tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3931921496989071942.post5044207175207680031..comments2023-06-08T07:32:39.725-05:00Comments on Aristotle's Feminist Subject: Your Personality: to Know Language, Your Lover, and the BibleJ. K. Gaylehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07600312868663460988noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3931921496989071942.post-76969198308479400932009-12-14T17:08:19.752-06:002009-12-14T17:08:19.752-06:00Bob, I really appreciate that you've studied s...Bob, I really appreciate that you've studied some of this with someone else who might get it more profoundly. And I do like your last sentence here. As for twos, and splits, and black-and-white -- I'm getting a bit wary. Aristotle's binary was definitely masculinistic, but it can be useful <a href="http://speakeristic.blogspot.com/2007/11/feminist-binary-eleventh-step.html" rel="nofollow">if appropriated appropriately</a>. :) .<br /><br />Katherine, Thank you very much for your comment! Do you blog? You say so much, I'd like to hear more. Thanks for sharing your Myers-Briggs type and for confirming some of your learning experiences and tendencies. You feel comfortable with the guardian and rational temperaments in learning, you say. And I feel very comfortable with the idealist style. It's not my tendency, however. You guessed my MBTI exactly, except I'm a bit more of a T than an F: an INTP, with the P maybe helping me be more of an F, an Idealist many moments of my day. You mention the body of Christ and the needed personalities and ways of knowing. I agree. And I often wonder about Jesus, with two eyes a particular color and a learning temperament a particular style as well. I think he is an NF and perhaps an INFP. Aristotle, I believe, is an ISTJ or perhaps an ESTJ (though Keirsey has him as an NT). <br /><br />Jane, Thank you for stopping by after your conversion with someone else. We do want to hear more, after your interpreting and other important work. Now I have to run, and look forward to more later!J. K. Gaylehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07600312868663460988noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3931921496989071942.post-82735153176747988422009-12-14T03:01:10.846-06:002009-12-14T03:01:10.846-06:00I have to go off and interpret now but the first p...I have to go off and interpret now but the first part of this post is almost as if you had finished a conversation I had with someone about to learn a language - thank you!!<br />More later!Janehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04405344181636487394noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3931921496989071942.post-17072694068586911382009-12-13T19:49:52.124-06:002009-12-13T19:49:52.124-06:00No way you're not an Idealist. :-) The questio...No way you're not an Idealist. :-) The question is, which one? If I were one to bet, I'd put money on INFP. <br /><br />Myself, I'm an INFJ (a follower of "the significant way" in your nomenclature) to a T...well, an F I suppose. I remember doing a lot of this type of learning personality stuff in my time at GIAL. Meyers-Briggs (which I already knew), brain dominance, visual/audial/tactile, etc., and integrating that into an overall category. On the one hand, some of the things that I'm supposed to be drawn towards I can be somewhat indifferent to (group projects and dramatics), but when the necessity of friendly, cooperative, harmonious relationships and setting are mentioned, I have to laugh because it is SO true for me. <br /><br />What made the discussion interesting was the recognition that people can and do develop learning personalities that are sometimes distinct from their own basic personality. I feel comfortable with and am drawn to aspects of the Guardian learning style (memorization, drills, worksheets) and the Rational one too (problem solving, always asking why). I'm also reminded that traditional schooling, at least in the US, leans heavily on certain styles and not others. I think a lot of people's troubles in school have more to do with learning style and less to do with aptitude. <br /><br />Where was I? Oh right, your other question. Sure it affects my knowing. Who I am, who I've become to be; it affects what I notice, what I overlook; what questions I'm always asking and how I ask them, as well as which questions I never bother to ask; what I care about and what I don't; what I consider important and what I find negligible. It's good for me to be the way I am (at least, a healthy version of myself), and at the time time it is good and right that others not be like me. I need others and their "knowing". It takes two eyes seeing and knowing in their distinct but overlapping way for our human bodies to gain some perspective; surely the same (four-eyed?) knowing is needed in the body of Christ, for us to grow into our fullness.Katherinehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00574613265955035061noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3931921496989071942.post-2101648186959317342009-12-13T11:26:52.983-06:002009-12-13T11:26:52.983-06:00The medicine wheel and the division into 4 is some...The medicine wheel and the division into 4 is something I studied briefly in the early 90s with my aboriginal child. I've always enjoyed a simpler rule - that there are two kinds of people in the world - those who divide everything into two finds of thing and those who don't. I am not so sure that four is much better than 2 - maybe 2 times better.Bob MacDonaldhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11335631079939764763noreply@blogger.com