5 ms·

I used to think this checklist was misguided. My mental model of improving my rationality was something like acquiring lots and lots of impressive and clever to

I used to think this checklist was misguided. My mental model of improving my rationality was something like acquiring lots and lots of impressive and clever tools and then training myself to apply them in context appropriate places. I've come around to a model much more in line with this checklist though. Something like: 1. Noticing behavioral patterns 2. Thinking hard and doing research on the pattern, whether it leads to good or bad outcomes and whether modifying it is cost effective 3. Using habit formation techniques to modify things 4. Reviewing and reflecting on what is and isn't working for things I have modified using the above steps Old me would have considered this very laborious. You only get to make small changes this way and you aren't guaranteed they work. However, it doesn't take that many real improvements in fundamental counter-productive patterns before the benefits start stacking on top of each other. A few weeks of intense focus on one particular pattern is actually fairly high leverage considering that you can instill habits that will last a lifetime.

themodelplumber 12y ago
Your comment reminded me of the Meyers-Briggs model's concepts of introverted thinking and extraverted thinking. The extraverted thinker (NTJ) seeks out common, objective methodologies, while the introverted thinker (NTP) finds it easier to become comfortable with a more subjective, philosophical approach. You might then expect an INTJ to learn and hold to rules that seem to have authority or at least some critical thinking behind them, and an INTP could be expected to back off and start poking holes in those rules. An important part of INTJ maturity is accepting that their own approach may fall short and examining the basis of other beliefs regarding the system or framework they instinctively favor. Or just learning why the lack of adherence to such a framework might be acceptable. INTJs, for example, are urged to learn about different personality preferences so they don't grow impatient with just about every other type. It's easy for INTJs to wonder why their ENFP friend just won't act logically. In the case of the INTJ, the role of extraverted thinking, commonly called systems thinking, is crucial: It can replace their instinctive (and at times compulsive or otherwise destructive) emotional response to circumstances that make them feel anxiety. So when a more mature INTJ is feeling anxious about a situation or circumstance, they usually fall back on their extraverted thinking to help them examine rationally and build a model around it. Otherwise they might find themselves falling into compulsive behaviors, losing their grip on the situation.
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
- MeadowTheory 12y ago
  You do realize the Meyer-Briggs typology has been abandoned in favor of more meaningful tests? At this point it's basically a scientific-ish version of astrology.
  - andrewksl 12y ago
    Apologies for being off topic, but I, for one, was not aware. Which tests are considered more meaningful?
    - djokkataja 12y ago
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Five_personality_traits http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Five_personality_traits
  - themodelplumber 12y ago
    That comes off as a hand wave, especially considering that it's a model / typology (if you understand the role of a model vs. a theory) and is still used in research. See also Dr. Dario Nardi's neuroscience work at UCLA.
    - briandh 12y ago
      A quick search of Dr. Nardi reveals that he has a financial interest in the MBTI, being the author and/or publisher of many "educational" works on type (see, e.g., here: http://www.radiancehouse.com/psych.htm http://www.radiancehouse.com/psych.htm ). I did not see any peer reviewed journal articles by him on personality in a Google Scholar author search for his name, only books and a single conference paper. Finally, looking at the most recent CV I saw -- http://www.darionardi.com/webcv.html http://www.darionardi.com/webcv.html -- only one of the papers in the "personality" section is actually from a journal, and it is, lo and behold, a Type-centric journal. And half of the conference papers are for the Association for Psychological Type International. As appeals to authority go, he is a poor one.

themodelplumber 12y ago

Your comment reminded me of the Meyers-Briggs model's concepts of introverted thinking and extraverted thinking. The extraverted thinker (NTJ) seeks out common, objective methodologies, while the introverted thinker (NTP) finds it easier to become comfortable with a more subjective, philosophical approach. You might then expect an INTJ to learn and hold to rules that seem to have authority or at least some critical thinking behind them, and an INTP could be expected to back off and start poking holes in those rules. An important part of INTJ maturity is accepting that their own approach may fall short and examining the basis of other beliefs regarding the system or framework they instinctively favor. Or just learning why the lack of adherence to such a framework might be acceptable. INTJs, for example, are urged to learn about different personality preferences so they don't grow impatient with just about every other type. It's easy for INTJs to wonder why their ENFP friend just won't act logically. In the case of the INTJ, the role of extraverted thinking, commonly called systems thinking, is crucial: It can replace their instinctive (and at times compulsive or otherwise destructive) emotional response to circumstances that make them feel anxiety. So when a more mature INTJ is feeling anxious about a situation or circumstance, they usually fall back on their extraverted thinking to help them examine rationally and build a model around it. Otherwise they might find themselves falling into compulsive behaviors, losing their grip on the situation.

deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
MeadowTheory 12y ago
You do realize the Meyer-Briggs typology has been abandoned in favor of more meaningful tests? At this point it's basically a scientific-ish version of astrology.
- andrewksl 12y ago
  Apologies for being off topic, but I, for one, was not aware. Which tests are considered more meaningful?
  - djokkataja 12y ago
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Five_personality_traits http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Five_personality_traits
- themodelplumber 12y ago
  That comes off as a hand wave, especially considering that it's a model / typology (if you understand the role of a model vs. a theory) and is still used in research. See also Dr. Dario Nardi's neuroscience work at UCLA.
  - briandh 12y ago
    A quick search of Dr. Nardi reveals that he has a financial interest in the MBTI, being the author and/or publisher of many "educational" works on type (see, e.g., here: http://www.radiancehouse.com/psych.htm http://www.radiancehouse.com/psych.htm ). I did not see any peer reviewed journal articles by him on personality in a Google Scholar author search for his name, only books and a single conference paper. Finally, looking at the most recent CV I saw -- http://www.darionardi.com/webcv.html http://www.darionardi.com/webcv.html -- only one of the papers in the "personality" section is actually from a journal, and it is, lo and behold, a Type-centric journal. And half of the conference papers are for the Association for Psychological Type International. As appeals to authority go, he is a poor one.