional discovery, simply out of a sense of curiosity and need to analyze and collect data.

The (Rational) unemotionally and detachedly explains why he or she thinks in a certain way - that is what (Rational)s are best at, observation, particularly of themselves - and the (Idealist) then thinks that they are opening up to them, and becomes moved and emotionally attached to the (Rational). The (Rational) sees that their observations are being received and interesting to the (Idealist), so they continue.

A fascinating relationship between two types. A relationship of total mutual miscommunication, the motivations are completely different, but with a reinforcing result. The (Rational) feels the closeness and intimacy of being able to share their scientific self-analysis, and the (Idealist) feels that the (Rational) is sharing their innermost thoughts, feelings, and emotions, and so the cycle of miscommunication keeps them locked together in a positively reenforcing relationship.
And neither is the wiser until the Idealist becomes confused by the Rational's focus on achievement, and the Rational feels uncomfortable with the Idealist's focus on connection. It is then that the two must recognize and accept that their basic fuel for a relationship is different, and that the other will never truly fulfill the concept of mate that each values. In other words, the Idealist is not a mindmate and the Rational is not a soulmate.

So, does that mean we should mate with someone of our own temperament? Not necessarily. Most often, it is our differences that attract us to another. For good reason. Each personality type has strengths and weaknesses. One's strengths can complement the other's weakness. It is easy to see how "self" centered thinking would lead to confusion and misunderstanding between the two mates.

Some lucky couples do find an amazingly compatible mate to share their life with. But for the majority of us, once the romantic love phase of a new relationship fades, we start to experience rubs. And then we start launching our own Pygmalion Projects, each attempting to reform the other into a person more like ourself. Since, naturally, we all believe that our aim in life is the most valuable for everybody. But, as Keirsey points out, others cannot adopt our goals without violating their own character. The key to success, I believe, is maturity, a willingness to learn how others think, and a willingness to embrace others' values as equally valid as our own.

Personality theory experts tell us that any type pairing can be successful. Certainly, any two mature, well adjusted adults can learn to meet each others' needs and make a marriage work. But interestingly, studies have shown that there is a pattern to mating. Keirsey spent 40 years "people watching," and he has documented clear patterns in mating. By far, the most common marriage is between an Artisan and a Guardian. Not surprising, given that Artisans (SPs) and Guardians (SJs) comprise 85% of the population (according to Keirsey). And, though it's difficult for the relatively rare Rationals (NTs) and Idealists (NFs) to find each other, there is a significant frequency of Rational-Idealist marriages. I won't get into the explanation here, but Keirsey has a clear theory about why these pairings occur. It has to do with the preference for abstract vs. concrete use of language (N vs. S), and the preference for using tools in a cooperative manner to pursue goals (SJs and NFs) vs. using tools in a utilitarian (or most effective) manner to pursue goals (SPs and NTs.)

So whether your spouse is an Artisan searching for a playmate, a Guardian searching for a helpmate, an Idealist searching for a soulmate, or a Rational searching for a mindmate, any pairing can be successful. And learning how another sees the world can be a wonderful, lifelong, grand adventure!

(*Guardians seek "helpmates," and Artisans seek "playmates.")

Monday, December 1, 2008

Single (the second in a series about relationship...)


(image from: uic.edu)


I'm finally adjusting to being single. Woo hoo!

Now, you can lower those raised eyebrows-- I'm not talking about my marital status! I'm talking about my sense of self. You see, unlike most people, I did not come into this world alone. I am a twin-- I have a twin brother. Since my first cell divided I have been with another. My first night sleeping outside the comfort of mom's womb, I was not alone. I was never just "me" in school-- I was "one of the twins" (kinda like "Seven of Nine"… ha!) So, it has shaped my sense of self in an unusual way.

When I first started dreaming of falling in love and getting married, I assumed that Mr. Right and I would have such a close bond that we would effortlessly know each other. I think my vision of a mate went beyond the typical best-friend and soulmate ideas, because I already knew what living as part of a pair entailed.

My brother and I were always together when playing. We helped each other throughout development. He made me laugh when I got frustrated. I pushed him around on a wheeled giraffe when I was first to walk. He fixed broken toys for me, I helped him with his homework. We often finished each other's sentences. And, to the frustration of my sisters, we frequently communicated nonverbally across the dinner table, laughing at unspoken jokes.

As we grew into the teenage years, we drifted apart, had different friends and different interests. I developed a strong, stable, healthy individual self. But my vision of a soulmate was already formed.

To make matters worse, I am an "Idealist" personality type. As Keirsey says in Please Understand Me II, Idealists are unique in their approach to mating. The other temperaments are realistic-- they assume their mates to be fallible. But Idealists look for "more than life partners in their mates-- they want soul partners, persons with whom they can bond in some special spiritual sense, sharing their complex inner lives and communicating intimately about what most concerns them: their feelings and their causes, their romantic fantasies and their ethical dilemmas, their inner division and their search for wholeness. Idealists firmly believe in such deep and meaningful relationships-- they will settle for nothing less-- and in some cases they try to create them where they don't exist." (Does this sound familiar those of you who are also Idealist types?)

