What do you think?
Rate this book
Me, Myself, and Us: The Science of Personality and the Art of Well-Being
How does your personality shape your life and what, if anything, can you do about it? Are you hardwired for happiness, or born to brood? Do you think you're in charge of your future, or do you surf the waves of unknowable fate? Would you be happier, or just less socially adept, if you were less concerned about what other people thought of you? And what about your "Type A" is he or she destined to have a heart attack, or just drive you to drink? In the past few decades, new scientific research has transformed old ideas about the nature of human personality. Neuroscientists, biologists, and psychological scientists have reexamined the theories of Freud and Jung as well as the humanistic psychologies of the 1960s, upending the simplistic categorizations of personality "types," and developing new tools and methods for exploring who we are. Renowned professor and pioneering research psychologist Brian R. Little has been at the leading edge of this new science. In this wise and witty book he shares a wealth of new data and provocative insights about who we are, why we act the way we do, what we can -- and can't -- change, and how we can best thrive in light of our "nature."Me, Myself, and Us explores questions that are rooted in the origins of human consciousness but are as commonplace as yesterday's breakfast conversation, such as whether our personality traits are "set" by age thirty or whether our brains and selves are more plastic. He considers what our personalities portend for our health and success, and the extent to which our well-being depends on the personal projects we pursue. Through stories, studies, personal experiences, and entertaining interactive assessments, Me, Myself, and Us provides a lively, thought-provoking, and ultimately optimistic look at the possibilities and perils of being uniquely ourselves, while illuminating the selves of the familiar strangers we encounter, work with, and love.
284 pages, Kindle Edition
First published April 1, 2012
336 people are currently reading
5971 people want to read
About the author
Brian Little
32 books146 followersDr. Brian Little is an internationally acclaimed scholar and speaker in the field of personality and motivational psychology. His pioneering research on how everyday personal projects and ‘free traits’ influence the course of our lives has become an important way of explaining and enhancing human flourishing. Professor Little is currently at Cambridge University where he is a Fellow of the Well-Being Institute and Director of the Social Ecology Research Group in the Department of Psychology. He is also affiliated with the Cambridge Judge Business School and the Psychometrics Centre at Cambridge.
Previously, he taught at McGill, Oxford, and Harvard Universities. His course on personality in Harvard’s Department of Psychology was immensely popular, and he was elected as a ‘Favourite Professor’ by the graduating classes of Harvard for three consecutive years.
Dividing his time between Canada and the UK, Brian is also a Distinguished Research Professor Emeritus at Carleton University in Ottawa and he lectures world-wide on personality, motivation and well-being.
Previously, he taught at McGill, Oxford, and Harvard Universities. His course on personality in Harvard’s Department of Psychology was immensely popular, and he was elected as a ‘Favourite Professor’ by the graduating classes of Harvard for three consecutive years.
Dividing his time between Canada and the UK, Brian is also a Distinguished Research Professor Emeritus at Carleton University in Ottawa and he lectures world-wide on personality, motivation and well-being.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 159 reviews
February 9, 2017
I'm a reluctant convert to personality theory. This book won me over.
I began this book rather skeptical that personality was still relevant as a psychological construct. And for good reason. The personality construct (as we traditionally understand it) has been under assault from all directions for the past several decades or more.
Social psychology demonstrates that people's thoughts, feelings, behavior and even perceptions are largely mutable depending on the social and cultural context.
Environmental psychology demonstrates that environmental factors such as the organization and design of public spaces exert analogous effects on our thoughts, feelings, perceptions and behavior.
Neuroscience indicates that the "mind" is an emergent property of the brain, and that brain structure and function is subject to ongoing use dependent change (neuroplasticity) occurring throughout the lifespan.
These (and many other) findings, taken as a whole erode the notion of personality as fixed "thing" originating exclusively from within the individual and alternatively engender a view of the self as a context dependent, dynamic process.
I hardly ever refer to personality in my clinical work or personal life. In fact I steer as clear of characterological explanations for behavior as possible.
I prefer instead to explain behavior as an outcome of species typical evolutionarily conditioned biological factors, shaped by the individual's learning history and occurring within a particular social, cultural and environmental context.
So where does that leave the idea that people have these (ghost in the machine) immutable qualities we call personality. The very notion seems rather antiquated and naïve. Is it time to trash the whole notion of personality and start over. Or is there anything in there that we can salvage.
Me Myself and Us does a more than respectable job of plucking personality from the dumpster by hipping the reader to what's happening now in the world of contemporary personality psychology.
Additionally Me Myself and Us is chock-a-block full of groovy as hell shorthand abstractions (cognitive tools) useful for deciphering the otherwise mysterious dealings of persons of the human variety.
Contemporary personality psychology abandons the Jungian notion of fixed personality types, in favor a system of dynamic personality traits.
These traits tend to be fairly stable (on average) across the life span, but they are also quite flexible and can be adapted to the demands of the situation.
THREE SOURCES OF PERSONALITY:
The author cites three sources of personality traits: 1.biogenic, referring to the aspects of our personality best accounted for by (innate) biological factors, 2. sociogenic, referring to the aspects of our personality best accounted for by (learned) social and cultural factors, and 3. idojenic, referring to the aspects of our personality best accounted for by (idiosyncratic) individual factors such as personal values, goals, projects and commitments.
Number 3 (idojenic) is not as self explanatory as 1 and 2, so I will take a moment to explain.
An example of an idojenic (free) personality trait would be an introvert who projects an extroverted self image as an aspect of a job requirement e.g. an actor or club promoter.
For instance, I'm an introvert and a university lecturer, this means that I have to get in front of large crowds of easily board young people and talk about psychology. If I were monotone and cerebral, it would put my students to sleep. I have had to learn how to be lively and even (at times) entertaining. According to Dr. Little, I'm a pseudo extrovert when I am in front of my students.
My students are often surprised to hear that I'm an introvert. But I am. I have simply adapted my personality to meet the demands of the situation. People do it all the time. Think nerdy, cerebral Al Gore. Not exactly a natural public speaker, yet he rocks a slide show like it ain't no ones business.
The term counterdispositional behavior, refers to times when people behave "out of character" or counter to their typical disposition. My idojenic pseudo extroversion behavior is an example of counterdispositional behavior.
Of course there is more to contemporary personality theory than introversion/extraversion.
THE BIG FIVE:
The five-factor model (FFM) divides personality into the following five broad domains; 1. openness to novelty 2. conscientiousness regarding personal commitments and the feelings and welfare of others 3. extraversion referring to an individual's level of gregariousness 4. agreeableness referring to an individual's level of assholishness and 5. neuroticism referring to an individual's baseline anxiety, worry, fear ect.
SELF MONITORING:
High Self Monitoring (HSM) vs Low Self Monitoring (LSM) refers to the individual's trait sensitivity and responsiveness to social factors.
HSM and often behave in a manner that is highly responsive to social cues and their situational context. Conversely LSM tend to exhibit behavior that is congruent with their own beliefs, attitudes, and dispositions regardless of social circumstance.
Each self monitoring style has its up and down side: LSM's can be unconscious and boorish, while HSM's are more likely to be all sensitive (in the good way) to the needs and perspectives of others. However, LSM's are not afraid of healthy conflict, while HSM's are apt to avoid conflict at all costs.
LOCUS OF CONTROL:
locus of control refers to the extent to which individuals believe are in control of the events affecting them. A persons locus (location) of control is conceptualized as either internal (the person believes they are primarily in control of their life course) or external (meaning they believe their life course is primarily controlled by external factors which they cannot influence).
Individuals with an internal locus of control believe events in their life derive primarily from their own actions: for example, when receiving test results, people with an internal locus of control tend to praise or blame themselves and their abilities. People with an external locus of control tend to praise or blame external factors such as the teacher or the test.
White conservative American men tend to have internal locus of control, viewing the mythical rugged individual as the lone architects of their own destiny (e.g. Tea Party). Where as white liberal American men tend to have an external locus of control blaming everyone and everything (except themselves) for their (patchouly stinkin, drum circling, pot smelling) lot in life (e.g. Occupy Wall Street).
TYPE A and B PERSONALITY:
Of course no book on personality would be complete without reviewing type A and B personality theory. The theory describes two contrasting personality types (type A and B) and their relationship to the likelihood of developing coronary heart disease.
Type A
The theory describes "Type A" individuals as ambitious, rigidly organized, highly status-conscious, sensitive, impatient, take on more than they can handle, want other people to get to the point, anxious, proactive, and concerned with time management. People with Type A personalities are often high-achieving "workaholics" who multi-task, push themselves with deadlines, and hate both delays and ambivalence.
