Neat post. I enjoy this topic too! The thing I find most useful about books and information on personality types/profiles, is the conversations and understanding it opens up about ourselves and those around us. I find this of value at this point in my life, having recently "de-similated" (is dat a word?) and trying to figure out who the hell "I am" or where I want to go from here. Personally, I don't like being pinned down to one "type" and wouldn't presume to do that to anyone else. It has been my experience that people are generally not static or stationary like dat. I've changed a lot and continue to. I relate to many personality "profiles" and find that the best use for these is simply as a tool for exploration...and maybe some understanding.
IMHO and based on human nature I have felt that people tend to romantisize there own perceived personality type.
What gives you this impression? Are they romanticizing their perception of themselves? Or could you perhaps be cynicizing your perception of them? Or perhaps its a combo of both based on neither one fully understanding the subject/person in question?
I am interested in this from the standpoint that perhaps what we perceive as our personality type may not be how we come accross to others?! Has anyone experienced this? For example two people recently called me a romantic and I have always felt myself to be more of a realist.... Or perhaps our generalization of personality types causes us to automatically miss out on opportunities to relate to diverse or opposite personality types?
Your suggestion that "what we perceive as our personality type may not be how we come accross to others" sounds bang on to me. For example, I'm curious, how do you define "realist"? I've actually wondered about "realists", does a realist see their view of a given situation or person as "the way it is"?
I jest, and I agree it isn't very realistic at all to expect any two people to look at any one person with entirely the same opinion or perspective. I totally agree with you that generalizations and labels can really skewer the real issues at hand. Especially since hardly any two people would agree on the definitions of said labels or generalizations.
I know of a person who considers themselves a thinker or introspective type - but this person comes accross as one with a barely concealed rage and very opinionated but attempting to control it with a distate for those who are not necessarily more opinionated but more comfortable expressing or discussing opinions. I think this person takes there self imposed personality type a little to far and tries to stifle natural diversions into other personality types tendancies that this one finds negative. One person seems to be passive aggressive and comes accross as believing that it is better to subtly or not so subtly be argumentative and then not stick around for the debate or discussion...and then blame it on the other individuals conversation style or personality type...Have you told this person (or these people, i'm a little unclear as to how many people you are refering to here) of your judgement(s) of them or their behavior? On what standard do you base your judgement(s)?
Do you think that someones conversation style can be different than there personality type or is it all linked or situation dependant?
I'm no expert, but I'll take a wild stab at it. I think conversation style and personality "type" are two different things although they may have some influence on each other. I think both are impacted by varying elements of any given situation. I think both have a lot to do with skill, training and "evolution" or "adaptation" if you will, of the individual in question.
Love,
SPAZ