Is Knowing Your Personality a Good Thing? A Book Review of Me, Myself, and Us (2020 Archive)

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 spouse: 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.

Thanks for reading Words Like Silver! Subscribe for free to support my work.

Subscribe Now

placeholder

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.

Personality testing is a concept that inevitably captivates my attention. On one hand, quantifying elements of yourself feels useful in understanding how you tick; on another, overthinking your nature can put you in a box (and generally, thinking of yourself too much stokes self-absorption in an unhealthy way, even if done in the name of psychology.)

On another level, sharing how you test introduces an additional complication: which scores do you share, and what do you think it says about you to make them visible? What do you want people to think about the fixed elements of your personality? What does the public representation of you say about the private one?

I used to be really into Myers-Briggs as a baseline. (Guess which one I am.) So I went into Me, Myself, and Us just expecting the read to derail it as a practice. Instead, although it definitely criticized the accuracy of Myers-Briggs, Me, Myself, and Us was more so a stunning exploration of fixed vs. fluid traits.

““Every person is in certain respects like all other people, like some other people, and like no other person.””

I can get so into the weeds with this book — I’d love to read it for a book club of sorts. As a whole, it was a thoughtful and lovable discussion of a variety of factors that influence our personal identities and the way we construct those of others’.

The scope is impressive; the detail is thorough. I’d highly recommend to anyone looking for an introduction to these types of topics, as well as for anyone looking to deepen their current understanding. For now, I’m going to describe my reaction to specific lines and ideas.

The Flaws of Personality Testing

The book first establishes the structure of how personality emerges. The concept of the “mind” is emergent from all the various factors interacting within our brain. Our perceptions, decisions, and traits emerge from a variety of social and cultural contexts. (Yes, hello, give me more books on unconscious influences, because that’s been an obsession of the year.)

Sometimes, personality testing can be illuminating; in other contexts, it can be restrictive and inaccurate. The viability of these tests depends on the test itself, your relationship to personal projects that might “suspend” your current traits, and your state of mind when you’re taking it. So is personality relevant? Are your metrics helpful to know? Are they helpful to share?

2024 Update: While I think the pursuit of self-identity is a meaningful practice, I do think that we've swung some in the other direction and peppered therapy speak into our language so much that it's almost lost its potency. Sometimes, labeling yourself or your patterns can just put you in a box and make you less open-minded. For me, I know that I'm best when I'm a more externalized, disciplined, flexible self—which means clinging to any sort of testing label can be more harmful than helpful in rolling with the punches and embracing individual agency. I do think psychological fixes are valuable, don't get me wrong! But that they're more of a short-term tool than a long-term label we should use to narrow ourselves down. The danger of being told something about yourself is that you may believe it.

For context, I do personality tests every once in a while for a baseline. Supposedly I'm not a narcissist because of The Selfishness of Others: An Essay on the Fear of Narcissism by Kristin Nobek, but I'm definitely always afraid of being selfish because I am introspective, and that sort of me-based focus is never good. I know how I score on the Machiavellian index (that supposedly I am not manipulative) which makes sense to me in the context of some of my “bigger” personality traits.

Big Five. Love languages. Enneagram. For any given test, you definitely know people who swear by it wholeheartedly as a gauge for interacting with other people. You'll even see dating gurus claim they can chart the entire course of your relationship based on your attachment style.

Me, Myself, and Us built nicely upon the foundation and vocabulary built for me by reads such as The Art of Thinking Clearly and The Confidence Game. A lot of the points serve as healthy reminders for us. I like to read books that humble me often.

“One of the well-documented findings in the study of attributions is that we are more likely to ascribe traits to others, whereas we explain our own actions according to the situations we are in.”

And although Me, Myself, and Us utilizes the same studies and concepts as other books I’ve read this year, it also has fresh points that complicated the way I think about how I see others. I loved it for its intense focus on the role that language plays in our perceptions, which reminds me of The Memory Illusion.

“In short, our impressions of others’ personalities are routed through our personal constructs, and these are dynamic, complex, and potentially revisable. Although we might believe that our impressions of others are cool, rational readings of the objects of our construal, personal constructs are frequently hot, emotional expressions of something far deeper. Consider how personal constructs can influence emotional reactions.”

The emphasis that we place on binary constructs of personality — the example the book uses is trustworthy/non-trustworthy — is far more influential than we expect and can reflect the situations that we’re in. Additionally, they form systems of constructs that reverberate throughout all aspects of our lives. Do you trust others based on their first impression, and what flexibility will you give them to change? What role does choice play in all of this?

“The emotional consequences of testing and revising personal constructs help us understand how strongly we might resist changing them. The more implications a construct has for other constructs, the more resistance there is to changing it.”

