Talked for few min relating to the question. Proceeds to say “I forgot what your question was” 😂😂I love the authenticity I be like that too sometimes
@hirsch41553 жыл бұрын
Cultural context has soo much influence on interaction style it’s true. People underestimate it. There’s a lot of suppression going on and this is one reason for it.
@hanjesse313 жыл бұрын
@08:59 i was thinking about that. I read a bit about Jung's concept of ''collective unconscious''. Jung believe that ''the self'' is form by those traits that we inherited rather than formed by personal experience. I haven't read much about it though and how he came to that conclusion or if he believes that the psychological functions are entirely inborn and we react to the environment throught those inherited traits.
@hanjesse313 жыл бұрын
And the ''twin studies''also came to mind
@hirsch41553 жыл бұрын
@@hanjesse31 I think it’s explained pretty well in the video by Berens.
@hanjesse313 жыл бұрын
@@hirsch4155 yes it is. Mrs. Berens explain the concept well. I was just thinking the Jung concept of ''collective unconscious'' when she was explaining ''the self'' or the core.
@hirsch41553 жыл бұрын
@@hanjesse31 Yeah it’s interesting , it also makes me think of epigenetics, like inherited modulations of how our DNA expresses. Is the developed self subject partially to the interplay between the collective unconscious and these modulations ? I have trouble getting my head around it. Are you Ni-dom?
@hirsch41553 жыл бұрын
Would be interesting to interview two people of the same interaction style but different lead functions to see how they navigate goals (or what results they want and if they’re actually the same), whether in a relationship, professional setting etc.
@JoyceMeng223 жыл бұрын
Great idea, @EJ Hirsch!! I will tackle that topic in future videos. 🙂
@user-zi3lq9uw9r3 жыл бұрын
@@JoyceMeng22 Yes, thank you for this video! It would be really interesting to see the 4 MBTI types that fall under each interaction style to see how it manifests in them differently. Thank you again :)
@sirbradfordofhousejones3 жыл бұрын
That was an excellent video- Linda is so humble and insightful. I really enjoyed hearing her perspective on how her type didn’t change, but that she grew as a person. Beautiful.
@polishmeow82983 жыл бұрын
Having Linda Berens as your guest. This is awesome! ❤ 47:07 Yes, I love more information! Linda is right, your Catalyst self is showing. You're a great host, Joyce!
@JoyceMeng223 жыл бұрын
💕 Awww. Thanks, @Polish Meow!
@zindazed Жыл бұрын
Joyce just couldn't stop herself from the avalanche of compliments for the legendary Linda😅. thanks so much for this very much informative interview. it was magnificent really
@bluejjay3 жыл бұрын
Thank you for making this happen Joyce!I have always found Linda Berens' interaction styles to be one of the most highly observable attributes when self-typing. Self-typing is often hard and biased, but I thought it was instantly obvious to see whether I'm initiating/responding, or direct/informative, when taking into account my years of childhood and times of adapting to work environments. I do wonder about the matrix, instead of Keirsey's temperaments, how compatible the interaction styles would be with OPS concepts, such as single decider/observers. What I find interesting is that each interaction style only has either one single decider, or one single observer, and I wonder if these typed are then exceptional in some way in their respective interaction styles.
@hirsch41553 жыл бұрын
I had never heard of Linda Berens until today so thanks. I like the four categories of stabilizer, improviser, theorizer, catalyst. I think this could be useful in life coaching. For example, If an improviser is unsure of a direction to take then a catalyst could come in handy rather than a stabilizer. Conversely if theorizer is brilliant but too much in their head then a stabiilizer could be of help in grounding them and keeping them on a straight path. Also I think catalysts could benefit from a theorist coach. Higher knowledge and levity for their restless souls.
@VeggieJohnx2 Жыл бұрын
Linda to Joyce after Joyce’s many words of affirmation, “Your Catalyst is showing.” lol. Brilliant.
@neugroove61723 жыл бұрын
This was a very well articulated framework. This model IMO, exposes OPS in terms of how it types. I’ve always made the case that under the video requirements, some people will give you the contextual self, and not the core self. Therefore some people are being typed incorrectly. Thanks for reintroducing Linda’s work.
@mamu79763 жыл бұрын
Wow, Linda Berens and Joyce on the same show. 2 psychology stars! Amazing!
@JoyceMeng223 жыл бұрын
Wow, such high praise! Thank you, @Ma Mu!
@baaf7772 жыл бұрын
Great interview Joyce! Wondering why it took me about a year before finding this golden nugget at KZbin.
@JoyceMeng222 жыл бұрын
Glad you feel that way. 🙂 Linda is truly a gem in the community!
@shan_hart Жыл бұрын
Love this interview. Thanks to Linda and yourself for providing much clarity on the Styles and Motivators. It’s huge for self reflection and understanding. ✨
@malindaeckert23003 жыл бұрын
so dope you have Linda Berens!❤️
@BenVaserlan3 жыл бұрын
I'll watch this, share it on my channel put it in playlists. Well done, Joyce, for getting her on. :)
@JoyceMeng223 жыл бұрын
You're a gem. :D Thanks!
