Type & Academia: A Conversation with Dr. Gordon and Richard Owen of the British Association of Personality Type

False Humility: Why Feeling Inferior is All About You

When teaching my students about psychological defenses, most of them often have a pretty good understanding of the superiority complex.  They easily describe the school bully, who enacts a type of superiority in order to mask his sense of inferiority, or the short guy whose inferiority takes the form of a Napoleon complex, or the other “short guy” who has the biggest truck in the parking lot.  They understand that behaving in these superior ways often belies a deeper sense of (real or imagined) inferiority or inadequacy.  To be sure, this is a rather sophisticated understanding of this psychological phenomenon.  An understanding that is in line with Alfred Adler’s original description of the superiority complex: “If we inquire into a superiority complex and study it continuity, we can always find a more or less hidden inferiority complex” (Adler, The Science of Living, Chapter 2, page 2).

However, what is often less well understood is the complexity of the opposing complex: The Inferiority Complex.  When asked about it, my students shrug or guess that it’s another name for the superiority complex.  Indeed, popular descriptions of the two have been conflated.  This is understandable as the above quote on the superiority complex is immediately preceded by Adler’s contention that “We should not be astonished if in the cases where we see an inferiority complex, we find a superiority complex more or less hidden.”  So, these two complexes are reflections of each other and might even be described as two sides of the same coin.  They are similar in that both are egocentric complexes, where one form is generally found to be masking the other and both; however, their manifestations appear quite different.

Popularly the inferiority complex is often described as a type of self-loathing resulting from being compared or comparing oneself to others.  The implication is that this causes the individual to have a devalued (inferior) sense of themselves and/or their abilities in whole or in part.  Yet, this is only a half-understanding of the complex and altogether misses the root of the problem.  Like the superiority complex, where the expression of superiority is understood to be a façade masking a deeper felt (sometimes unconscious) sense of inferiority; the inferiority complex is also a façade that masks a deeper felt (sometimes unconscious) sense of superiority.

How else could a sense of inferiority emerge except from a deep-down sense that one really is (or should be) superior?

While not necessarily evidence of a full inferiority complex, examples of this dynamic are observable when we do things like reject praise we duly deserve, fish for compliments via self-deprecation (e.g., humble-bragging), or portray helplessness in situations in which we have power.

In a society that on the one hand espouses the virtues of humility, while also promoting self-importance, the inferiority complex emerges as one way that we try to reconcile these two disparate ideals.  The problem is that this complex, which at first glance may appear to be aligned with humility, is primarily self-serving and has more to do with narcissism than with true humility.  The ways in which we decry our inferiority only serve to call attention back to ourselves, where we hope others will recognize our true brilliance or lift us up to such a place.  In other cases, our expressions of inferiority serve as a means to abdicate responsibility in our lives – to throw our hands up in situations where acknowledging our power means being held accountable for how, when, and if we use it.  The truth is that having power (in any its many forms, e.g. influence, intelligence, beauty, money, privilege, etc.) while denying it or insisting that it is inconsequential is a veiled attempt at obtaining more of it.

When asked about the difference between an inferiority complex and humility, the monk Radhanath Swami responded, “An inferiority complex is when the (false) ego is frustrated; whereas, humility is when the (false) ego is rejected.”  He goes on to explain that inferiority is often about appearances.  In a society that glamourizes humility, the enactment of humility becomes more important than a true embodiment of it.  True humility doesn’t seek happiness in the recognition of others, and in that way, has no one to feel inferior to.

Be the Mountain -- Guided Meditation (video)

One of my favorite meditations is "The Mountain Meditation" by Jon Kabat-Zinn.  It encourages us to seek inner stability and peace, even in the face unpredictable change and chaos.  

Here is an adaptation of Kabat-Zinn's classic guided meditation, followed by the adapted script below. 

Video Block

Double-click here to add a video by URL or embed code. Learn more

One of my favorite meditations is "The Mountain Meditation" by Jon Kabat-Zinn.  It encourages us to seek inner stability and peace, even in the face unpredictable change and chaos.  

Here is an adaptation of Kabat-Zinn's classic guided meditation, followed by the adapted script below. 

Continue to breathe deeply. 

Bring your awareness to the sensations of your breath, and the gentle rhythm it is creating within you. “Letting it be, just as it is.”  Each inhale and exhale announcing the next.

