A Case Study in Personality Typing: Michael Pierce

Where is the intersection between a personality preference and a measurable trait?

What trait theories like the Big 5 are measuring is a self-reported self-concept. What personality type theories like MBTI and Socionics measure is largely a self-reported historical account of behaviors. What trauma-based personality theories such as Enneagram measure are self-reported coping mechanisms. Each has their strengths, because much of what a person does is through the lens of their self-concept, with the goal of building a consistent identity of behaviors and preferences, which happens to be influenced substantially by traumas. However, there is a point of convergence in personality theory which not only encompasses self-concept, behavioral preferences, and the influence of past traumas, but doesn’t rely on self-reported information.

Where is personality most objectively seen?

In the descriptive words and phrases we use.

Why? Because the different value measurements we use to each have very distinct words and phrases associated with them and though we might think before we speak, we likely don’t consider the frequency or diversity of words in specific categories, they just come out spontaneously from what we value deep inside.

These value measurements are supposed to be steps in an interactive and integrating process, but because of traumas and the identity-based solutions that arise from those traumas, biases towards and against certain types of value measurements form and influence how we think, feel and what we do.

What we value can be seen in the descriptive words we use, because the aspects of life we value often have a larger and more frequent vocabulary compared to the aspects of life we ignore. The A.M.E. Text Analysis is the first step in truly objective personality typing. You can paste text into it (the more words the better) and it will show the word frequency and diversity for each category. It doesn’t take a computer algorithm to type personality, once you understand the 7 value measurements or ideals, and the 4 aspects, it is pretty easy to see which 3 value measurements and 2 aspects each person has a preference towards.

While watching a recent video from Michael Pierce, I decided it was a good example to use to show the typing process. I think Michael Pierce is an excellent person and I hope he enjoys this foray into his psyche.

For context into the basics of the 7 value measurements/ideals, and the 4 aspects read this article. TLDR: There are 7 steps in what could be considered a value metabolism. The steps go in order, but because each step has positive and negative identities associated with them, we avoid spending time in some and try to spend more time in others. There is also resistance at each step because each of the steps has its opposites. These steps are: Initiation, Deconstruction, Expansion, Unification, Implementation, Preservation, and Transformation.

The 7 steps happen naturally, which seems like a state of flow(which should be our normal state) but when we are supposed to be on one step if we become fixated on being on a different one, there can be a lot of tension or internal conflict.

At the beginning of the video we see what this conflict is for Michael Pierce.

"I've been having a hard time ever since I made the Patreon video."

You would think that any content creator would love that milestone of actually being paid to do what you want to do. There are countless Patreon accounts, likely with a lot of thought put into them, without a single Patreon member. So why would this be the beginning of a hard time for Michael?

This is where the concept of a core emotion or core value measurement type comes in. In this case, I believe, “Unification.” Unification is the fourth step in the cycle after all the variables that have been discovered in the first three steps are brought together in the most harmonious way.

Something pivotal to this approach is illustrated in this old game.

In order to put the pieces in an order that makes happiness, one of the squares has to be missing. One person, at their own expense, has to make space for other people to come together in a harmonious way. This selfless move is not sustainable as a long term mode of existence, because you can’t permanently not exist, especially merely in order to make space for other pieces to have the luxury of moving around. This selfless action only seems/is worth it when the moment arises and it comes naturally. Part of the appeal to Unification is knowing that a finite action can potentially be a catalysts for an infinite positive effect. You plant one seed, and eventually there is a whole forest. This appeal becomes less the less finite the action and the less infinite the positive effect. This means that someone with a preference towards this value measurement, would not want to exchange this selflessness for money and definitely not be locked into a contract required to manufacture selfless feelings or actions. Can you imagine paying money for a “genuine complement” or a heartfelt hug?

The idea of being stuck in a contract seems to be the root of the problem, and is something he addresses. “In the Patreon video I made, some of the things I said, were partly that I was trying to figure out what the problem was. And I wondered if what the problem was, was that maybe I’m feeling ‘beholden’ to you guys in this para-social relationship.”

The idea of Patreon gets worse through a Unification lens. Unification brings things together, and so to exclude some people by hiding features behind a paywall wouldn’t be appealing. Through other lenses the situation looks very different.

The Initiation measurement type is looking for what is functional and prefers quick feedback–money is a very measurable form of feedback. This is one reason people with a preference for the Initiation measurement type are good at business.