Type B
The theory describes "Type B" individuals generally live at a lower stress level and typically work steadily, enjoying achievement but not becoming stressed when they do not achieve. They may be creative and enjoy exploring ideas and concepts. They are often reflective.
As most of us are aware, type A run the higher risk of coronary heart disease. But few people understand precisely why this is the case.
High stress is often assumed to be the important factor. But it's not.
As it turns out, Type A behavior is expressed in three major symptoms: 1. free-floating hostility, 2. time urgency and impatience and (3) a competitive drive, which causes stress and an achievement-driven mentality.
Out of the three, hostility turns out to be the killer. And the reason why is absolutely fascinating.
Apparently there are two types of high blood pressure. Type 1 is brought about by increased heart rate. This type is not necessarily damaging. Type 2 is brought about by contraction of blood vessel diameter.
It turns out that the hormone oxytocin (the cuddle hormone), associated with bonding and relational connection, dilates the vascular system, decreasing the damaging effects of stress.
This lends credence to what we all already knew. That being in the company of supportive loved ones reduces the feelings of distress experienced in high stress situations.
High hostility folks tend to have lowered ability to reach out and feel connected with others and subsequently run a bit lower in the oxytocin department and are therefore high in the tic tic tic kaboom department too.
THE PERSON IN THE ENVIRONMENT:
One of the really fun and surprising parts of the book is the section on the intersection of personality psychology and environmental psychology. The interaction between environmental and personality factors is only lightly touched on. But it is so dang fascinating I wish Dr. Little would wright another book devoted to the subject.
There's much much more. But I don't want to spoil the whole book. So I strongly encourage you to get this thing if you're feeling even remotely sparked. I doubt you'll regret it.
WHY GIRLS LIKE FLOWERS:
About ten or so years ago I was working a blue color job. My boss picked a half rotten flower arrangement out of the trash, stuffed them in a cheesy vase that he stole from the job site, and sent me in a truck to give them to a girl he was wooing. On my way out he said "ask her not to chuck the vase when she's done with it, I want it back". What a douche right? He's actually a wonderful guy but that wasn't his best stuff.
Anyway.
On my way there I was feeling positively mortified. I had met the girl before and not only was she a knockout, she was classy to boot. I was sure she would recognize that the flowers were junk and toss them right back in my face in a kind of Cleopatra kills the messenger type of scene.
When I showed up with the trash flowers she absolutely light up. She loved them. And her girlfriends at work were swooning over them too. Wow. Really? That shit worked. Unbelievable.
When I returned, I asked my bros why they thought girls liked to get flowers so much. They all got really irritated. One of them angrily barked "they just do". Another impatiently added "it's because the flowers are like them". I got confused. "They like to get things that are like them" I retorted, "why in the world do they want that". I wasn't intentionally being difficult, it's just that the explanation didn't make sense to me. Another guy chimed in with the classic, "flowers just say I care". I said I already knew what 1-800-flowers had to say about the situation. But I wanted to know why girls actually liked getting flowers.
I never did figure out why girls like flowers so much. But I did realize that I had vastly different needs than my work buddies when it came to explaining and understanding human behavior. So I quit my job and began my formal studies in psychology. It was a really good move.
This book reminds me why I wanted to study psychology. It's just so darned satisfying when you finally get good explanations for human behavior, and as I mentioned earlier, this book is chockablock full of them.
I found that all of the shorthand abstractions in the book contributed quite a bit to my understanding of people and (more importantly) why (exactly) they do the crazy shit they do, and why they are the crazy way they are.
Five stars!!!!
I began this book rather skeptical that personality was still relevant as a psychological construct. And for good reason. The personality construct (as we traditionally understand it) has been under assault from all directions for the past several decades or more.
Social psychology demonstrates that people's thoughts, feelings, behavior and even perceptions are largely mutable depending on the social and cultural context.
Environmental psychology demonstrates that environmental factors such as the organization and design of public spaces exert analogous effects on our thoughts, feelings, perceptions and behavior.
Neuroscience indicates that the "mind" is an emergent property of the brain, and that brain structure and function is subject to ongoing use dependent change (neuroplasticity) occurring throughout the lifespan.
These (and many other) findings, taken as a whole erode the notion of personality as fixed "thing" originating exclusively from within the individual and alternatively engender a view of the self as a context dependent, dynamic process.
I hardly ever refer to personality in my clinical work or personal life. In fact I steer as clear of characterological explanations for behavior as possible.
I prefer instead to explain behavior as an outcome of species typical evolutionarily conditioned biological factors, shaped by the individual's learning history and occurring within a particular social, cultural and environmental context.
So where does that leave the idea that people have these (ghost in the machine) immutable qualities we call personality. The very notion seems rather antiquated and naïve. Is it time to trash the whole notion of personality and start over. Or is there anything in there that we can salvage.
Me Myself and Us does a more than respectable job of plucking personality from the dumpster by hipping the reader to what's happening now in the world of contemporary personality psychology.
Additionally Me Myself and Us is chock-a-block full of groovy as hell shorthand abstractions (cognitive tools) useful for deciphering the otherwise mysterious dealings of persons of the human variety.
Contemporary personality psychology abandons the Jungian notion of fixed personality types, in favor a system of dynamic personality traits.
These traits tend to be fairly stable (on average) across the life span, but they are also quite flexible and can be adapted to the demands of the situation.
THREE SOURCES OF PERSONALITY:
The author cites three sources of personality traits: 1.biogenic, referring to the aspects of our personality best accounted for by (innate) biological factors, 2. sociogenic, referring to the aspects of our personality best accounted for by (learned) social and cultural factors, and 3. idojenic, referring to the aspects of our personality best accounted for by (idiosyncratic) individual factors such as personal values, goals, projects and commitments.
Number 3 (idojenic) is not as self explanatory as 1 and 2, so I will take a moment to explain.
An example of an idojenic (free) personality trait would be an introvert who projects an extroverted self image as an aspect of a job requirement e.g. an actor or club promoter.
For instance, I'm an introvert and a university lecturer, this means that I have to get in front of large crowds of easily board young people and talk about psychology. If I were monotone and cerebral, it would put my students to sleep. I have had to learn how to be lively and even (at times) entertaining. According to Dr. Little, I'm a pseudo extrovert when I am in front of my students.
My students are often surprised to hear that I'm an introvert. But I am. I have simply adapted my personality to meet the demands of the situation. People do it all the time. Think nerdy, cerebral Al Gore. Not exactly a natural public speaker, yet he rocks a slide show like it ain't no ones business.
The term counterdispositional behavior, refers to times when people behave "out of character" or counter to their typical disposition. My idojenic pseudo extroversion behavior is an example of counterdispositional behavior.
Of course there is more to contemporary personality theory than introversion/extraversion.
THE BIG FIVE:
The five-factor model (FFM) divides personality into the following five broad domains; 1. openness to novelty 2. conscientiousness regarding personal commitments and the feelings and welfare of others 3. extraversion referring to an individual's level of gregariousness 4. agreeableness referring to an individual's level of assholishness and 5. neuroticism referring to an individual's baseline anxiety, worry, fear ect.
SELF MONITORING:
High Self Monitoring (HSM) vs Low Self Monitoring (LSM) refers to the individual's trait sensitivity and responsiveness to social factors.
HSM and often behave in a manner that is highly responsive to social cues and their situational context. Conversely LSM tend to exhibit behavior that is congruent with their own beliefs, attitudes, and dispositions regardless of social circumstance.
Each self monitoring style has its up and down side: LSM's can be unconscious and boorish, while HSM's are more likely to be all sensitive (in the good way) to the needs and perspectives of others. However, LSM's are not afraid of healthy conflict, while HSM's are apt to avoid conflict at all costs.
LOCUS OF CONTROL:
locus of control refers to the extent to which individuals believe are in control of the events affecting them. A persons locus (location) of control is conceptualized as either internal (the person believes they are primarily in control of their life course) or external (meaning they believe their life course is primarily controlled by external factors which they cannot influence).
Individuals with an internal locus of control believe events in their life derive primarily from their own actions: for example, when receiving test results, people with an internal locus of control tend to praise or blame themselves and their abilities. People with an external locus of control tend to praise or blame external factors such as the teacher or the test.
White conservative American men tend to have internal locus of control, viewing the mythical rugged individual as the lone architects of their own destiny (e.g. Tea Party). Where as white liberal American men tend to have an external locus of control blaming everyone and everything (except themselves) for their (patchouly stinkin, drum circling, pot smelling) lot in life (e.g. Occupy Wall Street).
TYPE A and B PERSONALITY:
Of course no book on personality would be complete without reviewing type A and B personality theory. The theory describes two contrasting personality types (type A and B) and their relationship to the likelihood of developing coronary heart disease.
