Jung and Gardner Theory
The Psychological Type Theory (PTT) of Jung consists of the orientations (extraversion as opposed to introversion) and the functions of “thinking, feeling, intuition and sensation” to be defined for a person (Crellin, 2014, p. 14). Thinking is opposed to feeling; intuition and sensation form another pair of opposed features (Seel, 2012). Thinking presupposes rational thinking or perception, feeling describes the value, intuition represents potentiality or possibility, and the sensation is “the empirical function giving awareness of events in the field of experience” (Crellin, 2014, p. 14). The functions demonstrate the way a person approaches and perceives the world. One of the functions is dominant, and another one is least valued by a human, but each of them has its advantages or, rather, specific features that can be used to the advantage. The combination of these functions is what allows one to define the type of personality according to Jung’s typology.
Howard Gardner was not acquainted with this typology, and he suggested the “theory of multiple intelligences” that resembled the PTT to an extent but did not include the intuition (Beebe, 2012, p. 61). It has been suggested that Gardner chose not to include intuition because the Western scientific society tends to devalue it. For this report, however, all the elements of the comprehensive PTT will be used to make an attempt describing the strengths of the three participants.
The theories of Jung and Gardner have been developed and dwelled upon. The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator is the popularized test, which is based on the typology described above (Crellin, 2014). The same can be said about the “Five Factor Model” and the “Sixteen Personality Questionnaire” (Seel, 2012). Nowadays, a number of websites offer PTT-based tests, and the 16personalities website is one of them (NERIS, 2016). This site was used to complete the tests and facilitate the analysis in this report.
Three Top Strengths of the Participants. Similarities and Differences
One of the advantages of the mentioned site and its questionnaire lies in the fact that it reports the percentage of the answers that indicate a particular orientation or function. For example, I am 63% thinking rather than feeling. Such an approach corresponds to Jung’s idea of a balanced personality (Crellin, 2014). Upon completing the test, I agreed with its results. It also indicated the domination of intuition over sensation in my case. The least dominant function in my results is sensation (29%), and I have to admit that I am relatively unobservant. Apart from that, I am more introverted than extroverted (68%). The three greatest strengths that I would pick for my personality include my analytical and abstract thinking, my imagination, and objectivity.
Two other participants are my closest friends. One of them (P2) is a highly extroverted person (83%) with the feeling as the dominant function (72%) and intuitive function dominating over the sensing (59%). Naturally, P2 is a very friendly person who is good at communicating. These strengths are defined by the extraverted orientation of P2. As a third strength, I would point out the tolerance and belief in humanity, which are caused by the domination of feeling (value) and, perhaps, intuition as well (with possibility and belief dominating over observation results). According to NERIS (2016), the third participant (P3) belongs one of the most “populous” types: introverted rather than extroverted (62%), sensing rather than intuitive (69%), and thinking rather than feeling (64%).
I have to agree that P3 is practical, reliable, and capable of establishing and maintaining the order of things. I suppose that such characteristics stem from the combination of the two functions and the orientation. Thinking predomination, for example, must have an influence on all the strengths; the lack of intuition leads to the fact that P3 values order over spontaneity. Also, P2 and P3 could be described as complete opposites, which might explain the fact that they are not getting along very well. From what I have observed, I believe that their conflicts stem from the focus of the P3 on order and the lack of order in the life of the P2. Apart from that, I have to admit that P3 would not consider belief in humanity to be a strength. These are not the only reasons, but they appear to have an influence on their relationships.
Theory Significance and Uses: A Conclusion
To put it simply, PTT was created to help people understand themselves. A balanced approach to oneself is the way to harmony, and this is the primary aim of this test (Crellin, 2014). Apart from that, it appears that it can provide a better understanding of other people. Finally, by realizing the strengths and weaknesses, a person can put the former to use and attempt to eliminate the latter or reduce their negative effects.
For example, in my studies, I can use and develop my tendency to think objectively analyze a problem from various perspectives, especially abstract ones. At the same time, knowing that I am not too good at sensing and observing, I can either pay more attention to this aspect when it is necessary or stay away from the work where it is required to avoid letting anyone down. The understanding of personality should also be considered when choosing one’s profession and, especially when organizing the working or team learning process. For instance, P3 will be good at organizational issues while P2 is best suited for interpersonal communication, and all of these strengths can be put to good use by a manager (team leader) when needed.
References
Beebe, J. (2012). Psychological Types in Freud and Jung. Jung Journal, 6(3), 58-71.
Crellin, C. (2014). Jung’s theory of personality. Hove, East Sussex: Routledge. Web.
NERIS. (2016). 16 Personalities.
Seel, N. (2012). Encyclopedia of the sciences of learning. New York, NY: Springer. Web.