- Type: TiNe
- Development: l--l
- Attitude: Adaptive
I like this. I think @faeruss captured more of my sentiment in this. But also something else — “whose to say what is better?” — for example, a certain kind of Je-lead (Tony Robbins) may see it as self-work and self-growth to rise up to challenges, have unlimited power, and make a success of your life. Another certain Je-lead may find they’re a workaholic and their growth path revolves around relaxing their rigidity; indeed, engaging the P axis. They may go to yoga & meditation after work every day.
If “self-work” means working on aspects that are “what we least want to do” / our weaknesses.. presumably to achieve some balance, then I would retract my original statement and say that all types can equally do this.
If “self-work” means attaining a better state of acceptance and equanimity, then often the Ekhart Tolle route (P-lead) is idealized, and J-ness is opposite to that.
If “self-work” means stop being lazy, adopt a responsibility, make an impact, do something with your life — then the Je route is idealized.
This is why I started the post saying I’m not a moralist, as I see it from a relativistic light. The idea of “self improvement” is vague and one can say many opposed paths are routes of improvement, depending on what view is held as central. All I can say for sure is that humans ‘are’. They do things. 🙂 Wonderful, fascinating and horrible things.
p.s. – There’s also the l— angle to this which is not talked about enough. To me there’s a beauty in the l— development, a kind of “true to the original self” aspect to it. I can easily see someone idealizing the l— state as a kind of “be you” mode, which can be self-improvement if one is trying to undo the influences of culture or forced over-modulations.
But I’m curious to hear what others have to say, @umbilicalsphere too yes, if he shows up.