Devotion to a Pursuit Redefines You

The book talks about ways in which we polarize our traits and perceptions. It also talked about how we occasionally suspend our core traits to advance personal projects. An additionally salient aspect of the book is the pursuit of personal projects, and how that impacts how we see ourselves. As somebody who constantly has a personal project, that qualification is something that I haven’t found in another book on personality — how that can temporarily change your baseline operations.

I think there's nothing more special than sheer devotion. For me, that looks like my book Mountain Sounds dominating my field of vision. I derive a lot of confidence, happiness, and fulfillment from knowing the efforts and intent I've poured into a pursuit, and I also love other people best who are similarly devoted to a cause. Still, there are definitely changes I see within myself when I'm in "the thick of it" versus on the outside of a work phase, so I appreciate knowing how a project can qualify your most expressive traits. I am who I am because of what I do, and maybe that gives me a dash of behaviorism?

But, as Little reminds us,

“Your personal constructs serve as both frames and cages.”

Is It Good to Try to Know Yourself? To Want to?

Me, Myself, and Us explored a concept that’s impacted my personal philosophy this year: sometimes, ignorance is bliss.

I used to believe that knowing everything and being able to prepare yourself for the circumstances around you would always be the right call. After this year, I’ve started to believe more so in the opposite; in certain cases, I’d rather not know. Self-knowledge can definitely be a cage, especially in transitional times like this year when the whole world feels open.

I also used to take a lot more pride in personality scores and quantification — knowing exactly how to situate myself. Now, I’m a lot more appreciative of my mutable qualities and ability to be flexible regardless of any elements of my personality that I’ve previously seen as “accurate.” Me, Myself, and Us was a revealing experience in that regard.

2024 Update: It's been five years since I first wrote this review, and I think often we can see "changing" in reaction to external pressures as being a bad thing or somehow inauthentic, when in reality, it's a natural aspect of this constant redefinition of the self. The static sense of self might just be a constant series of recommitments to your chosen version rather than actually being static at all.

It's both hopeful and disorienting to know we're much more flexible than we think.

One of my favorite books, Tiger Lily by Jodi Lynn Anderson, also has a relevant quote I've always loved.

““I'm not myself,' she offered, guilty. She softened around Tik Tok, and when she did she was, for those rare moments, girlish. He smiled. 'You can never say that. You're just a piece of yourself right now that you don't like.””

Who I Am, According to a Strength Index

I won’t share many of my scores with y’all — this book warns against that — but I will share my supposed “top qualities,” as told to me via the tests advertised by this book, as an example. That was a positive framework in which to align myself.

1. Gratitude — You are aware of the good things that happen to you, and you never take them for granted. Your friends and family members know that you are a grateful person because you always take the time to express your thanks.
2. Appreciation of beauty and excellence — You notice and appreciate beauty, excellence, and/or skilled performance in all domains of life, from nature to art to mathematics to science to everyday experience.
3. Bravery and valor — You are a courageous person who does not shrink from threat, challenge, difficulty, or pain. You speak up for what is right even if there is opposition. You act on your convictions.
4. Honesty, authenticity, and genuineness — You are an honest person, not only by speaking the truth but by living your life in a genuine and authentic way. You are down to earth and without pretense; you are a "real" person.

On that note, clearly I’m sharing my results because I like what they say about me and how they contribute to the way that I form a representation of myself in a public sphere. (Wouldn’t it be nice to be known as a grateful, brave, honest person?)

I like that I score in the 99th percentile for grit, and excessively low on the Mach scale. Supposedly, I can endure anything. Concrete lines like that can be helpful when I don't feel good, even if they're from a flawed mechanism. Self-fulfilling prophecy can run our lives at times, so sometimes I have to cling to specific core beliefs like these to prove that choice is possible. Choosing to be different is very possible.

Many studies show that thoughts can follow actions, and a lot of how we feel can be based on what we choose to do (which is, for example, why exercising when you're low can change your mood.)

So maybe having a test that tells me these things is something to point to when I don’t act in ways that are grateful, brave, honest. But I do largely believe that who we are is what we do.

Still, these are constructs that I’d like to cling to in the future, recognizing the ways in which they might limit my ability to recognize other strengths, or to acknowledge flaws in myself related to each of these. The question of personality, and which traits stick with us, is a relevant one. You just also need to choose how much you believe in it.

Overall Thoughts

Although I knew that I would like it, my reaction to this book as a whole shocked me. It was addictive. Brian R. Little has an apt sense for which anecdotes to include, detailing them in a way that feels suspenseful and intriguing, capitalizing on my curiosity. I literally didn’t put it down, which is so different from my normal nonfiction reading style, which is in small bursts. It’s a thorough exploration of fixed vs. fluid traits, nestled within the question of what most contributes to your well-being. It functions well as a complement to Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience. If you’re interested in social psychology, I would highly recommend such an articulate and enjoyable read.

Update, December 23, 2019: I just read an excellent Aeon article on the pitfalls of knowing yourself, and the argument there is a compelling one. Go read it if you’d like to further complicate the discussion!