Type A
The theory describes "Type A" individuals as ambitious, rigidly organized, highly status-conscious, sensitive, impatient, take on more than they can handle, want other people to get to the point, anxious, proactive, and concerned with time management. People with Type A personalities are often high-achieving "workaholics" who multi-task, push themselves with deadlines, and hate both delays and ambivalence.
Type B
The theory describes "Type B" individuals generally live at a lower stress level and typically work steadily, enjoying achievement but not becoming stressed when they do not achieve. They may be creative and enjoy exploring ideas and concepts. They are often reflective.
As most of us are aware, type A run the higher risk of coronary heart disease. But few people understand precisely why this is the case.
High stress is often assumed to be the important factor. But it's not.
As it turns out, Type A behavior is expressed in three major symptoms: 1. free-floating hostility, 2. time urgency and impatience and (3) a competitive drive, which causes stress and an achievement-driven mentality.
Out of the three, hostility turns out to be the killer. And the reason why is absolutely fascinating.
Apparently there are two types of high blood pressure. Type 1 is brought about by increased heart rate. This type is not necessarily damaging. Type 2 is brought about by contraction of blood vessel diameter.
It turns out that the hormone oxytocin (the cuddle hormone), associated with bonding and relational connection, dilates the vascular system, decreasing the damaging effects of stress.
This lends credence to what we all already knew. That being in the company of supportive loved ones reduces the feelings of distress experienced in high stress situations.
High hostility folks tend to have lowered ability to reach out and feel connected with others and subsequently run a bit lower in the oxytocin department and are therefore high in the tic tic tic kaboom department too.
THE PERSON IN THE ENVIRONMENT:
One of the really fun and surprising parts of the book is the section on the intersection of personality psychology and environmental psychology. The interaction between environmental and personality factors is only lightly touched on. But it is so dang fascinating I wish Dr. Little would wright another book devoted to the subject.
There's much much more. But I don't want to spoil the whole book. So I strongly encourage you to get this thing if you're feeling even remotely sparked. I doubt you'll regret it.
WHY GIRLS LIKE FLOWERS:
About ten or so years ago I was working a blue color job. My boss picked a half rotten flower arrangement out of the trash, stuffed them in a cheesy vase that he stole from the job site, and sent me in a truck to give them to a girl he was wooing. On my way out he said "ask her not to chuck the vase when she's done with it, I want it back". What a douche right? He's actually a wonderful guy but that wasn't his best stuff.
Anyway.
On my way there I was feeling positively mortified. I had met the girl before and not only was she a knockout, she was classy to boot. I was sure she would recognize that the flowers were junk and toss them right back in my face in a kind of Cleopatra kills the messenger type of scene.
When I showed up with the trash flowers she absolutely light up. She loved them. And her girlfriends at work were swooning over them too. Wow. Really? That shit worked. Unbelievable.
When I returned, I asked my bros why they thought girls liked to get flowers so much. They all got really irritated. One of them angrily barked "they just do". Another impatiently added "it's because the flowers are like them". I got confused. "They like to get things that are like them" I retorted, "why in the world do they want that". I wasn't intentionally being difficult, it's just that the explanation didn't make sense to me. Another guy chimed in with the classic, "flowers just say I care". I said I already knew what 1-800-flowers had to say about the situation. But I wanted to know why girls actually liked getting flowers.
I never did figure out why girls like flowers so much. But I did realize that I had vastly different needs than my work buddies when it came to explaining and understanding human behavior. So I quit my job and began my formal studies in psychology. It was a really good move.
This book reminds me why I wanted to study psychology. It's just so darned satisfying when you finally get good explanations for human behavior, and as I mentioned earlier, this book is chockablock full of them.
I found that all of the shorthand abstractions in the book contributed quite a bit to my understanding of people and (more importantly) why (exactly) they do the crazy shit they do, and why they are the crazy way they are.
Five stars!!!!
July 13, 2016
I heard the author interviewed on the radio and decided I definitely wanted to read his book. Unfortunately, I think I heard the best bits in the interview. Or it may be that I shouldn’t attempt psychology books in the summer time. I wasn’t as impressed as I expected to be, although I still appreciate the book.
I think by now that the vast majority of introverts have read Susan Cain’s Quiet : the Power of Introverts in a World that Can’t Stop Talking. It’s our manifesto, reminding us that introverts are necessary and important to our society (which seems to value extraverts over us).
And yet, like most introverts, I know that I can push myself to act extraverted. I got going on that in my twenties and I’m just ramping down from that effort in my fifties. But, as Brian Little states in Me, Myself, and Us, there is a price for that. I’ve spent decades pushing myself to go out into the world and do things, attend events, make acquaintances. My schedule was often so full that I when I actually got a day to myself, I wouldn’t even bother to get dressed. Pajama days, I called them, when I didn’t have to go anywhere or be anybody. I just collapsed in a heap. I also treasured the occasional evenings at home, doing my own thing, like the exemplary introvert that I am.
Recently, my financial advisor was holding an appreciation evening for all of his clients and he was pressing me to attend. I asked, “Is this one of those evenings where we juggle wine glasses and little plates and have to make conversation with complete strangers?” He got an odd look on his face (he’s an extravert) and replied, “Yes.” I told him that I’d been forcing myself to do stuff like that for decades and now that I was well over 50, I was no longer willing to suffer in that fashion. I believe my exact words were, “I’d rather stick needles in my eyes.” He & his partner eventually laughed about it, but it was obvious that they had no idea how much discomfort such situations cause for us introverts.
So I have some sympathy for extraverted folks who are made to try to sit still & quiet in classrooms, expected to study quietly in libraries, and not be disruptive in offices. They are having to stifle their essential selves and it is not easy. It takes a lot of energy and good coping strategies.
I appreciated the reminder from Little that we have our essential nature, but we also have the ability to choose other behaviours, that we must plan to recover from such efforts, and that others are making similar efforts. I also enjoyed the chapters on personal projects—and the advice to help with those projects that have been foisted upon you (by your family, your spouse, your boss) and find time for the self-chosen projects that actually make life meaningful.
A good book to choose if you frequently feel like your life is being pushed off course by forces beyond your control.
I think by now that the vast majority of introverts have read Susan Cain’s Quiet : the Power of Introverts in a World that Can’t Stop Talking. It’s our manifesto, reminding us that introverts are necessary and important to our society (which seems to value extraverts over us).
And yet, like most introverts, I know that I can push myself to act extraverted. I got going on that in my twenties and I’m just ramping down from that effort in my fifties. But, as Brian Little states in Me, Myself, and Us, there is a price for that. I’ve spent decades pushing myself to go out into the world and do things, attend events, make acquaintances. My schedule was often so full that I when I actually got a day to myself, I wouldn’t even bother to get dressed. Pajama days, I called them, when I didn’t have to go anywhere or be anybody. I just collapsed in a heap. I also treasured the occasional evenings at home, doing my own thing, like the exemplary introvert that I am.
Recently, my financial advisor was holding an appreciation evening for all of his clients and he was pressing me to attend. I asked, “Is this one of those evenings where we juggle wine glasses and little plates and have to make conversation with complete strangers?” He got an odd look on his face (he’s an extravert) and replied, “Yes.” I told him that I’d been forcing myself to do stuff like that for decades and now that I was well over 50, I was no longer willing to suffer in that fashion. I believe my exact words were, “I’d rather stick needles in my eyes.” He & his partner eventually laughed about it, but it was obvious that they had no idea how much discomfort such situations cause for us introverts.
So I have some sympathy for extraverted folks who are made to try to sit still & quiet in classrooms, expected to study quietly in libraries, and not be disruptive in offices. They are having to stifle their essential selves and it is not easy. It takes a lot of energy and good coping strategies.
I appreciated the reminder from Little that we have our essential nature, but we also have the ability to choose other behaviours, that we must plan to recover from such efforts, and that others are making similar efforts. I also enjoyed the chapters on personal projects—and the advice to help with those projects that have been foisted upon you (by your family, your spouse, your boss) and find time for the self-chosen projects that actually make life meaningful.
A good book to choose if you frequently feel like your life is being pushed off course by forces beyond your control.
June 24, 2015
This book made me wish I had taken more personality courses in grad school. Or at least better ones, preferably taught by a professor like Brian Little. Smart, articulate, engaging, but not at the expense of providing solid content -- and sometimes, surprisingly funny.
