/lit/ - Literature

>>9402956
>then why not use the term

because they're not meant for you to use to "classify" yourself as they're overtly abbreviated and reductionist. They will never encapsulate the complexities of yourself or the handful of other people that you will get to know with any detail in your life.......They're meant for demarcating a large amount of people you will never have the time to get to know intimately so that you can put them into some kind of functional narrative. So, for example, something like the briggs-meyers classification system would be handy if you were conducting some kind of social research project with a large amount of subjects and limited time.


any person with a modicum of intelligence (like an adult academic) should know this. Applying something like the briggs-meyers types to yourself and taking it seriously is submissive and pathetic

Is the art of writing skill-based, or talent-based?

There is no real point in reading if you don't possess photographic memory.

Placing a book on your shelf, cracking the spine and convincing yourself that you read it about two years ago is the same as actually sitting down and reading through it.

>b-but it shapes my self in an unexplainable and magical way like childhood trauma
"no"