The meaning of words for rational and irrational types

Rational and irrational types seem to have different relationships to words. Rational types tend to "trust" words spoken by themselves and others, while irrational types "mistrust" them.

In conversation, rational types seem to pay more attention to words and treat them as accurate indicators of what a person really thinks, feels, and experiences. Irrational types seem not to focus much on words and pay attention to something entirely different. They treat words as approximate indicators rather than accurate reflections of subjective reality.

So, when an irrational type communicates with a rational one, the rational type will try to "latch onto" words spoken by the irrational type and will, in the irrational type's perception, misinterpret what the irrational type was trying to say. If the rational type repeats what the irrational type said, they will actually leave out certain words and end up distorting the message.

I suppose the same is true in the other direction, though irrational types seem less inclined to paraphrase and repeating verbal messages since they are seen as less important. Most likely, the irrational type will look for a way to sum up what was said—something like, "it sounds to me like you're saying X" or "so you're saying that X."

What I've written so far is probably obvious to most readers. But what is the reason for this different attitude towards words?

On the surface it would seem that in rational types the brain's verbal faculties are more closely linked to the subconscious mind than in irrational types. In other words, their words indeed are more accurate indicators of their subjective reality. Because of this, they spend much less energy trying to go beyond words, which is a perpetual interest of many irrational types.

With weaker links between their verbal faculties and the subconscious mind, irrationals feel that words are a kind of smokescreen which needs to be seen through in order to understand what's actually going on. It may be hard for them to fathom that rationals could actually mean what they say.

Another possibility is that irrational ("perceiving") functions are centered in the right hemisphere, while rational ("judging") functions are centered in the left, and that language is, by nature, more a tool of judging than of perceiving. If verbal faculties in all types are mostly centered in the left hemisphere, than rational types would, in fact, have greater verbal access to their "accepting" functions (#1, 3, 5, and 7) than irrational types. In irrationals, signals would have to jump from the right to the left hemisphere to be verbalized, creating an experience of distance between reality and verbalizations of reality.

But, of course, I'm a dilettante in brain physiology, and any neuroscientist would say, "well, it's more complicated than that."

Rationality and Irrationality

When you begin to dig deep in the worldview and perception of rationals and irrationals, you find two very different worlds.

Irrational types

The irrational worldview is accepting of wild, untamed nature. Irrational types perceive themselves to be part of this wild nature which exists outside of any laws, descriptions, ethics, and other bounds on what should or should not be. Irrational types are open to unexpected, spontaneous displays of this reality and feel that they cannot even know what to expect from themselves, as their own nature is wild and untamable just like the rest of reality.

Irrationals are always somewhat skeptical of norms, rules, exact formulations, and conventions, considering them to be an approximation of "wild reality" rather than a form of Truth. They expect that in some circumstances rules and conventions may be superceded or completely replaced, depending on factors that cannot be foreseen.

This worldview is expressed in many different ways in day-to-day behavior:

• placing less importance on completing tasks (since nothing really begins or ends in wild nature)
• less emphasis on making final decisions (since unknown circumstances may affect any situation)
• periods of high activity followed by listlessness and a lack of direction (since changing circumstances may suddenly create ideal conditions for certain activities, and the irrational's psyche is prepared to jump in and exploit these circumstances and "rest up" afterwards)
• more allowance for unforeseen moods and circumstances that may affect interaction and communication; irrationals do not jump into communication without scanning the situation first (since they are not thinking about norms and purposes relating to the situation, but rather their immediate impressions)

Rational types

The rational worldview is skeptical and often fearful of wild, untamed nature. Rational types perceive themselves as being apart from wild nature and trying to introduce order and culture to reality so that people can use it and live in it. Rational types feel that unexpected, spontaneous displays of reality need to be kept in check and altered to suit society's purposes. This includes elements of "wild nature" within people as well. In order to allow for order and effective activity and societal interaction, people need to submit their wild, unpredictable impulses to reason and ethics.

Rationals take norms, rules, formulations, and conventions quite seriously. They do not feel that people should be able to ignore these things on a whim just because they feel like it, since such behavior can potentially lead to a complete breakdown of effective cooperation.

This worldview is expressed in different ways in day-to-day behavior:

• placing importance on completing what has been begun (since this is an expression of man's rational, purposeful nature and creates more order in the universe)
• placing emphasis on the decision making process (another expression of the primacy of reason over wild nature)
• steady, purposeful activity that cannot be interrupted and broken off easily (since the rational makes less provision for the unexpected and does not let himself be easily swayed by unforeseen circumstances)
• less allowance for unforeseen moods and circumstances that may affect interaction and communication; rationals tend to jump into communication without scanning the situation first (since they are basing their initial behavior on norms and purposes relating to the situation rather their immediate impressions)