Expand your awareness to the sensations of your body.  Sitting upright and with dignity – bring your attention to the surface beneath you and the support it provides.  Root your body into its strength and become aware of your connection to it – Complete, whole, and in this moment, you are grounded by its unwavering resolve.

As you sit there, visualize a grand mountain, whose peaks pierce smoky clouds and continue upward where the air is clear and the view is endless.  A mountain with slopes that are both jagged and gentle; supported by a vast foundation, rooted deep in the bedrock of the earth.  This mountain is a monument to all that is solid, grand, unmoving, and beautiful.

Are there trees?  Does snow blanket it lofty heights? Perhaps waterfalls cascading as mist into an open sky? 

However it is – let it be as it is: a perfect of creation.

Be this mountain, and share in its stillness.

Grounded in your posture, your head its skyward peak, supported by the rest of your form, granting you an awe-inspiring perspective of the landscape before you, behind you, and about you, which flows from your center into the distance horizon.

Be this mountain.

And take on its stability as your own.  From the top of your crown, down your neck, and into the balance of your shoulders, like cliffs, descending into your arms and forearms, and coming to rest in the valley of your hands.  

Be the mountain.

Your feet, legs, and hips its base – solid and rooted beneath you – a foundation, extending up your spine and abdomen: A core of stability.

The rhythm of your breath is all that moves you.  A living mountain: alive and aware, “yet unwavering in inner stillness:  completely what you are, beyond words and thought:  a centered, grounded, unmovable presence.”

A mountain, which witnesses the sun travel across the sky, casting light and shadows and colors across its consistent composure.  Moment by moment, in the mountain’s stillness, the surface teems with life and activity:  Snows melt, streams run down its face, trees and flowers bloom and die and bloom again as the wildlife returns and departs with the seasons.

Be the mountain, who will be called beautiful and inspiring, and dark and ominous, and knows that it is all of those things and less.

Be the mountain – which sits and sees how night follows day and back again.  Which knows the sun by the warmth it brings on rising, and the stars by the way they show in a darkened sky.

Through it all, the mountain sits.  Aware of the changes that each moment brings, around it and to it. Yet it remains itself.  Still, as the seasons flow one into the other, and the air swirls from hot and cold, and the weather turns from tame to turbulent.  Some so treacherous as to tear at its surface.

Still - none of this concerns the mountain, whose serenity is housed within, and cannot disturbed by fleeting furor.    

 “In the same way, as you sit in meditation, you can learn to experience the mountain as a means to embody the same centered, unwavering stillness and groundedness in the face of all that changes in your life – over seconds, and hours, and years.”

Like the mountain you will experience the changing nature of your mind and body, and of the world around you.  You will have periods varying in intensity – of darkness and light, of activity and inactively, and moments that fill your life with color.

Through it all, be the mountain, and call on its patient strength and stability within you.  Let it empower you to encounter each moment with mindful composure and compassionate clarity.  

The Purpose of Meditation (video)

I talk about how to start meditating, whether there's any point to it, and tricks of the old masters. 

My Interview with America Magazine: The Evolution of Catholic Masculinity: 15 Questions for Dr. Aqualus Gordon

Find the interview here: http://americamagazine.org/content/all-things/evolution-catholic-masculinity-15-questions-dr-aqualus-gordon 

Decoding Your Myers-Briggs Personality (Part 2): Sensation & iNtuition

When you ask a person: “How do you know that?” you are asking them to draw on their perceptive trait – the second letter of the Myer-Briggs Type Indicator.  This trait drives how we become interested in one thing over the other, and most importantly it determines how we understand and how we explain. 

Sensation is the process of conscious awareness, and iNtuition is the process of unconscious awareness. 

Everyone has some degree of both perceptive traits.  iNtuitive individuals have a Sensing function that is subordinate to their iNtuition, and vice versa.  However, the dominant perceptive trait reflects the primary way a person perceives his/her world.

The perceptive processes are not simply passive in their nature.  They are generative -- helping the individual to formulate understanding and expectation.  Jung said that these traits are not “mere reactive process[es] of no further importance for the object."  He called them, "almost actions, which seize and shape the object...active and creative processes that [must] build into the object just as much as they take out.” 

