Our latest topic in MIC class is the Myers-Briggs
personality types and how they affect our pastoral ministry. After an hour, I felt like we had a pretty
good grip on which individual personality traits might affect which
behaviors. In one sense, humanity and
all of its intricacies in relationships seemed predictable. That notion, however, was shattered before
the end of class. My class had done a
particularly good job of falling into a major pitfall when it comes to these
sorts of tests: labeling each other and pigeonholing each other into roles we
were not comfortable in or had never experienced before.
Looks like we weren’t as predictable as we thought.
It can be kind of nice and disconcerting for someone to tell
you who you are. I always find
personality tests interesting because they can help me put my finger on some
parts of my personality that I had a hard time understanding. This past summer at CPE, however, my
supervisor’s supervisor was sitting with the five of us and proceeded to go
around the room pointing at each of us and saying, “You’re an extrovert” or “You’re
an introvert.” I wasn’t expecting his
label to bother me, but when he said I was an introvert, I had a pushback. How do you think I am an introvert? Do you not
know me?
I find comfort in the fact that, no matter whether someone
points at you or whatever totals you might score on a test might say, we are
more. It’s not necessarily that we are
totally different (I do have an
introverted side, after all, not too distant from my extroverted side) but that
we are more. We are more than a piece of
paper. We are more than a pointed finger. How cool is that?
Nice article man...Personality tests are useful, but you really hit the problem that we can create with them.
ReplyDelete