The book begins with a discussion of personal constructs, ways that we judge and characterize other people as well as ourselves. We see people behaving in certain ways and create entire narratives around this limited information, thinking we're incredibly perceptive. Sometimes we're right. Sometimes we're way off. People who tend to do this a lot are "person specialists," fascinated by people's intentions and motives. People who tend to do this less may be "thing specialists," focusing on the concrete things they actually see and not inferring more than meets the eye.
It was validating for me to read this, because I know a couple where the wife fancies herself highly perceptive and her husband a doltishly poor judge of character. People around them, including the husband, tend to believe this narrative which was largely created by the wife. I was more skeptical, especially since I noticed that on many occasions, the wife's assessments tended to be pretty speculative. Her husband, in contrast, was sometimes the better judge because there are times when what you see is what you get, and creating a whole elaborate narrative could actually mislead you. Of course, I don't think either of them noticed those instances because of the confirmation bias and all that (see Mistakes Were Made (But Not by Me): Why We Justify Foolish Beliefs, Bad Decisions, and Hurtful Acts). But I digress. Anyway, one of the points the book makes with regard to well-being is that being flexible about your personal constructs gives you room to tolerate information that takes you out of your comfort zone.
The book then discusses "The Big Five" dimensions of personality -- conscientiousness, agreeableness, neuroticism, openness to experience, and extraversion. Where people fall out on these different continuua are defining features of their personality. The book also notes that we sometimes have the capacity to act out of character occasionally on any of these dimensions in accordance with situational demands -- an introvert may turn on their inner extrovert when they need to, for instance. Is that being fake? Not necessarily. Choosing to act contrary to one's innate character as a means of pursuing a value or goal is arguably just as authentic as doing what comes naturally, even if it requires more effort. Acting out of character over a long period, though, can be stressful as I'm sure most of us know. There are people who do this more, called high self-monitors, who try hard to conform to situational demands in the moment. People who do this less are called low self-monitors, insisting on being themselves no matter where they are or who they're with. The former might be called pragmatic, the latter, principled. Is one innately superior? The answer, of course, is that it depends on the situation.
The book then discusses locus of control, or the perception that one has control over events and how things will turn out. Some people really and truly believe that they have the power to affect change; others are more fatalistic. One question the book discusses is whether it's better to have a high or low locus of control, which is not as clear-cut as one might think. Another question is whether it's good or bad to be deluded about the level of control you actually have.
The book then discusses stress and health, leading into the ever-popular "Type A" and "Type B" personalities. The relationship between being a "Type A" personality and health is not nearly as clear-cut as was once believed. Some other surprises in this book include the traits of creative people (not always what you would think), a look at person-environment fit (there are, in fact, "country people" and "city people" but the traits differentiating them are not simple), and a discussion of our personal projects and what they say about us. Though not a self-help or pop psych book, the book wraps up with a discussion of what all of this means in terms of our well-being.
Maybe I just liked this because I'm a psychologist and have a preexisting interest in the topic. But this book wasn't written for psychologists, and that wasn't the only thing I liked about it. What I really admired was Brian Little's ability to be informative, engaging, and funny -- exactly what I look for in a good non-fiction read.
The book begins with a discussion of personal constructs, ways that we judge and characterize other people as well as ourselves. We see people behaving in certain ways and create entire narratives around this limited information, thinking we're incredibly perceptive. Sometimes we're right. Sometimes we're way off. People who tend to do this a lot are "person specialists," fascinated by people's intentions and motives. People who tend to do this less may be "thing specialists," focusing on the concrete things they actually see and not inferring more than meets the eye.
It was validating for me to read this, because I know a couple where the wife fancies herself highly perceptive and her husband a doltishly poor judge of character. People around them, including the husband, tend to believe this narrative which was largely created by the wife. I was more skeptical, especially since I noticed that on many occasions, the wife's assessments tended to be pretty speculative. Her husband, in contrast, was sometimes the better judge because there are times when what you see is what you get, and creating a whole elaborate narrative could actually mislead you. Of course, I don't think either of them noticed those instances because of the confirmation bias and all that (see Mistakes Were Made (But Not by Me): Why We Justify Foolish Beliefs, Bad Decisions, and Hurtful Acts). But I digress. Anyway, one of the points the book makes with regard to well-being is that being flexible about your personal constructs gives you room to tolerate information that takes you out of your comfort zone.
The book then discusses "The Big Five" dimensions of personality -- conscientiousness, agreeableness, neuroticism, openness to experience, and extraversion. Where people fall out on these different continuua are defining features of their personality. The book also notes that we sometimes have the capacity to act out of character occasionally on any of these dimensions in accordance with situational demands -- an introvert may turn on their inner extrovert when they need to, for instance. Is that being fake? Not necessarily. Choosing to act contrary to one's innate character as a means of pursuing a value or goal is arguably just as authentic as doing what comes naturally, even if it requires more effort. Acting out of character over a long period, though, can be stressful as I'm sure most of us know. There are people who do this more, called high self-monitors, who try hard to conform to situational demands in the moment. People who do this less are called low self-monitors, insisting on being themselves no matter where they are or who they're with. The former might be called pragmatic, the latter, principled. Is one innately superior? The answer, of course, is that it depends on the situation.
The book then discusses locus of control, or the perception that one has control over events and how things will turn out. Some people really and truly believe that they have the power to affect change; others are more fatalistic. One question the book discusses is whether it's better to have a high or low locus of control, which is not as clear-cut as one might think. Another question is whether it's good or bad to be deluded about the level of control you actually have.
The book then discusses stress and health, leading into the ever-popular "Type A" and "Type B" personalities. The relationship between being a "Type A" personality and health is not nearly as clear-cut as was once believed. Some other surprises in this book include the traits of creative people (not always what you would think), a look at person-environment fit (there are, in fact, "country people" and "city people" but the traits differentiating them are not simple), and a discussion of our personal projects and what they say about us. Though not a self-help or pop psych book, the book wraps up with a discussion of what all of this means in terms of our well-being.
Maybe I just liked this because I'm a psychologist and have a preexisting interest in the topic. But this book wasn't written for psychologists, and that wasn't the only thing I liked about it. What I really admired was Brian Little's ability to be informative, engaging, and funny -- exactly what I look for in a good non-fiction read.
April 13, 2022
الرفاه هو طيب العيش.
وهذا كتابٌ يبحث كاتبه فيه عن الأسباب الموصلة إلى هذا العيش الطيب والحال الكريمة.
يبحث الكاتب "برايان ليتل" ومن خلال تخصصه العلمي في الأسباب النفسية للرفاه. ينطلق في بحثه من الشخصية؛ سماتها الثابتة والحرة، وأثر كل من المواقف والبيئة والمراقبة الذاتية على تجلي تلك السمات وتحقق الرفاه.
ويصل بنا الكاتب متدرجاً إلى فكرته الرئيسية؛ حول أهمية وجود "المشاريع الشخصية" والسعي المستدام لتحقيقها؛ للوصول إلى العيش الطيب.
تدور فصول الكتاب الأخيرة حول نوعية تلك المشاريع، وطرق تقييمها من حيث الفعالية والإمكانية، وأهمية المرونة من جهة والصلابة والالتزام من جهة أخرى. وغاب عن الكتاب التفصيل في كيفية معرفة الشخص لمشاريعه.
الكتاب جيد، والترجمة موفقة إلى حدّ كبير. وفي الكتاب اختبارات نفسية كثيرة، وهي مقاييس نفسية لها مرجعياتها المعتمدة. وفي الكتاب إشارات إلى مراجع مهمة عديدة. ولا ريب في أنّ الفراغات والتناقضات والاستثناءات التي تحتلّ أجزاء واسعة من فضاء الدراسات النفسية؛ كفيلة بحمايتنا من المبالغة باعتبار مثل تلك المقاييس أو اعتمادنا على يقينية تلك الآراء والدراسات.
أهمّ ما في الكتاب برأيي، هو كونه صافرة خطر وإنذار؛ يتردد صداها في فراغ كلّ حياةٍ بلا مشاريع!
وقد ذكرتني فكرة المشاريع الشخصية كسبيل لتحقق الرفاه بقولٍ للشعراوي رحمه الله، مفاده أنّ: (السعادة تتحقق إذا كانت الحركة في اتجاه الهدف).
وهذا كتابٌ يبحث كاتبه فيه عن الأسباب الموصلة إلى هذا العيش الطيب والحال الكريمة.
يبحث الكاتب "برايان ليتل" ومن خلال تخصصه العلمي في الأسباب النفسية للرفاه. ينطلق في بحثه من الشخصية؛ سماتها الثابتة والحرة، وأثر كل من المواقف والبيئة والمراقبة الذاتية على تجلي تلك السمات وتحقق الرفاه.