The Sensation and iNtuition represent fundamental differences in how individuals interpret their environment and how they interpret themselves.  Sensers see the world as it is, and iNtuitives see the world as it might be. It may be because of this fundamental difference that people tend to relate best with others that share their same perceptive trait.  Indeed, the opposite is also true; i.e. iNtuitves may find Sensers too literal and unimaginative, while Sensers may find iNtuitives too abstract and unrealistic.  

SENSATION

Sensers focus on the present, concrete details, and are primarily oriented toward what is available to them through their five senses.

The Sense trait is directly to-do with how an individual perceives present reality to actually exist.  They are concerned with seeing the world as it is, accurately and without affectation.  

"His ideal is the actual, [and] he has no ideals related to ideas.”

Because of this, Sensers are more likely to seek out concrete and (seemingly) definitive ways of understanding things.  They will favor explanations that are grounded in what is provable rather than what "could be." 

For example, a Senser would be more likely to attribute the cause of a headache to skipping breakfast (which is provable) than to stress (which is less provable). 

Regarding individuals with this trait, Jung writes: “Nothing can be more than concrete and actual; conjectures that transcend, or go beyond the concrete, are only permitted on condition that they enhance sensation [or what is real]."

As well, Sensers are more likely to be drawn to things that "appeal to the senses."  That is, things that are objectively and presently appealing, rather than things that are potentially or relatedly appealing. For example, someone with a Sense dominant trait would more likely be interested in buying a well-maintained, furnished house over a promising fixer-upper.

In some cases, when someone with a strong S trait experiences a sensation that is out of line with reality – whether due to their unacknowledged intuition or some type of unconscious desire – Sensers may insist that their subjective perception is the objective truth.  This is a type of projection -- a defense mechanism.  Consider a painter, who after a frightening encounter with an unfriendly dog, produces a painting of the dog as snarling and foaming at the mouth with oversized teeth and beady eyes.  The Sensing painter may well insist the depiction is a true to form: an objective and unexaggerated account.  When in truth, the dog likely appeared far less menacing. The Senser’s intuition about the dog has unconsciously influenced what he believes to be an objective understanding.  

INTUITION

If the role of Sensation is to "discover the realities" of the objective situation, then the role of iNtuition is to "discover the possibilities" of that same situation.  iNtuition helps us see beyond the literal data of our objective sensations.  It is responsible for our ability to make connections, predict, and understand things outside of what is immediately evident. 

Jung notes that while the iNtuitive does have sensations, she “is not guided by them per se, merely using them as directing-points for [her] distant vision.” 

Unlike the Senser, the iNtuitive is oriented by this expanded vision, rather than by what arouses the strongest physiological sensation.  Instead, the iNtuitive is directed towards sensations that are expanded by her unconscious knowledge and attitudes. 

For example, a woman with a strong iNtuitive trait might be drawn to a particular dress that appeals to her because it (unconsciously) reminds her of her mother, or perhaps some other fond association.  That is to say, the dress has not stood out in an objective sense – e.g. the dress is the brightest, best cut, most popular, least expensive, etc. 

In many cases the iNtuitive will be unaware of the many of the contingencies driving their interest, since much of the related content may be unconscious to them or at least "subconscious."  In these cases, when the iNtuitive woman is asked why she like a particular dress, she may believe that her interest is based on (objective) sensations (i.e., “I like it because it’s the most beautiful") or she may be unclear as to specific source of her interest, and simply acknowledge: “I don’t know; I just liked it.”

In this way, you might call iNtuitives less connected to the present situation, focusing not on what is immediately in front of them, but instead bringing-to-bare an unconscious culmination of their past experiences, which is overlaid into their initial perception of reality in order to predict its course or envision the whole.  

“The intuitive is represented by a certain attitude of expectation: a perceptive and penetrating vision, wherein only the subsequent result can prove, in every case, how much was ‘perceived-into’.”

This, of course, has its draw-backs, as attending to "what could be" often defers attending to "what is."  This type of looking to the future can also bring with it a persistent dissatisfaction with things as they are.  As Jung notes, “because his eye is constantly ranging for new possibilities, stable conditions have an air of impending suffocation.”

-----

Both traits have their strengths and their weaknesses.  Sensation helps us to see things objectively, as they are in the present.  While, iNtuition helps us to see beyond what is obvious and envision what might be.  They are not unlike the rods and cones in our eyes, whose similar and yet specialized functions enhance and complement one another.

