Is There One Word For Each Personality Type? | 10 Min Type Advice | S03:11

www.personalityhacker.com/typ...
In this episode Joel and Antonia respond to a listener’s question about summarizing a personality type with one word.
Take The FREE Personality Test - Discover Your Myers-Briggs Type:
Click here: personalityhacker.com/genius-...
Get The Personality Hacker Book: amzn.to/37JMJVf
DO YOU LIKE WHAT YOU'VE HEARD AND WANT TO LEARN MORE?
Explore our catalog of available educational programs: personalityhacker.com/program...
TAKE THE FREE PERSONALITY TEST:
personalityhacker.com/genius-...
GET THE PERSONALITY HACKER BOOK: amzn.to/32JhvcT
============================
SUBSCRIBE TO THE PODCAST
============================
Subscribe With iTunes
itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/p...
Non-iTunes Link
feeds.feedburner.com/Personali...
Google Play Store
play.google.com/music/listen#...
Download The Android App
play.google.com/store/apps/de...
Subscribe on SoundCloud
/ personalityhacker
Subscribe on Stitcher
www.stitcher.com/podcast/perso...
#PersonalityTypes #MyersBriggs #MBTI #Podcast #PersonalGrowth #SelfHelp #Jung
-

[@TransparentLabyrinth]

I think one word encapsulations are useful in an academic context, where the use of the word comes with a definition in context to establish its intended limitations of use and meaning. The problem that I think you touched on here is when it gets applied casually, you get someone seeing things in association with archetypes, experiences, and just a variety of shifting connotations because language isn't set in stone. For example, a term like Rationals for a type grouping might make sense in a very specific context to describe them, but in a broader societal context, you could see people (and can observe this in some MBTI communities) having a takeaway that NT types are inherently more logical and reasonable, and other types lack in that area. So then, like your inventor example, someone could go "well I'm logical, I can't be a feeler then." So definition along with the word is super important, but this presents a challenge for casual MBTI discussion where you don't want to have to stop to define a word specially all the time, so it's probably easier and more effective to avoid simplistic characterizations unless an academic evaluation is being made and communicated.

[@CourageToLiveTrue]

Keirsey - Temperaments
Esfj Provider, Estj Supervisor, Isfj Protector
Enfp Champion, Infp Healer, Enfj Teacher
Esfp Performer
Nardi -

[@CourageToLiveTrue]

Sp - Esfp Motivator/Presenter
Sj - Guardian/stabilizer
NF - Discoverer/advocate

[@langtran5402]

I would actually go different direction rather than name each type.simply because making more alternatives makes things complex and that simply appears to me as just using logic.The whole purpose is maybe get answer to the classic question "who am I to me" but when it comes down to word personal stuff..it mostly turns to "who am I as other sees" and for me that leads to a lot misunderstanding..and yeah I would rather summerize all types to one classic word a like "will" rather than bring new choices.