One of our biggest mistakes as humans is classifying people.
We have a jillion labels we use and it makes us feel so very intelligent when we can describe where someone fits in the catalog. The overuse of Meyers-Briggs matrix is an example. You’ll notice when real people take the battery of questions, they become infuriated at how the inventory forces them into neat categories that don’t actually fit. If the Meyers-Briggs inventory doesn’t piss you off, I have serious doubts about your sanity. If you take the results of that test seriously, you’ll never understand how to deal with me.
For example, having introverted tendencies, I am deeply annoyed by people arguing, especially if the argument is petty. At the same time, I am deeply mystical in my general viewpoint on life, so I can steel myself to filter somewhat when I can’t escape the tension. MBT makes zero allowance for mysticism, and summarily rejects the very existence of quantum moral reasoning. You aren’t permitted to be more than one person on the MBT; the variations are pitifully narrow. This makes it as a whole one very ugly lie.
It’s not as if we can’t learn something useful, but it’s so disastrously stupid to take any of it seriously. That falls into the same category with people I’ve tutored who buy into my teaching with far too much enthusiasm. That sort of cathexis is dangerous, and signals a serious moral failure within the student. We don’t run through life announcing that we are Christian Mystics, waving the pennants and wearing the team colors. There’s a place for that, but in our current social structure, people take such things far too seriously.
My wife is on the same team as me. To some degree, a few other close relations tend to act like team members. The sense of identity has nothing to do with all those externals. It has to do with a sense of commitment and calling that transcends our human existence. We don’t classify each other, but strive to actually know each other. It’s the complex interaction of knowing there are certain burdens we share and foibles we accept because that’s what we face here. Unless you live in my presence, you aren’t on my team; you can’t be.
In every social context, I may well have a different answer to different folks asking exactly the same questions about me. Real people don’t fit into neat categories and no amount of effort can make us all mean the same thing by the same questions. Since I can’t see what’s inside their heads, the best I can do is answer according to the whims of the moment arising from how ever much attention I’m paying to my own spiritual nature. I’d love to have a stock answer for everyone, but it just won’t happen. Even if I fully understand the common categories and expressions, using them might be a blatant lie in itself. I often end up asking people to define what they mean, or what sort of answer they seek.
If I sense the encounter is just temporary and holds little consequence, I’ll assume some sort of dramatic persona for their consumption. While the range I choose has to meet my own internal moral tests, it still varies widely. Most of the time, my answer takes the shape of inviting people to think of me as a space alien. I never presume to ask that they not judge me; that’s not a valid request, given human nature. Rather, my point is to warn them that getting to know me might be a challenge.
Reflexively, the only thing I need to know about another person is how God wants me to handle them. This is the quintessential question the Bible teaches about all of our experiences in this life. The primary issue in all things is the moral issue. Western society scarcely recognizes the question, and offers precious little support for the approach. Instead, it often prescribes hostility for such a question. It’s not efficient to operate in quantum moral thinking. However, in quantum moral reasoning, efficiency is a very minor point of consideration. Time is not precious until it is invested; the resources of this world are meaningless outside of moral considerations.
There will be a significant amount of time that seems wasted because there is no apparent return. While that is a factor in what you decide to do at any given moment, you can’t rely on it too heavily. The whole point of discussing quantum moral reasoning is to ensure we don’t limit ourselves to any single channel of operations, but free the soul to chase multiple threads simultaneously. Your contextual response may seem simple to observers, but you can’t afford to throttle down your sense of awareness. If something in the moment draws you far away from the physical context, that’s just one of those things we face as humans. We accept it as our norm.
Human behavioral science is full of useful facts packaged in the most repulsive lie.