ويصل بنا الكاتب متدرجاً إلى فكرته الرئيسية؛ حول أهمية وجود "المشاريع الشخصية" والسعي المستدام لتحقيقها؛ للوصول إلى العيش الطيب.
تدور فصول الكتاب الأخيرة حول نوعية تلك المشاريع، وطرق تقييمها من حيث الفعالية والإمكانية، وأهمية المرونة من جهة والصلابة والالتزام من جهة أخرى. وغاب عن الكتاب التفصيل في كيفية معرفة الشخص لمشاريعه.
الكتاب جيد، والترجمة موفقة إلى حدّ كبير. وفي الكتاب اختبارات نفسية كثيرة، وهي مقاييس نفسية لها مرجعياتها المعتمدة. وفي الكتاب إشارات إلى مراجع مهمة عديدة. ولا ريب في أنّ الفراغات والتناقضات والاستثناءات التي تحتلّ أجزاء واسعة من فضاء الدراسات النفسية؛ كفيلة بحمايتنا من المبالغة باعتبار مثل تلك المقاييس أو اعتمادنا على يقينية تلك الآراء والدراسات.
أهمّ ما في الكتاب برأيي، هو كونه صافرة خطر وإنذار؛ يتردد صداها في فراغ كلّ حياةٍ بلا مشاريع!
وقد ذكرتني فكرة المشاريع الشخصية كسبيل لتحقق الرفاه بقولٍ للشعراوي رحمه الله، مفاده أنّ: (السعادة تتحقق إذا كانت الحركة في اتجاه الهدف).
December 12, 2014
This is easily one of my favorite books that I read this year, and I think the most important. Dr. Brian R. Little's conversational writing style makes the important concepts he introduces digestible without being elementary. I'd highly recommend this book to anyone wanting to do some self-reflection at the end of this year or beginning or next and/or looking to understand those they interact with every day.
December 29, 2021
In contrast with theories that emphasize unconscious determinants of personality, humanistic psychologists emphasized the more active and growth- oriented aspects of human behavior. px
Is your own way of thinking about yourself centered upon too limited an array of personal constructs? Are there certain constructs that you cling to zealously? Are you threatened when they are challenged? Are you hostile in attempting to validate them? p20
If you answered in a fit of honesty, damn right! then you may find lots to object to here, unless you are brave and curious enough to settle down and read the book already.
Or if, like most of us, your answer is most likely to be a cookie jar face and a vehement, who me? : well you have nothing to fear, do you?
Our illusions are often are often collusions with others who may or may not be invested in our long-term welfare. p109
Why do some people struggle with the self and others find self-exploration to be invigorating? p212
Brian R Little has given us an amplified frame for our experience, an effective construct that allows us to navigate our mutable selves, rather than allow them to steer. Ultimately, his inquiry is focused on the question of free will and how it shows up as we attempt to establish agency and control the shape of our lives.
You are not simply a passive pawn manipulated entirely by forces beyond your control, even though you may have your doubts when you wake up and reflect on what an idiot you were last night. from preface xi
We need to make sure that the buttons we have in our lives are, in fact, hooked up. p108
Is your own way of thinking about yourself centered upon too limited an array of personal constructs? Are there certain constructs that you cling to zealously? Are you threatened when they are challenged? Are you hostile in attempting to validate them? p20
If you answered in a fit of honesty, damn right! then you may find lots to object to here, unless you are brave and curious enough to settle down and read the book already.
Or if, like most of us, your answer is most likely to be a cookie jar face and a vehement, who me? : well you have nothing to fear, do you?
Our illusions are often are often collusions with others who may or may not be invested in our long-term welfare. p109
Why do some people struggle with the self and others find self-exploration to be invigorating? p212
Brian R Little has given us an amplified frame for our experience, an effective construct that allows us to navigate our mutable selves, rather than allow them to steer. Ultimately, his inquiry is focused on the question of free will and how it shows up as we attempt to establish agency and control the shape of our lives.
You are not simply a passive pawn manipulated entirely by forces beyond your control, even though you may have your doubts when you wake up and reflect on what an idiot you were last night. from preface xi
We need to make sure that the buttons we have in our lives are, in fact, hooked up. p108
August 13, 2017
Brian Little presents his personality theory of personal projects with the perfect mix of scientific research, personal and professional anecdotes, and good humour. I was fortunate to have had Professor Little for a Social Psychology course at Carleton University thirty years ago, and three degrees and over thirty MOOCs later, he's still the best prof I ever had. His lectures were a mix of profound insight and tears of laughter, and in this book he finds a similar balance. In clear simple prose Little describes the concepts of traits, mutable selves, control, and creativity and relates them all to his theory that we are our core personal projects. I was delighted to hear again his fascinating and hilarious portraits of introversion and extraversion, and the book is filled with illuminating personality tests. This book is not only a good read and good science, it's also a lot of fun and an opportunity for enlightenment and self-reflection.
After teaching at Carleton, Professor Little went on to lecture at Harvard where he was voted the students' favourite prof three years running. He is now at Cambridge and has also taught at McGill.
After teaching at Carleton, Professor Little went on to lecture at Harvard where he was voted the students' favourite prof three years running. He is now at Cambridge and has also taught at McGill.
January 6, 2015
I enjoyed and appreciated this book. It is cleverly written, but also presents and deals with matters of substance and significance. I took a chance on making this my read-while-I'm-riding-my-exercise-bike book, which doesn't always work as well with non-fiction, but this one managed to hold my attention and keep me interested even while sweating away at my pedals. Interesting, thought-provoking, insightful, and helpful. The author explains developments in the understanding of personality and the way it impacts life, relationships, personal projects, and overall well-being. Worthwhile, and a fairly fast read.
August 8, 2016
Bromidic: it anesthetizes with trivialities (dressed up as science).
I suppose I have no one else but myself to blame. I've struggled with depression all of my life, but from later 2014 through most of 2015 had the worst episode ever. it forced me into therapy and turned me to looking for solid books on the topic. Unfortunately, most our self-help-style books, which means they sublimate any actual insights to genre conventions. This book wasn't trying to sell me on a particular method, but on the rigor of the underlying science of personality. It didn't make the case.
As best I can tell, Brian R. Little is a big name in the field of personality psychology. He wrote this book to combat what he saw as the perniciousness of Myers-Briggs-style personality testing. He wants readers to know that, yes, there are measurable dimensions of personality, but that they are not deterministic: we also have free will. This he accomplishes in the first four chapters, more or less, then pads the book with other bits on personality science, some interesting, some not, none simultaneously novel and thought-provoking.
Studded throughout are a number of points that make me consider the rigor of this book and the purported underlying science. I do not mean to make myself out as an expert in personality psychology--I'm not, that's why I read the book--but I'm minimally informed and confused by some of the stuff he says, including quite contradictory points. For example, he cites the 40-year-old marshmallow test done at Stanford. (Kids who delayed getting marshmallows so they could accumulate more did better in life)--but this has been critiques a great deal; maybe it's right, maybe it's wrong, but putting it in there as if it is self-evidently true science is bad. Also: he talks about Type-A personalities as though the science behind them is similarly solid, but that whole apparatus has also been questioned--in part because the research was funded by tobacco companies to discredit the link between smoking and health problems. (Ever hear of a Type-B personality?) It doesn't help that he confidently cites fMRI data, either.
And for all of Little's insistence that personalities are malleable, he seems quite confident in predicting certain behaviors based on those personalities. Some personalities are more likely to get speeding tickets. Introverts, like him, do better with a little alcohol in their system, but worse with caffeine. (He clearly does not understand the wonders of coffee!) But it's all okay because he says science-y things, like, he explains certain of his behaviors by saying his amygdala is active, or he is in a high state of arousal.
The key set of paragraphs, then, come in the introduction, when Little insists that, unlike the bad years before the 1980s--never mind the marshmallow test was done int he 1970s!--the science of personality is firmly scientific. It is nothing like the humoral theory of personality that dominated Western thinking for 2,000 years. Except, you know, it is--like it, I mean. And given the questions raised about his scientific objectivity in the way he discusses the marshmallow test and type-A personalities, one wonders if, indeed, this is such a golden age of personality studies.
Little's argument is based on the five-factor model of personality--different than four factors of the Myers-Briggs test. It is commonly abbreviated canoe or ocean for: open, conscientious, extravert, agreeable, and neurotic. Each of these five have opposites (closed, careless, introvert, disagreeable, stable) and except for neurotic the nominal terms are all the highly-valued traits. (Little's colleague, Susan Cain, wrote a book last year, Quiet, to argue for the positive aspects of introversion, but American society does not value it, really.) Little makes some half-hearted arguments for why the opposite traits might have some evolutionary value; the case is clear, though, that they do not work well in American society as structured.