Through the lens of Implementation, it is fine to be paid a solid day's wage for a solid day's work. It wouldn't want to tip, but it wouldn’t stand for less than what is agreed upon either

Through the lens of Preservation it would want to make sure expectations and commitments are outlined, but apart from the risk of getting into a bad contract, they would be fine accepting money for work.

Through the lens of Expansion being given money would be greatly appreciated because there are always a lot of exciting projects to do and never enough funds to do them.

That leaves only two emotional lenses that would not like accepting money. The transformation emotional lens which would rather have status than money, and the Deconstruction emotional lens which wants truth. The Deconstruction measurement type is illustrated well in Socrates when he was given the ultimatum by the government to renounce his idea of truth and accept the cultural tradition. There wasn’t any amount of money or any amount of anything apparently that would have made not having a pursuit of objectivity be worth it.

It seems that the preference for Unification is what makes the idea of Patreon stressful, and why stopping Patreon has allowed him to come back to making Youtube videos. If that is the case, we will see more words and phrases to do with Unification compared to Initiation, Implementation, Preservation or Expansion.

"I am having a hard time figuring out…” (what the creators block is or what to do with it)

If by "figure" he means understanding the variables at play, then this would indicate Deconstruction, if it is "figure" as look at the long term implications and goals of, then it would be Transformation. Or, what is very likely, is that it is both Deconstruction and Transformation together. The context of the video, and all of his videos would indicate Deconstruction is a focus because parsing out what personality is or what the current block is, are both a very consistent theme. Added to that general context, we see the Transformation measurement coming in.

"I feel ‘awkward’ putting this on camera and putting this out there. I swear ‘I'm fine’ even if ‘I seem’ frustrated." Transformation sees the forest rather than the trees, and sees value in how things are perceived, because it knows something could be good, but not be valued if it is not perceived in the right light. Transformation is an opposite of Deconstruction because it responds to a top down ‘awkwardness’ or ‘presentability’ rather than a bottom up objectivity.

It I were to guess, prior to grad school Michael’s preference was:

1) Unification

2) Deconstruction

3) Transformation.

The influence of the order of priority of lenses would be as if the first lens was the biggest, and so when the second lens is layered on, there is a portion of the scope of perception that only the largest lens sees. This uncontested region of perception can be seen when the lenses lower in priority are not factored into a situation.

Making videos before, stereotypical ideas of ‘awkwardness’ or ‘presentability’ weren’t factored in very much. That likely was actually quite appealing to his audience because the genuineness of his pursuit of understanding came through more easily that way. The transformation value measurement when in third place supplements the intentions of the top two measurement types. In that position Transformation would look more like philosophy or sociology rather than pursuit of moving up the hierarchy like it would if it was in first place. However, on going to grad school that changed. This would seem like a temporary necessity, but a shift in the value measurement priorities is no small change. Value measurements are made almost instantaneously, and so to shift which measurement gets the uncontested first position means that you have to ignore or repress the first value measurement that comes up. Once taken out of first or second position, where do you put it back in? That’s why it is so draining. On top of that, when there is a shift in preferences, it means that a new one that was not preferred now comes to the forefront. In this case I think it was Preservation.

Guessing it is Preservation that is now a new preferred measurement type could be suspected based on exclusion of other possibilities, but there are some clues that suggest is would be Preservation. One clue is in the title of the video which is “My creator’s Block.” Along those same lines is seen when he says, “Maybe I need to break through some kind of barrier.” The Preservation approach separates the desired plan from anything that might mess it up. If this was the new measurement type that came in to replace the Deconstruction measurement type, then it would make sense why it would seem like a pesky barrier that might be needed and so is scared to break through. What is on the other side of that barrier? His true thoughts and opinions, his deconstructed view of the world—which in the academic hierarchy would only be points of potential ridicule or conflict.

This means that the grad school Michael preference could be:

1) Transformation

2) Unification

3) Preservation.

We can see the influence of the Transformation value measurement as a priority in the comment, “I’m very sensitive to what I think other people are thinking at any moment. My brain in that respect works very very fast. Faster than ‘me.’ [the old preferred emotional lens] As so it can kind of take control sometimes in a weird way where I’ll be talking and then that part of me that is always checking [how presentation looks from the top down] will seize me up or make me very nervous. It’s kind of how it is, it is self censorship. I’ve talked about this before, way back when, it has always been there, it’s just for some reason it has been really pronounced lately.

Preservation is the emotion Fear, which is a stomach twisting or when listened to is butterflies. Perseveration suddenly becoming a consistent measurement tool would be exhausting since it hadn’t been used until recently very much compared with Unification or Deconstruction.

What did Deconstruction feel like?