@BenVaserlan3 жыл бұрын
@@JoyceMeng22 Thank you for your kind words. BTW, I've sent you a message suggesting a video you could do. :)
@JoyceMeng223 жыл бұрын
@@BenVaserlan Sure! I will check Telegram.
@BenVaserlan3 жыл бұрын
@@JoyceMeng22 :)
@VeggieJohnx2 Жыл бұрын
This is amazing! Learning about the different overlapping layers, as well as our core parts that contribute to type. The nature and nurture facets that contributes to all the nuances of an individual is fascinating. Thank you for sharing.
@VeggieJohnx2 Жыл бұрын
The topic was touched upon briefly. I would love to hear more about it.
@TraumaType3 жыл бұрын
That’s pretty amazing you got Linda Berens on
@godmode36112 жыл бұрын
Comment No. 70. It is indeed a magnificent contribution to the typing community. Unfortunately a lot of people don't know it, or use it and are quite lost. A lot of mistyping come from not using this.
@diannarowlands37843 жыл бұрын
Without the intp ability to bring forth new information and theory to the personal development of ourselves, a beautiful, amazing young lady like you would not be able to help others to recognize gifting and talents.
@TheSnugglery3 жыл бұрын
YES! I love this theory!!
@rimasoosamir8167 Жыл бұрын
The queen herself
@westcoastswingmusic2 жыл бұрын
Thanks for this wonderful interview with a pillar of the typology community.
@drtonymilton26842 жыл бұрын
Thanks alot for this amazing video. It's full of knowledge and wisdom. I admire this amazing woman Linda Berens so much I wanna be wise like her when I grow up
@danilles.42473 жыл бұрын
Loved loved loved everything about this Joyce. Thank you for putting this on my radar, can't wait to dive in
@JoyceMeng223 жыл бұрын
🤍🤍 Enjoy, Danille!!
@kairostimeYT Жыл бұрын
30:50 Reaction*
@jasmin17733 жыл бұрын
Thank you Joyce, I just recognized that I'm often disatisfied with conversations I had, and knowing how I "work" was a big win:). Happy new year and greetings from Germany!
@malakashraf28013 жыл бұрын
You helped more than you think , thank you
@Alazsel3 жыл бұрын
Thank you Linda for being so earnest and informative to the viewers. Zeitgeist is such a lovely term to explain the Spirit of the times. I liked how you tracked the zeitgeist of our recent times in your other presentation. OK I'm about to ask something controversial - what doyouthink about the new temperament theory EJ, IP, EP and IJ? Does it have a chance or is it just goobly goop?
@PowerRedBullTypology3 жыл бұрын
What is new about temperament theories of such groups? Which one?
@Alazsel3 жыл бұрын
@@PowerRedBullTypology Well, Objective Personality calls it the 4 human needs / Frank James calls it the 4 temperaments / cognitivetype.com calls it the 4 energetics. But essentially they all refer to EJ IP EP IJ as a new way of dividing the 16 types into 4 groups. In terms of their psychological needs/aim.
@PowerRedBullTypology3 жыл бұрын
@@Alazsel Oh thanks, I see! I did not know this sort of classification is considered new. It seems that if any of such classifical obeys to a logical structure, they are expected to have things in common and it basically almost can not be a nonsensical way of looking at it. However, to me any way you can look at a thing is valuable (but that may be my Ne that likes this).
@PowerRedBullTypology3 жыл бұрын
@@Alazsel IS what Frank James says about it the same as OPS?
@Alazsel3 жыл бұрын
@@PowerRedBullTypology yeah FJ pretty much repeats OPS; tribe/ self/ gather/ organise. While cognitivetype.com is following; utility/ alignment/ novelty/ predictability. In the order of EJ IP EP IJ once again.
@ashleywagner86503 жыл бұрын
What a wonderful and helpful conversation! Thank you, as always, Joyce (and Linda!) ☺️
@kev_ty3 жыл бұрын
Yay Linda! (Hi Linda)
@JoyceMeng223 жыл бұрын
Hi Kevin! :D
@kev_ty3 жыл бұрын
@@JoyceMeng22 :D
@hadisesadat38393 жыл бұрын
Why we can't have Direct, initiating, movement (instead of control) or informative, responding (instead of initiating), movement for interaction styles? For example.
@sandradibiaso73163 жыл бұрын
I am a control informative behind-the-scenes type. Only in my shadow and demon can I become direct.
@bradyconlon95693 жыл бұрын
Algorithm comment. Looking forward to watching this one.
@actionchaplain13 жыл бұрын
At least 2 out of 3 met, say it: 1. Is it true? 2. Is it necessary? 3. Is it kind?
@DonnaMakesArt3 жыл бұрын
BLM and BLT was gold 💖
@sirbradfordofhousejones3 жыл бұрын
“The voice of God” 😂 😂 😂 Your Fe isn’t just showing, it’s booming