Recently I took a personality test that has been popular for a while—16 Personalities Test. It is based on the MBTI® (Myers-Briggs Type Indicator) 16 Personalities.
I’m initially tested out as ENFJ personality—Extroversion iNtuition Feeling Judgment. But hold the result for a minute, as I was kind of intrigued to learn the personality types.
The MBTI system uses 4 sectors to test out one’s personality: First, it’s either you have more extroversion or introversion; second, it’s either intuition or sensing; third, whether rely more on feeling or thinking; fourth, either using judgment or perception. So four sectors each two standards, naturally come out with 16 outcomes. However, the percentage of each personality is not equal, some are rare and some are common. For example ENFJ is a rare personality type, consists of around 2% in population.
As you can see around the ENFJ, other rare personality types also share a tiny portion. But as you can see, other big personality types are around 10%, so each one is not a very dominant one in a society. If you divide 100 by 16, it’s 6.25, so it’s not so absurd to exceed or deceed the number some.
And the MBTI test has been controversial awhile now, in 2015, two years ago people have started endless debate and discussions spinal around these 16 personalities. Yet thousands of informative publishers have offered public of commercial study, research and information for them to better understand their own personalities and affairs related.
For now, when people are astounded by the accuracy of the test, it seems many are to believe the selling congenital personality theory. Many mostly young people love to do these tests, for the results could provide them with future planning and relationship, friendship advice.
From my experience and thought-out theory, personality does not base on congenitality.
What a man would become pertains to his after-born acquirements. Values is one of them, and it vastly impacts one’s behaviors, thus, personality.
Personality is like a free space of anything you can do, and values is a set of rules that declares what you can not do. So that it builds up one’s specific personality, and it is also greatly influenced by education, cognition and morals.
I’d say congenitality may in some way work in one’s personality, but from my experience it’s still mostly impacted by after-born events.
A child’s personality matured is before his 14-15, after that, the child’s capability of changing personality is small.
And apart from this, knowing that values pertains to personality then the “future planning” or “relationship advice” should take extra consideration before you jump into others’ conclusions. Because who knows? Values can change over time, maybe next what you believe is not what you believed. Personality would follow the lead too.
That’s it for today, cheers.
Some people argue that nature sometimes makes a difference onto one’s personality, I do on some extent agree on that.
It’s about either nature or nurture, but I am still a firm believer side at nurture.
Parents’ genes on some extent may decide what a child naturally looks like.
So some people propose the idea of 1/3 nature and 2/3 nurture. I’d say it’s a fair equation.
The recent years DNA discovery tells that one’s DNA can be affected by his long term behaviors, environment and some extreme sudden events. Here,the Holocaust Study discovered that trauma from the survivors would pass on to their children as in DNA forms.
The DNA itself has a lot of “switches”, it’ll open itself on certain circumstances, for example, seasons, weather and such, and close itself on some certain circumstances.
This is not physically changing the DNA sequence, but it’s effectively influencing its displaying style, thus substantively impacting one’s status.
So it’s plausible to make changes to your children with determination of life style changing and choices upon a suitable or better spouse in terms of genes.
As you can see from the above personality types pie chart, there’s a distinctive difference regarding on the thinking part.
Here, you can see the common types/big types are all sharing the S standard, meaning, sensing. These people utilize sense as their perception of the world, while the rare types use N, intuition to analyze and understand the world. This is the pure difference that divides population as most people, are emotional beings, whilst a small portion of population is intuitive/rational beings, who utilize reasoning/rationality as their means to depict the world.
Especially regarding on thinking part, here lies my theory. The more similar the values, the closer the people get together. Ideas are the driven force of N people, which on this study case. They are few.