He goes on to show that these traits have some biological basis--in the genes, rather than the humors, but the point is relatively academic: either way, you are born with a certain personality. In Little's model, biology accounts for about 50% of your personality. Some unknown percentage is then effected by the culture in which you grow up, and its different effects upon you depending upon your race and religion and gender, etc., etc. The rest of your personality--impossible to put a number on it--depends upon what you do: you have freedom of choice.
Which is fine, but, you know, obvious to anyone who is alive. You have certain traits. Some of these are encouraged or discouraged by the people around you. But you can buck them, and buck yourselves, if you care enough to--though going against the grain of your personality exacts come cost. This is the familiar story of every artist who has ever lived. Sometimes it is worth if for you, an introvert, to be extraverted, if it gets you what you want, but it takes a toll. Little fluffs up this cliché with citations of scientific data and lots (and lots) of anecdotes, told in excruciating detail.
If you, yourself, have never met or been a human being, all of this might seem revelatory. Otherwise, you should have known this since you were 12. But it forms the basis, I guess, for Little's reputation as a humanist: he is encouraging people to put aside personality traits if they really want to go after a personal project.
The rest, as I say, is padding to this. People, he says, like to feel as though they have some control over their lives. (I know, I know: sit down, drink a glass of water, this is a lot to take in!) Some people are more sensitive to what others think, while others are guided by their own inner convictions--and their is evidence that those who take into consideration other's thoughts do better in life! As there is generally evidence that people with more agreeable, extraverted personalities who are relatively emotionally stable have better health. (All this information may be coming at you too quickly; I apologize I do not have a lot of anecdotes to break it up.) Creative people still need the support of others! It is good to have goals in life.
It is worth noting that the science underlying the very idea of the five-fold personality model is questioned, but Little does not have time to deal with this objections for want of adding in more anecdotes. Now it could be that what he sees here is correct, and the model is a robust interpretation of reality; still, it would have been nice to see him mount a defense. But even so, the date and the model lead to nothing more than well-known trivialities and support for the notion that psychology is less about describing humans and more about adjusting them to the society in which they live.
There hardly seems anything here that one couldn't find in Dale Carnegie, and that's hardly a good sign for a supposed scientific understanding of the human animal.
I suppose I have no one else but myself to blame. I've struggled with depression all of my life, but from later 2014 through most of 2015 had the worst episode ever. it forced me into therapy and turned me to looking for solid books on the topic. Unfortunately, most our self-help-style books, which means they sublimate any actual insights to genre conventions. This book wasn't trying to sell me on a particular method, but on the rigor of the underlying science of personality. It didn't make the case.
As best I can tell, Brian R. Little is a big name in the field of personality psychology. He wrote this book to combat what he saw as the perniciousness of Myers-Briggs-style personality testing. He wants readers to know that, yes, there are measurable dimensions of personality, but that they are not deterministic: we also have free will. This he accomplishes in the first four chapters, more or less, then pads the book with other bits on personality science, some interesting, some not, none simultaneously novel and thought-provoking.
Studded throughout are a number of points that make me consider the rigor of this book and the purported underlying science. I do not mean to make myself out as an expert in personality psychology--I'm not, that's why I read the book--but I'm minimally informed and confused by some of the stuff he says, including quite contradictory points. For example, he cites the 40-year-old marshmallow test done at Stanford. (Kids who delayed getting marshmallows so they could accumulate more did better in life)--but this has been critiques a great deal; maybe it's right, maybe it's wrong, but putting it in there as if it is self-evidently true science is bad. Also: he talks about Type-A personalities as though the science behind them is similarly solid, but that whole apparatus has also been questioned--in part because the research was funded by tobacco companies to discredit the link between smoking and health problems. (Ever hear of a Type-B personality?) It doesn't help that he confidently cites fMRI data, either.
And for all of Little's insistence that personalities are malleable, he seems quite confident in predicting certain behaviors based on those personalities. Some personalities are more likely to get speeding tickets. Introverts, like him, do better with a little alcohol in their system, but worse with caffeine. (He clearly does not understand the wonders of coffee!) But it's all okay because he says science-y things, like, he explains certain of his behaviors by saying his amygdala is active, or he is in a high state of arousal.
The key set of paragraphs, then, come in the introduction, when Little insists that, unlike the bad years before the 1980s--never mind the marshmallow test was done int he 1970s!--the science of personality is firmly scientific. It is nothing like the humoral theory of personality that dominated Western thinking for 2,000 years. Except, you know, it is--like it, I mean. And given the questions raised about his scientific objectivity in the way he discusses the marshmallow test and type-A personalities, one wonders if, indeed, this is such a golden age of personality studies.
Little's argument is based on the five-factor model of personality--different than four factors of the Myers-Briggs test. It is commonly abbreviated canoe or ocean for: open, conscientious, extravert, agreeable, and neurotic. Each of these five have opposites (closed, careless, introvert, disagreeable, stable) and except for neurotic the nominal terms are all the highly-valued traits. (Little's colleague, Susan Cain, wrote a book last year, Quiet, to argue for the positive aspects of introversion, but American society does not value it, really.) Little makes some half-hearted arguments for why the opposite traits might have some evolutionary value; the case is clear, though, that they do not work well in American society as structured.
He goes on to show that these traits have some biological basis--in the genes, rather than the humors, but the point is relatively academic: either way, you are born with a certain personality. In Little's model, biology accounts for about 50% of your personality. Some unknown percentage is then effected by the culture in which you grow up, and its different effects upon you depending upon your race and religion and gender, etc., etc. The rest of your personality--impossible to put a number on it--depends upon what you do: you have freedom of choice.
Which is fine, but, you know, obvious to anyone who is alive. You have certain traits. Some of these are encouraged or discouraged by the people around you. But you can buck them, and buck yourselves, if you care enough to--though going against the grain of your personality exacts come cost. This is the familiar story of every artist who has ever lived. Sometimes it is worth if for you, an introvert, to be extraverted, if it gets you what you want, but it takes a toll. Little fluffs up this cliché with citations of scientific data and lots (and lots) of anecdotes, told in excruciating detail.
If you, yourself, have never met or been a human being, all of this might seem revelatory. Otherwise, you should have known this since you were 12. But it forms the basis, I guess, for Little's reputation as a humanist: he is encouraging people to put aside personality traits if they really want to go after a personal project.
The rest, as I say, is padding to this. People, he says, like to feel as though they have some control over their lives. (I know, I know: sit down, drink a glass of water, this is a lot to take in!) Some people are more sensitive to what others think, while others are guided by their own inner convictions--and their is evidence that those who take into consideration other's thoughts do better in life! As there is generally evidence that people with more agreeable, extraverted personalities who are relatively emotionally stable have better health. (All this information may be coming at you too quickly; I apologize I do not have a lot of anecdotes to break it up.) Creative people still need the support of others! It is good to have goals in life.
It is worth noting that the science underlying the very idea of the five-fold personality model is questioned, but Little does not have time to deal with this objections for want of adding in more anecdotes. Now it could be that what he sees here is correct, and the model is a robust interpretation of reality; still, it would have been nice to see him mount a defense. But even so, the date and the model lead to nothing more than well-known trivialities and support for the notion that psychology is less about describing humans and more about adjusting them to the society in which they live.
There hardly seems anything here that one couldn't find in Dale Carnegie, and that's hardly a good sign for a supposed scientific understanding of the human animal.
October 22, 2022
ترجمة الكتاب غير مستساغة .. ألزمتني بالتوقف من إنهاء الكتاب دون إكماله :)
Read
November 10, 2014I'm not sure how to rate this yet. My psych-major self was interested in a lot of the material... but it was also somewhat heavy, and I found myself nodding off at parts.... It was almost like reading a psych textbook or long article.
April 17, 2020
Our dance with selves can take place at any time; we needn't wait until we are old and wobbly to reconcile ourselves to ourselves. And although self-reflection may begin with reconciliation, it also creates the impetus for revitalizing our lives. With some new personal constructs for thinking about yourself and others as well as a deepened self-awareness, you may have already been dancing through these chapters and thinking, "That's me, that's my very self."
Non-fiction has always fascinated me for the intrinsic power of its sentences. But I do not recall any time where I needed to take notes while reading. I have always had the habit of underlying the parts of the books which resonate within me, together with dog-earing such pages. I do at times just stand in front of my personal library (when I am at home, therefore very rarely, unfortunately) and take one of those books and reread all of the quotes within it. Usually, within those pages, you could find (if you ever will come to my house, which, honestly, it is very unlikely) marks around the cited books, or songs, or poems. I mean, citations of works of art in a work of art. With "Me, Myself, and Us", however, it was different. I really felt like I needed to grasp to those citations, as if it was something I owed to my own self. I felt like I had to transcribe those sets of titles and authors and years of publication so that I could know more and, eventually, grow into them.
