9 ms·

I would argue that they're all different forms of "maps" and have their uses, but they are not the territory. If you start to confuse the map for the territory

by tailspin2019 5y ago

I would argue that they're all different forms of "maps" and have their uses, but they are not the territory. If you start to confuse the map for the territory then yes they can be limiting in some ways, because you no longer see any features that are not included on the map. And the features that have been included seem more prominent. All we can create as humans are maps for things. Different types of abstractions. And refine them over time as we gain better understanding. But when using these maps it's important to keep in mind that they're just one of many ways of describing the thing you're trying to understand. Myers-Briggs for me was very enlightening, and started me on a journey of understanding how people can be different (led to greater empathy and awareness on my part). I don't walk around classifying people's MBTI type though. Zodiac... not so much. That map is a bit old now!

fastball 5y ago
This is a fair point, though I'd say my main concern is that "confusing the map for the territory" seems to be the status quo with these types of things. As an example of this with Myers-Briggs: I think your MBTI can be helpful if you think of it as "these are the patterns of behavior I naturally fall into, I should try harder to be aware of and use patterns outside my comfort zone in situations where that might be more productive than my default". However, 9 times out of 10 when I actually meet someone who brings up their MBTI in conversation, the way they think about it is more like "I'm an INTJ, X just isn't something I do", where X is something they probably should do but are avoiding because their MBTI is giving them a pass (in their mind). So on balance I feel that "maps" like this do more harm than good, because our human instinct when given such a map is to point to it and say "this bit of territory looks scary so I'm gonna avoid it".
- tailspin2019 5y ago
  Good counterargument to my counterargument :) I think you're right that confusing the map for the territory is by far the default. So in that sense I do agree with the downsides that you're bringing attention to. And as always, it's not so much about the tool but how you use it. If you give a power saw to someone who hasn't used it before and hasn't been remotely trained on how to, then they'll probably end up chopping off a limb. But that's not to say the power saw isn't an incredibly effective tool for achieving a very specific task in the right context. So I can't agree that these maps do more harm than good. It's not as binary as that in my view. Even if maps like MBTI are wrong - there is a lot of meta-understanding that can come from just going through the exercise. Most people go through life not really understanding that other people don't see the world exactly the same way as they do. And we judge people on their external actions alone with, most of the time, very little understanding or empathy as to what beliefs, traits and preferences might exist below the surface that drives their behaviour. The bar is very low even for the best of us in our ability to really understand ourselves and others. So just the process of discovering a map that shows you a different view of the world can be very powerful - even if ultimately the map itself isn't quite right. Without the use of external maps, we create our own internal maps by default anyway - this is just how the brain works. And those maps can have the exact same effect that you're describing. "I believe that I am X and so this is why I can't do Y". But often those maps aren't created with intention, nor are they based on information that is up-to-date and relevant (eg. our limbic system by default wants to pull our default behaviours/actions back towards surviving tiger attacks and hunting for food - this is out of date information encoded in an out of date map). I guess another way to put it, is we're always following a map of some sort. Our default maps (our beliefs about ourselves) aren't as a rule known to be the most accurate either!

fastball 5y ago

This is a fair point, though I'd say my main concern is that "confusing the map for the territory" seems to be the status quo with these types of things. As an example of this with Myers-Briggs: I think your MBTI can be helpful if you think of it as "these are the patterns of behavior I naturally fall into, I should try harder to be aware of and use patterns outside my comfort zone in situations where that might be more productive than my default". However, 9 times out of 10 when I actually meet someone who brings up their MBTI in conversation, the way they think about it is more like "I'm an INTJ, X just isn't something I do", where X is something they probably should do but are avoiding because their MBTI is giving them a pass (in their mind). So on balance I feel that "maps" like this do more harm than good, because our human instinct when given such a map is to point to it and say "this bit of territory looks scary so I'm gonna avoid it".

tailspin2019 5y ago
Good counterargument to my counterargument :) I think you're right that confusing the map for the territory is by far the default. So in that sense I do agree with the downsides that you're bringing attention to. And as always, it's not so much about the tool but how you use it. If you give a power saw to someone who hasn't used it before and hasn't been remotely trained on how to, then they'll probably end up chopping off a limb. But that's not to say the power saw isn't an incredibly effective tool for achieving a very specific task in the right context. So I can't agree that these maps do more harm than good. It's not as binary as that in my view. Even if maps like MBTI are wrong - there is a lot of meta-understanding that can come from just going through the exercise. Most people go through life not really understanding that other people don't see the world exactly the same way as they do. And we judge people on their external actions alone with, most of the time, very little understanding or empathy as to what beliefs, traits and preferences might exist below the surface that drives their behaviour. The bar is very low even for the best of us in our ability to really understand ourselves and others. So just the process of discovering a map that shows you a different view of the world can be very powerful - even if ultimately the map itself isn't quite right. Without the use of external maps, we create our own internal maps by default anyway - this is just how the brain works. And those maps can have the exact same effect that you're describing. "I believe that I am X and so this is why I can't do Y". But often those maps aren't created with intention, nor are they based on information that is up-to-date and relevant (eg. our limbic system by default wants to pull our default behaviours/actions back towards surviving tiger attacks and hunting for food - this is out of date information encoded in an out of date map). I guess another way to put it, is we're always following a map of some sort. Our default maps (our beliefs about ourselves) aren't as a rule known to be the most accurate either!