Hi Mira,

Your comments on the person accused of schizophrenia were very
helpful, thanks. Regarding personality tests ...

On Aug 18, 2008, at 5:54 AM, mirah@... wrote:
> Regarding personality tests, I don't believe in them, but I see
> nothing
> wrong with people who do believe in them taking them.

My problem with personality tests might best be exemplified by looking
what one reviewer states in his review of "Please Understand Me" at
Amazon:

> I am an INTJ, and always wondered why everyone wasn't like me. Well,
> it turns out that I make up less than 1% of the population, and this
> book was a great help in helping people to understand me, but also
> in giving me the information I need to realize that everyone is
> different, and everyone needs to be understood in a different
> manner. What might make total sense to an INTJ, might really hurt
> someone else's feelings. And getting passionate about an illogical
> point in an arguement completely backfires when dealing with someone
> like me.
http://tinyurl.com/5qrw5f

The person is clearly using the test to validate himself. Also, all
other behavior is hereby validated (within some limit, I suppose) by
people's personality.

I'm okay, and you're okay.

The problem is, we shouldn't need a test to validate ourselves. We
should be able to achieve self-validation without the intermediary aid
of an expert, or a tool designed by an expert. Plus, if we feel
dissatisfied with ourselves or with another, maybe there's a good
reason for that!

Interestingly, the reviewer notes the example of someone making an
"illogical" point. If someone clearly makes some statements that don't
follow logically, it seems useful to point that out, but now he's not
going to do anymore if the person he's dealing with is a different
type than him. Let me pause and shudder for a minute here. (Of course,
old fashion manners might dictate when pointing out logical errors is
inappropriate anyway.)

So summing up at least two problems with personality tests:
1. We shouldn't rely on tests for expert validation of some sort.
2. We should deal with issues on an ethical level not a psychological
level. (That doesn't sound right, I guess I mean we should just avoid
psycho-babble.)

Best,
Matt Dioguardi