This is an extremely fascinating collection of thoughts and, literally, lessons on how to identify personalities and how to apply the science of psychology and well-being to get to know (or, rather, to question) your true own self. You will not find any answer to your questions, if you ever had any. Rather, you will find food for your thoughts and, surprisingly, even more reading suggestions. I loved it like you love something that’s important to you.
February 19, 2016
I listened to this book on Audible and I enjoyed the research review so much that I am going to take a second listen. Professor Brian Little is a Harvard "Personality" Psychologist and one of the World's experts on the subject of personality. I am intrigued and wonder about how much of our personalities are "hard-wired" and genetic versus how much flexibility we have to alter them. (My clients know how much I believe FLEXIBILTY in our lives is so important.) Dr. Little educates us on why the Myers Briggs in an unreliable and invalid test (I just heard your collective sigh), and really blows up what is so misunderstood about our understanding of personalities. I learned that I am an "ambivert" (I am actually right in the middle between extrovert and introvert). I do recommend this book to everyone, if for no other reason than food for thought and great conversation.
January 24, 2015
This book contains a ton of excellent insight into the world of personality psychology. Outside of just debunking silly personality quizzes and famous tests such as "Myers-Briggs" it gave me a new and deeper understanding of the different variables that make each person unique and the ideas presented within the book opened my mind to how those differently tuned variables can affect my own personal/work relationships and the well being of myself and those around me. It's one of those 'must reads' to me because it can give us a solid framework to helping and understanding others as well as themselves. Great read. Really enjoyable.
October 29, 2014
Dr. Little's book was a great discussion of three key aspects of becoming who we are becoming. He blends conversations about stable personality traits, free traits and core projects into a very well written book giving us hope for becoming who we want to be. Our personality, in its multi-faceted reality, is not determinative of our destiny. This book will prove helpful to everyone interested in better understanding themselves and finding their core purpose in the world. Highly recommend.
November 20, 2014
Loved this book! Fascinating look at what drives us, an exploration of the five core personality scales (resilience, conscientiousness, intelligence, etc) and I found the part about personal projects particularly compelling: Little believes that the way we answer the question "How are you?" depends on if we have a personal project that we care about (could be work related or not). Highly recommend for self-assessment junkies in particular :)
May 19, 2022
كتاب ممتع لمن له اهتمام بالمقاييس التي تقاس بها الشخصية وسماتها مثل نظرية السمات الخمسة الكبرى (الانبساطية، العصابية، يقظة الضمير..إلى آخره.).
يناقش الكتاب هذه السمات وكونها ثابتة أم قابلة للتغيير -وإن كانت في مواقف معينة-؟ وأثرها في حياتنا اليومية والمهنية والاجتماعية، وغيرها من المواضيع.
الكتاب جيد لولا استطرادات المؤلف وقصصه الرديئة -أدبياً- ، ومن يقرأ مثل هذه الكتب يعرف الأساليب المملة التي يروجون بها الدور كتبهم للMain stream.
بالمجمل الكتاب مفيد وممتع ويفتح آفاق للمهتمين بهذه المقاييس
يناقش الكتاب هذه السمات وكونها ثابتة أم قابلة للتغيير -وإن كانت في مواقف معينة-؟ وأثرها في حياتنا اليومية والمهنية والاجتماعية، وغيرها من المواضيع.
الكتاب جيد لولا استطرادات المؤلف وقصصه الرديئة -أدبياً- ، ومن يقرأ مثل هذه الكتب يعرف الأساليب المملة التي يروجون بها الدور كتبهم للMain stream.
بالمجمل الكتاب مفيد وممتع ويفتح آفاق للمهتمين بهذه المقاييس
February 1, 2017
+1 would read and recommend and I am even more glad I got to meet this guy.
With an even hand of psychological science and personal observation, Brian Little wrote a book to bring modern streams of psychology to an easily accessible level. This book looks at personality psychology from many angles and invites reflection and introspection into what makes you tick.
With an even hand of psychological science and personal observation, Brian Little wrote a book to bring modern streams of psychology to an easily accessible level. This book looks at personality psychology from many angles and invites reflection and introspection into what makes you tick.
June 16, 2018
If you don't have time to read the whole book, just read the first and last chapter, that would do it.
I read the whole book, and it was a good read, very rich with research based facts on personalities. And plenty of good take aways in regards to understanding relationships between traits and happiness, with one bonus chapter on creativity.
One good reading.
I read the whole book, and it was a good read, very rich with research based facts on personalities. And plenty of good take aways in regards to understanding relationships between traits and happiness, with one bonus chapter on creativity.
One good reading.
June 3, 2023
Спочатку я побачив на Youtube випадково коротке відео, де якийсь харизматичний дідусь щось завзято говорить про особистість, екстравертів та інтровертів, про те як ми сприймаємо людей і все таке інше. Мене зачепило, я загуглив, знайшов його лекцію на TED (називається Who are you, really? The puzzle of personality), і подумав "А раптом цей дядя написав книгу? А раптом її переклали на українську?"
Пройшло десять секунд - і вжух, бачу, що Фабула видала його книгу. Ну вогонь же! Отже...
Браян Р. Літтл - британський психолог, фахівець у галузі психології особистості та мотиваційної психології. Цікавий факт, що випускники Гарварду тричі поспіль обирали його "улюбленим професором". Непересічна людина, з харизмою.
"Я, моє "Я" та МИ" - це посібник до того, як зрозуміти себе та оточення. Книга невелика, але читається довго, бо тут і опитувальники, і історії з життя, і пояснення науковий термінів, і опис різних досліджень. І багато іншого, що чіпляє, зацікавлює, і найголовніше - відкриває очі на ті чи інші речі. Все це прикріплено прикладами та реальними історіями. Якщо піти сухо по темам, то ось про що пише Браян:
📍Що таке ваше "Я" і чи це одне і те ж, що і ВИ?
📍Чому ми сприймаємо людей саме так, а не інакше? Що це сприйняття говорить про нас?
📍Що керує нами - наше "Я" чи ситуація, в якій ми опинились?
📍Чи нормально те, що ми мінливі час від часу?
📍Чому не ок вважати себе виключно інтровертом або екстравертом? Які є ще важливі характеристики, про які люди не знають?
📍Як наш характер впливає на здоров'я?
📍Що таке самоаналіз?
📍Як ми рухаємось по життю, як розставляємо пріоритети?
Якщо хоча б щось з цього вам відгукнулось - почитайте, вивчіть тему. Я не можу сказати, що книга рівна і цікава від самого початку і до самого кінця (бо я б прочитав її швидко), все ж перші розділи мені були дуже пізнавальні, а чим ближче до кінця, тим частіше я відкладав книгу. Однак, це залежить від питань, які ви поставите перед читанням.
Я на свої питання відповіді отримав. Цікаво та пізнавально, але без вау ефекту.
Пройшло десять секунд - і вжух, бачу, що Фабула видала його книгу. Ну вогонь же! Отже...
Браян Р. Літтл - британський психолог, фахівець у галузі психології особистості та мотиваційної психології. Цікавий факт, що випускники Гарварду тричі поспіль обирали його "улюбленим професором". Непересічна людина, з харизмою.
"Я, моє "Я" та МИ" - це посібник до того, як зрозуміти себе та оточення. Книга невелика, але читається довго, бо тут і опитувальники, і історії з життя, і пояснення науковий термінів, і опис різних досліджень. І багато іншого, що чіпляє, зацікавлює, і найголовніше - відкриває очі на ті чи інші речі. Все це прикріплено прикладами та реальними історіями. Якщо піти сухо по темам, то ось про що пише Браян:
📍Що таке ваше "Я" і чи це одне і те ж, що і ВИ?
📍Чому ми сприймаємо людей саме так, а не інакше? Що це сприйняття говорить про нас?
📍Що керує нами - наше "Я" чи ситуація, в якій ми опинились?
📍Чи нормально те, що ми мінливі час від часу?
📍Чому не ок вважати себе виключно інтровертом або екстравертом? Які є ще важливі характеристики, про які люди не знають?
📍Як наш характер впливає на здоров'я?
📍Що таке самоаналіз?
📍Як ми рухаємось по життю, як розставляємо пріоритети?
Якщо хоча б щось з цього вам відгукнулось - почитайте, вивчіть тему. Я не можу сказати, що книга рівна і цікава від самого початку і до самого кінця (бо я б прочитав її швидко), все ж перші розділи мені були дуже пізнавальні, а чим ближче до кінця, тим частіше я відкладав книгу. Однак, це залежить від питань, які ви поставите перед читанням.