“I get a real kick out of psychoanalyzing myself.”

The value measurement Deconstruction is correlated with the emotion sadness. The emotion sadness is the heart/unconscious suggesting that the most meaningful action is to deconstruct the situation to really figure out the variables at play. Emotions are not inherently positive or negative, the are felt as positive when listened to, and felt as negative when they are ignored. An example of this would be the bitter tears that often accompany a resistance to reality such as the wish to go back in time to a previous starting point rather than acknowledge the current starting point with the current variables. Happy tears are the confirmation that the Deconstruction process found some new deeper insight into the local variables at play. Similar to Michael Pierce I am someone who enjoys the Deconstructing. It might look almost masochistic to other people to see self-analysis, but that just shows the difference in approach. Which of the seven approaches you use is because it is which one you think has the solution to the problem. Deconstruction suggests that a cathartic deeper understanding awaits on the other side of a painful dissection.

The axis of measurement for Deconstruction is not pain but understanding and objectivity. The two opposite approaches Unification and Transformation both have pain or tension as the axis of measurement. Unification is looking at more of a present pain/tension whereas transformation is looking as a long term pain/tension, but either way, they are both opposite Deconstruction. In fact, for someone who prefers Deconstruction and who has many experiences finding important insights hiding behind pain, they might see increasing pain as a sign they are finding something.

People who have yet to find much value in Deconstructing might feel confused watching someone else deconstruct themselves, or feel mad if someone tries to deconstruct them. My own experience is that some people, even if you are not deconstructing yourself or others, just knowing that you could, can make them nervous. They would rather surround themselves with people inept at or committed against analysis just to avoid what countless people have said is, “opening that can of worms.”(referring to their own brain) For Michael Pierce, this analytical ability in the context of youtube is valued by others, but in the context of an academic institution situation could cause conflict or drama. This means that the transition of environment to grad school would mean the sacrifice or repression of the Deconstructive ability that not only has been very useful to him but also gives him a kick. He even refers to him psychoanalyzing himself as too “self-indulgent.” How odd that the very valuable tool of Deconstructing could change from something that solves problems and sparks joy to being looked at as self-indulgent. This shows the process and power of taboos that arise.

Unlike other personality type theories which see personality as ridged, A.M.E. sees the preferences as situational. This doesn’t mean that a person’s personality type is always changing, because for most people, we are typically only in three different types of situations: one where we are using the value measurement we like, one where we are using the value measurement we are proficient with that other people tend to respond well to, and one where we are using a backup measurement tool we are proficient with, but no one really likes. These value measurements/approaches/emotions are labeled Ego, Persona, and Shadow respectively.

In the case of Michael Pierce, what was the part of grad school that he liked the most? Teaching his own class.

Though teaching a class is rewarding to him, there is something that spoils it. Not only is teaching only a small portion of what he does, the teaching situation is nested inside of the institutional hierarchy which for him has become filled with enough drama to make him reflect on the value measurements that have gotten him into the situation he is right now. Though stressful, it is good, because ideally we should use all seven value measurements equally. Theoretically that is how we are born, capable and willing to use all seven value measurement types, and then taboos and ideals that arise as coping mechanisms become rooted in, over time becoming stronger and stronger. It is like when I broke my right arm while riding my dirt bike and was forced to learn how to rely on my left arm for a while. What it looks like when we are free from taboos and one-dimensional ideals is that we use all seven value measurements spontaneously in a state of flow. A state of Flow or Nirvana I believe is our natural state.

Returning to the state means breaking everything holding your taboos and one-dimensional identity-based ideals in place. Often we get things more for the identity we have rather than the actual things we do. Initiation lens offers a charismatic or confident image. Deconstruction offers an Intelligent or Insightful Imagine. Expansion an image of Creativity or Perspective. Unification an image of Kindness or Connectivity. Implementation an image of Reliability or Responsibility. Preservation an image of Order and Preparedness. Transformation an image of Wisdom or Beauty. Each as one-dimension are merely masks.

So what is the shift in paradigm that allows Michael to break through the block?

“Maybe I need to break through some kind of barrier. So you know what? You all are going to be my therapist today." The Preservation lens came in, exiled the Deconstruction lens, dethroned the Unification lens, and put the Transformation lens on the top. When there is a shift in Value Measurement priorities it is usually an emergency response which was seen as a temporary solution but then can’t be shifted back until there is an opposite emergency. “Help! I need a support group of Analysts to help me!” And bam! Unification is back on top and Deconstruction has returned from exile.