In Jung's view, the complementary relationship in these traits is transpersonal in nature – helping the whole of humanity achieve balance between “what is” and “what might be.” 

---

Do the descriptions above match your experience being a Senser or an iNtuitive?  If so/not, let me know by comment or tweet. 

In Part 3, I'll talk about the third letter of the Myers-Briggs, the Judging traits: Thinking and Feeling.

Decoding Your Myers-Briggs Personality (Part 1): Extroversion & Introversion

Introduction: Carl Jung and the Myers-Briggs.

The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) has become one of the most popular personality tests around.  Thousands, if not millions, of people have taken some version of the psychological assessment based on the findings of Carl Jung.  Some of these sites offer credible descriptions of the overall personality types, they rarely provide any information about the individual personality traits and their interactions with one another.  So, here I skip descriptions of the sixteen Myers-Briggs types and instead focus on the eight individual traits that make up each the Myers-Briggs types. 

(If you are looking for a resource that offers good descriptions of each of the personality types, this one is my favorite: https://www.personalitypage.com/html/portraits.html  )

Before going on, I should make clear that for the purposes of this article I will refer to the full MBTI results (e.g. ENTJ, ISFP, etc) as TYPE; I will refer the individual letters that make up a type (i.e. E or I, N or S, F or T, J or P) as TRAITS; and I will refer to the interaction between traits (e.g. extraverted-intuition or Ne) as FUNCTIONS.

The traits and functions associated with the MBTI were described in 1921, in Jung’s work Psychological Types.  In it he suggests that differences in personality are biologically innate and represent fundamental (rather than superficial) ways that human character varies from individual to individual. He goes on to describe the evolutionary benefits of this type of variability within any given population, making the case that our diverse characters have been vital to the advancement of humanity.

Extroversion & Introversion

The first two traits Jung discusses are the EXTROVERT and the INTROVERT.  The original distinction between the two goes deeper than whether or not a person enjoys a lively party.  Jung described extroversion and introversion as the “general attitude” of a person.  It describes how an individual is generally oriented in the world – towards the objective (in the case of the extrovert) or towards the subjective (in the case of the introvert).  This general attitude will also affect how the other personality traits are felt and expressed.

The extrovert is defined by a dominant orientation toward the outside, objective world.  The extrovert’s direct and immediate attention is drawn toward things external him, and in extreme cases may altogether disregard his own subjective experience.  In this way, he can be blind to his own well being and the effect that he has on others.  For the extrovert the world consists primarily of the things directly in front of him.  Jung writes, "[the extrovert's] consciousness looks outwards to the world, because important and decisive determination always comes to him from without.  But it comes to him from without only because that is where he expects it."

By contrast, the introvert is defined by a dominant orientation toward the internal, subjective world.  The introverts direct and immediate attention is drawn first toward their subjective experiences, and in extreme cases may altogether disregard the objective reality of what is happening.  As Jung put it, “the introvert interposes a subjective view between the perception of the object and [her] own action, which [may prevent] the action from assuming a character that corresponds with the objective situation.” If the extrovert’s blind-spot is his disregard for his effect on the world around him, the introvert’s blind-spot is her disregard for objective reality in favor of their subjective experience of it. 

This difference in external or internal orientation tends to have a noticeable impact on the behavior of extroverts as compared to introverts.  Extroverts tend to find it relatively easy to tune into their immediate situation and adapt to it; however, introverts tend to find these same settings taxing, as it requires them to engage the external world with little time to “interpose a subjective view.”  Conversely, extroverts may become easily bored or uneasy when their external world offers them little to interact with – for instance when they are alone.  This is because for the extrovert, turning his attention inward may be as taxing to him as a lively party would be to an introvert. 

Another way of saying this is that extroverts engage in the outside world with relatively little direction or effort; while introverts engage in their internal world in this same way.  The result is that extroverts may appear to be more social, reckless, connected, and impulsive; whereas, introverts may appear to be more reserved, thoughtful, aloof, and measured.   

As I tell my students: “Introverts prefer to look before they leap; Extroverts just leap.” 

In the next part, I'll explain the differences between the differences between Sensation and iNtuition.  In the mean time, let me know how your experiences of Introversion or Extroversion.