Yep. That's what I did. But as I'm growing and experiencing life, I'm learning that such idealism does not lead to true intimacy. It can be taken too far. As much as an idealist would love to have a mate who fits their vision exactly, it is not reasonable or realistic. An idealist's vision of how things should be, can frustrate or even stifle others in their lives.

I've learned that for two to become one, they must first be two complete individuals. The early stages of a relationship feel like oneness, but that is fantasy. When a couple first falls in love they lower all internal boundaries and experience the feelings of merging with each other. Lovers often say that he/she "completes me". But this is not true oneness. True oneness can only develop over time. And the prerequisite is two complete people, each able to do all that relationship requires (according to Drs. Cloud and Townsend in Boundaries in Marriage ): give and receive love, be responsible, be independent and self-sufficient, live out values honestly, have self-confidence, deal with problems and failures, live out their talents, and have a life. My initial vision of a soulmate looked more like the merging of two incomplete people (very romantic, but not healthy!)

So, for the first time in my life I'm drawing boundaries around my "self" so that I can assess where I need to grow to become a more complete individual. It's exciting! I'm rediscovering the core of my self that is independent of any connections or relationships (a rather large task for me-- see part one). As I strengthen her, I will have more to give to others. And that is the basis for a true soulmate relationship!

Thursday, September 25, 2008

Personality talk, part 4



So, now you have discovered your "type" (go back to Personality Talk, part 2, if you are just joining us). The description is remarkably resonant with you. You are amazed that someone else has described you so accurately. (If you don't feel this way, you probably haven't found your true type yet-- keep searching!)

Now what? Obviously, knowing one's strengths and weaknesses is essential to set goals for personal growth, defining a self identity, and understanding why there are patterns in your behavior. I had fun discovering how much of "me" is related to my personality type. But I also had a surprise discovery. When I started reading about other types, I learned that there are ways of thinking or reacting to the world that I would never have conceived on my own (and I thought I had a pretty good understanding of people….)

In 1978, David Keirsey published Please Understand Me (and twenty years later, Please Understand Me II). He divided the 16 types (which he also ascribed descriptive names) into four Temperaments based on observable behaviors and viewpoints. Keirsey's four Temperaments are:

SP Artisans
(ISTP-crafter, ISFP-composer, ESTP-promoter, ESFP-performer)

SJ Guardians
(ISTJ-inspector, ISFJ-protector, ESTJ-supervisor, ESFJ-provider)

NF Idealists
(INFP-healer, INFJ-counselor, ENFP-champion, ENFJ-teacher)

NT Rationals
(INTP-architect, INTJ-mastermind, ENTP-inventor, ENTJ-fieldmarshal)

As an INFJ, I read the Idealist description and found myself nodding. Jason, an INTP, felt a resonance with the chapter about Rationals. The beauty of Keirsey's book is that he demonstrates the contrasts between temperaments in simple, but very effective ways. For example, in his chapter on mating he observes that each Temperament has a different style or goal in what they want from a mate. Artisans want a playmate, Guardians want a helpmate, Idealists want a soulmate, and Rationals want a mindmate. Here are a few more traits of each temperament for comparison:

Artisans
value being: excited
aspire to be: virtuoso
trust: impulses
seek: stimulation
yearn for: impact
self-esteem comes from being: artistic
feel confident when being: adaptable

Guardians
value being: concerned
aspire to be: executive
trust: authority
seek: security
yearn for: belonging
self-esteem comes from being: dependable
feel confident when being: respectable

Idealists
value being: enthusiastic
aspire to be: sage
trust: intuition
seek: identity
yearn for: romance
self-esteem comes from being: empathetic
feel confident when being: authentic

Rationals
value being: calm
aspire to be: wizard
trust: reason
seek: knowledge
yearn for: achievement
self-esteem comes from being: ingenious
feel confident when being: resolute

Wow! Now we can begin to understand each other better! No wonder Jason looks at me like I'm a dork when I say things will work out because "I just know they will." I trust intuition, he trusts reason. And you can just imagine how my yearning for romance and his yearning for achievement play out… ;) My parents are both Guardians, so Jason and I now understand when their trust of authority clashes with our points of view. And, gosh, I thought everyone knew what having a soulmate means... man, was I wrong! Learning how differently people view life has helped me understand others' behaviors, values, and motives when they differ from mine. As a typical idealist, I've always wondered why we can't all just get along. Now I've got some tools… mwah, ha, ha, ha… (remember, I am a counselor!).

Let me know if there are questions you'd like me to answer or ideas you'd like me to address in a future post about personality type.

(on to part 5)
(back to part 3)