Я на свої питання відповіді отримав. Цікаво та пізнавально, але без вау ефекту.
January 6, 2020
Learned and accessible, this book is a great guide on how to view our multiple selves and how aspects of the self are both stable and mutable at the same time, and provides plenty of practical wisdom on how to view the projects of our lives.
August 8, 2022
A great read indeed. In this deftly written, entertaining and thought-provoking book, personality psychologist Brian Little discusses, explores, deconstructs and even reconstructs various personality theories with profound insights and humour.
August 11, 2024
کتاب من، خودم و ما کتابی در زمینه روانشناسی شخصیت است و به این موضوع میپردازد که چگونه ویژگیهای فردی بر سلامت ما تأثیر میگذارد. برایان لیتل، نویسنده کتاب من، خودم و ما، بر اساس جدیدترین تحقیقات علمی در زمینه شخصیت نشان میدهد که نوع نگاه فرد نسبت خودش و دیگران چه تأثیری بر روی زندگی او میگذارد.
کتاب من، خودم و ما تلاش میکند تا نشان دهد ما از چه طریقی انسانهای اطراف خود را میشناسیم و با آنها ارتباط برقرار میکنیم.
(خلاصه خوانی)
کتاب من، خودم و ما تلاش میکند تا نشان دهد ما از چه طریقی انسانهای اطراف خود را میشناسیم و با آنها ارتباط برقرار میکنیم.
(خلاصه خوانی)
February 2, 2018
I've learned many interesting knowledges about Personality.
but the book is longer than it should be
but the book is longer than it should be
April 18, 2019
3 point something.
September 5, 2017
A fluid read dissecting the creative and conventional self with some assessments along the way. I'd recommend it!
Creatives tend to be:
- B vs. A students
- in need of a more conventional person's support in order for ideas to come to fruition
- introverted vs. extroverted (although extroverts may claim and readily share what they perceive as creative)
- less agreeable
- thrive in cities
- high self monitors adapting aspects of persona to others they engage with
- last borns
- intuitive not sensing
- exhibit free traits (ex: acting out of character - more extroverted or agreeable, etc. to gain attention or heighten confidence for a cause
- weird (university of British Columbia) Western. Educated. Industrialized. Rich. Democratic.
- geographic location and personality- Florida (conscientiousness), Minnesota (agreeableness), New York (openness), North Dakota (outgoing),
Featured quote I like:
On self reconciliation (Owen Flanagan)
"It is inevitable, but also my wish that you save the last dance for me. Never mind the clumsiness, we know each other well by now. And let's hope- this seems both romantic and reasonable- that value is detected as we embrace... but it should be more than mere infatuation. This life should really mean something. Respect, even self-referential respect, should be warranted. It will be good to feel peace of mind, to be comfortable, to sense integrity, and effort, and to recognize that we have had some fun. Remember, if anyone knows you- really remembers and knows you- especially how you dance, it is me. Cha,cha,cha."
Creatives tend to be:
- B vs. A students
- in need of a more conventional person's support in order for ideas to come to fruition
- introverted vs. extroverted (although extroverts may claim and readily share what they perceive as creative)
- less agreeable
- thrive in cities
- high self monitors adapting aspects of persona to others they engage with
- last borns
- intuitive not sensing
- exhibit free traits (ex: acting out of character - more extroverted or agreeable, etc. to gain attention or heighten confidence for a cause
- weird (university of British Columbia) Western. Educated. Industrialized. Rich. Democratic.
- geographic location and personality- Florida (conscientiousness), Minnesota (agreeableness), New York (openness), North Dakota (outgoing),
Featured quote I like:
On self reconciliation (Owen Flanagan)
"It is inevitable, but also my wish that you save the last dance for me. Never mind the clumsiness, we know each other well by now. And let's hope- this seems both romantic and reasonable- that value is detected as we embrace... but it should be more than mere infatuation. This life should really mean something. Respect, even self-referential respect, should be warranted. It will be good to feel peace of mind, to be comfortable, to sense integrity, and effort, and to recognize that we have had some fun. Remember, if anyone knows you- really remembers and knows you- especially how you dance, it is me. Cha,cha,cha."
May 19, 2018
This book was a survey of some of the academic research on personality by a Harvard professor. It had some great stories. I have read a lot in this space and was I learned a few things I haven't read elsewhere. But didn't quite turn into a great book.
First, I didn't find a central theme or organizing principle beyond "here's some cool ideas on personality". Second, he got a little to academic at times: He used overly complicated words when there are common ones that mean the same thing; and he explained why his position is better than another professor's opinion--just state your case and move on, we don't need to hear the views of the other guys. Third, he reveals that he is an introvert--this colors all his examples and he just can't seem to give balanced descriptions or explanations of extroverts (feels like they're just fundamentally a drain/annoyance to him). Fourth, he's overly dismissive of the value of popular assessments. Simply because they have limitations doesn't make them invaluable. Ironically, he reveals some of their value when he revealed his MBTI type--he's the type that hates the idea of categorizing people into types. So his frustration with the assessment confirms that it has some validity. :)
But this topic (self-awareness/personality) is so very important. And I'm likely a little harder on him than others would be because I've read so much in this space. It's a solid read if you're looking for more on personality types.
First, I didn't find a central theme or organizing principle beyond "here's some cool ideas on personality". Second, he got a little to academic at times: He used overly complicated words when there are common ones that mean the same thing; and he explained why his position is better than another professor's opinion--just state your case and move on, we don't need to hear the views of the other guys. Third, he reveals that he is an introvert--this colors all his examples and he just can't seem to give balanced descriptions or explanations of extroverts (feels like they're just fundamentally a drain/annoyance to him). Fourth, he's overly dismissive of the value of popular assessments. Simply because they have limitations doesn't make them invaluable. Ironically, he reveals some of their value when he revealed his MBTI type--he's the type that hates the idea of categorizing people into types. So his frustration with the assessment confirms that it has some validity. :)
But this topic (self-awareness/personality) is so very important. And I'm likely a little harder on him than others would be because I've read so much in this space. It's a solid read if you're looking for more on personality types.
April 22, 2015
great book I'll give you a quote from the end of the book that I enjoyed.
Darling self, it is inevitable, but it is also my wish, that you save the last dance for me. Never mind the clumsiness, we know each other well by now. And let's hope that this seems both romantic and reasonable that value is detected as we embrace.
But it should be more than mere infatuation. It shouldn't really matter. It, this life, that is, should really mean something. Respect, even self-referential respect, should be warranted. It will be good to feel peace of mind, to be comfortable, to since integrity, and effort, to recognize that we have had some fun. Remember, if anyone knows you really remembers and knows you especially how you dance, it is me. Me myself and I... By Owen Flanagan
Darling self, it is inevitable, but it is also my wish, that you save the last dance for me. Never mind the clumsiness, we know each other well by now. And let's hope that this seems both romantic and reasonable that value is detected as we embrace.
But it should be more than mere infatuation. It shouldn't really matter. It, this life, that is, should really mean something. Respect, even self-referential respect, should be warranted. It will be good to feel peace of mind, to be comfortable, to since integrity, and effort, to recognize that we have had some fun. Remember, if anyone knows you really remembers and knows you especially how you dance, it is me. Me myself and I... By Owen Flanagan
January 3, 2015
How often have you found yourself thinking someone you thought you knew very well was acting out of character? Is one's personality fixed or can we make changes to our personality to fit the situations we find ourselves in? If we can make changes, is there a cost to our health in doing so? Are we more susceptible to being persuaded by our peers or are we less open to suggestions? Is there a difference between eccentricity and creativity?
The study of personality science is an interesting one, and the author delivers his research in addition to some great personal and anecdotal stories. Perhaps the understanding of what makes us and those close to us tick and why we behave the way we do will enable us to communicate better with them, lower stress and increase our sense of well-being.
The study of personality science is an interesting one, and the author delivers his research in addition to some great personal and anecdotal stories. Perhaps the understanding of what makes us and those close to us tick and why we behave the way we do will enable us to communicate better with them, lower stress and increase our sense of well-being.
November 15, 2014
I am always interested in books about happiness and I had heard this author interviewed on the radio. He argues that we ought to understand our innate dispositions (personality characteristics and innate traits) and then work to find contexts and other people to surround ourselves with that suit those - to the extent that we can. We can be happier as a result. A fine argument. Some interesting chapters on traits that I was not familiar with and a concluding chapter about the pursuit of personal projects that I found insightful. If psychology or the happiness literature interests you, I would recommend this book.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 159 reviews