The Diagnosis of Psychological Types

In bringing before you for discussion the subject of psychological types, I have had in mind two things: first, the importance of understanding type classification and diagnosis for the great contribution it can make to the problem of human relationships; and second, its value for the individual himself and for the psychological analysis of his particular problem. There is a great deal of loose talk and careless use of type terminology by unqualified persons, and even from those who should know better. This causes confusion and discredits a work that is in itself difficult and complex, but at the same time of great service for the comprehension of the complexities of human behavior and the extraordinarily diverse attitudes towards the same environmental situations.

The marked differences in reaction and behavior toward similar conditions and environmental situations among human beings—not only between races, but among individuals of the same race, and more narrowly grouped still, between members of the same family—has long been a subject of observation and discussion.

Every family reveals individuals as different in so-called temperament and in corresponding psychological reactions as though they were not related, and parents are frequently at a loss to understand these opposite and contrasting children which they have produced. The distinctions between children are supposed to be due to their individual differentiation, and parents and teachers are admonished to regard the individuality of the child; whereas, as a matter of fact, the individual quality is little more than a spark or a faint trace indicating the possibility of the growth of a true individuality.

Every person and every living creature is an individual from the biological standpoint, but psychological individuality is something to be won and organized from the numerous natural tendencies and possibilities with which the child comes into the world. Science and students of human behavior in general, have b