I recommend watching the video of Michael Pierce and seeing this internal conflict play out. You will start to see how internal conflicts play out and hopefully be able to start seeing the internal conflicts in yourself for what they are.

Here are a few phrases that stand out as examples.

"56 takes, not all tonight. I'm not..." I am assuming the word he didn't want to say was crazy. People with the Transformation emotional lens preference are often seen as wise, which is quite the opposite as crazy. It is reacting to the appearance of things. Deconstruction would not care what truth looked like to anyone else, and so here is another instance of it being in play, the number of takes was objectively recorded, but was at least rivaled by Transformation that would not want that to appear not wise.

"I don't care. I am done not making videos. I like making videos. I have things I want to share." I don't care about what? The "I" of not caring, can't be the same "I" as the "I" that wants to share. Switching emotional lenses is something that usually happens in a change of situation, and so to be in a classroom, which likely is attached to a whole mode of approach, shows how much influence our preferences have. My guess is that going to graduate school, that navigating the social hierarchy would bring Transformation to the forefront, and likely would be accompanied by the classical hardworking ethic of the Application emotional lens, or the organized attention to detail of the Preparation emotional lens. Either of those would be a drain, and when there is substantial resistance, especially to a core emotion like Unification in the face of drama, it would feel unnatural and scary to rely on Application or Preparation instead of Deconstruction which he has a lot more experience using. In fact, I imagine much pressure creating drama, is the other people he is working with not appreciating truth.

This is a problem with Deconstruction, because it has very deeply Deconstructed understandings and definitions for things, and it makes it really hard to get on the same page with other people, especially if they are leaning on authority or some other substitute for truth. It would feel conflicting to stay in a situation where they want you to renounce truth in order to stay, when there is an alternative environment that likes you the way you are. The reality of the choice is difficult because there is light at the end of the tunnel, a professor beloved by their students, but who will forever have to deal with the administration of the school, or the alternative, a Para social relationship which has its downsides as well.

“I feel awkward every time now that I say ‘Para social relationship’ because there was a moment in the Patreon video where I said it, and then when I relistened to it, I felt like it sounded as though I was knocking you. I was really annoyed with myself. I wish I hadn't said it that way, even though I know from experience that people typically don't notice...but still." The is Deconstruction and Transformation working together. Deconstruction preference people at some point realize that other people don't notice things at the same depth, and worse, that they don't care to know...or actually worse, they are mad if you try to help them know. As if they liked walking around with their eyes closed. This is where the Transformation emotional lens comes in to help navigate social situations and predicting in the long term, what would be good to say or do and what isn't worth it.

I'm hypersensitive to how I am coming across to people. Transformation, deconstruction, and Unification all at once. Is this wise? Is it true? Is it harmonious? If I do this it could be very wise, but mildly true and not harmonious, but if I do that it will be harmonious and mildly acceptable, but not at all true...

"I am very sensitive to how I think I will come across." It is the same sentence, but replacing feel with think. Feel in the first case might refer to Unification, and think might refer to Deconstruction and Transformation. Not that either is really a heart vs mind thing, but Unification might be the main emotion/evaluation measurement tool, and Deconstruction and Transformation are deployed to help it.

"I don't know what about grad school made that the case." For Transformation to move to first spot when it was Kindness and Connectivity nested under both the harmony filter of Unification, and then the truth filter of Deconstruction, but to bypass those value system filters, seems unkind and untrue.

"This is how I justify...it might sound weird and ‘stupid’(Deconstruction) and ‘cringy’(Transformation) to me." Don't worry colleagues, I know YouTube is not a professional forum, and I know that I should be doing academic papers instead, but this is just for therapy...

“Don't do that, it's weird. It makes them feel uncomfortable." ‘Uncomfortable’ is an interesting choice, it is a combination of Transformation and Unification.

“It is very strange. At least I am talking now.” Not talking is a transformation thing, especially when paired with Preparation. I imagine going to grad school he tried being extra conscientious and organized, and not saying anything that might rock the boat or be misunderstood. There is an old saying that our real friends are the ones that will tell us the truth even when it is hard. Michael’s relative silence in grad school, or any instance of self-censorship would likely be felt as not loving people enough to tell them the truth.

I hope this case study was helpful, and that this has piqued your interest in Anatomy of Mind and Emotion. In another post I will go into detail of the next layer of Typing which involves three dichotomies of data: Asset-appreciating vs Risk-assessing, Abstract vs Concrete, and Raw vs Interpreted data. In another post I will go into the 7 dichotomies of value that go into the 7 approaches.