The MBTI Explains the Limits of Open-Mindedness

Last updated on: July 24, 2014 at 8:45 am by David Mills

The MBTI Explains the Limits of Open-Mindedness 2014-07-23T12:39:37-04:00 David Mills

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

I have my doubts about the Meyers-Briggs Type Inventory, described in The Pastoral MBTI, but it has its uses. Admittedly I was using it for my own purposes and not its own, but it helped me explain the limits of open-mindedness in an essay I wrote for Touchstone years ago. Close Your Mind begins:

G. K. Chesterton once said of his friend H. G. Wells: “I think he thought that the object of opening the mind is simply opening the mind. Whereas I am incurably convinced that the object of opening the mind, as of opening the mouth, is to shut it again on something solid.” (Though we think of him mainly as a science fiction writer, Wells was a great leader of the progressive movements of his day. He was, sexuality aside, the Gore Vidal of the early twentieth century.)

To be open-minded — now usually called “entering the dialogue” — is not necessarily a virtue. The virtue of open-mindedness depends on how far you open your mind and how long you keep it open, and whether you close it when you ought to.

An open hatch on top of a submarine lets in needed light and air — until the submarine dives. An open door in a country house is one thing, an open door in a prison is another. A man may open-mindedly weigh the merits of monarchy, but he may not, without branding himself a moral imbecile, open-mindedly weigh the merits of Hitler’s policies for the Jews.

Thus there is less to be said for open-mindedness than is usually said by modern mainline Christians. It is not at all virtuous to keep your mind continually open, because you are not using your mind as it is meant to be used. You are in fact taking very poor care of it. The mind continually propped open will only collect dust and cigarette butts.

It reflects my immersion in the battles in the Episcopal Church (my family entered the Church the next year), in which the innovating party would switch from dialogical relativism to absolutist dogmatism and back in the blink of an eye as suited their polemical and political needs at the moment, and I would draw the lines more broadly and softly now, but I think the argument still hold.

Uncategorized

Previous Post

July 24, 2014

What the Bishops Should Do For Victims

Next Post

July 24, 2014 Judging Israel

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Abortion & life American Life Anglican Affairs Apologetics Art and artistry Beer Capitalism's downside Catholic converts Catholic issues Catholicism & public life Catholicism in general Christianity & culture Christianity & the Jews Conservatism Conservative problems Death Do unto others Dogs Ecumenical friendship Evangelicalism Evil in the world Family Friendship Heroes How we should live Islam It's a funny old world Jews Judaism Israel Judaism justice Liberalism Life issues Marriage Mary Mass Media Modern culture good & bad Modern life as it is lived Modern Religion Mormonism People Personal reflections Politicians Protestantism Race Rand & Randiansm Secularisms Sexualities Society justice equality freedom The papacy & the pope Uncategorized Worship Writing & Language

Select a Month January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

How did Saul die?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Died of old age Stoned by Israelites Fell on his own sword Killed by Philistines