Jungian wholeness (was Re: Does our first principle = respect?)
Karen Lona Allendoerfer
>[It is] frustrating when you can see women who need a kick in the butt and men
>who
>need to just sit down and emote. And vice versa.
It is frustrating. In fact, so frustrating that finding a
philosophical theory or overarching system to provide some explanation and
help me deal with it seemed to me to be a useful thing to do.
I first started down this road after being told that a particular
person that I was having trouble dealing with was a Myers-Briggs INFJ. I
didn't know what this meant, but found it on the internet, took the test,
and found out that I was something slightly different (INFP). The
specifics of this aren't that important for the current discussion; what
seemed good and useful about this particular inventory was the following:
that the categories were morally neutral. There is nothing, in the system,
a priori "better" about being introverted vs. extraverted, intuitive vs.
sensing, feeling vs. thinking, or perceiving vs. judging.
I found this view, especially its moral neutrality, to be in stark
contrast to the view that I had experienced personally both while growing
up and later as an adult: that being emotional or feelings-oriented was
both associated with being female, and "wrong;" this was inferior to being
logical and/or thought-oriented, which was associated with being male.
A year or so after the Myers-Briggs experience, I found a book,
called _The Highly Sensitive Person_, by Elaine N. Aron. She wrote (pp.
15-16):
"What is the ideal in our culture? Movies, advertisements, the design of
public spaces, all tell us we should be as tough as the Terminator, as
stoic as Clint Eastwood, as outgoing as Goldie Hawn. We should be
pleasantly stimulated by bright lights, noise, a gang of cheerful fellows
hanging out in a bar. If we are feeling overwhelmed or sensitive, we can
always take a painkiller.
"If you remember only one thing from this book, it should be the following
research study. Xinyin Chen and Kenneth Rubin of the University of
Waterloo in Ontario, Canada, and Yuerong Sun of Shanghai Teachers
University compared 480 schoolchildren in Shanghai to 296 in Canada to see
what traits made children most popular. In China "shy" and "sensitive"
children were among those most chosen by others to be friends or playmates.
(In Mandarin, the word for shy or quiet means good or well-behaved;
sensitive can be translated as "having understanding," a term of praise).
In Canada, shy and sensitive children were among the least chosen. Chances
are, this is the kind of attitude you faced growing up."
***
This gave to me some explanation as to why I felt I always received
messages that I was "wrong" as a child. It was a relief not to have to
hear about it in male/female terms.
Aaron's book is geared towards a particular, minority, personality type
(the highly sensitive person, or HSP), but in the end she attempts a
broader view, and talks about "wholeness" in a Jungian context (pp.
220-221):
"[T]he direction toward wholeness is a very individual matter, even for
HSPs. If we've stayed in, we'll be tempted out or finally forced out. If
we've been out, we'll have to go in. If we've armored ourselves, we'll
finally have to admit our vulnerability. But if we've been timid, we'll
start to feel all wrong inside until we're more assertive . . .
"Again, no one achieves wholeness. Embodied human life has limits--we
cannot be both fully shadow and light, male and female, conscious and
unconscious. I think people have tastes of wholeness. Many traditions
describe an experience of pure consciouness, beyond thought and its
polarities. It comes to us deep in meditation, and an awareness saturated
with it can become the foundation of our lives . . .
"In general, anything that has been our particular specialty has to be
balanced by its opposite, what we are bad at or afraid of trying . . .
"We each have our specialty from among these four "functions"--sensing,
intuiting, thinking and feeling. . . . While there are tests designed to
tell you which is your specialty, Jung thought we could learn more from
careful observation of which function we are worst at. Do you feel like a
rank amateur when you want to think logically? Or when you have to decide
how you personally feel about something? Or when you need to intuit what
is going on at a subtle level? Or when you must stick to the facts and
details without elaborating, getting creative, or going off into imaginary
realms?
"No one becomes equally skilled at using all four functions. But according
to Marie-Louise von Frantz, who wrote a long paper on the development of
the "inferior function," working to strengthen this weak and bumbling part
of ourselves is an epecially valuable path toward wholeness. It puts us in
touch with what is buried i the unconscious and therefore makes us more in
tune with all of it. Like the youngest, most foolish brother in the fairy
tales, this function is the one that comes home with the gold."
***
I've quoted enough from Aaron at this point, so let me try to summarize.
I suggest that these different styles that Jeff and I are both seeing (and
which are frustrating) are representative of people who need different
things to achieve wholeness, and with different inferior functions that
need to be developed. In that light, sensitive emotional people are not
"whiners" and "complainers" who need to have their problems "fixed" by
others.
Instead, we are all looking for balance, which as humans, we are only
fleetingly capable of achieving. In this striving for balance, this
perpetual search, we can find common ground and support each other. I find
that this can lessen the frustration.
Karen
MayuTzu
A very interesting post to think about, Karen. Of course, as always I
resist putting people in artificial catagories, and can't really get myself to
swallow that knowing what a person scored on a Myers test will actually help
with dealing with them in any given situation. Yet, my scientific background
impressed upon me that there are general trends that can be observed and
measured, and I think these folks may be on to something. Especially since
they don't break it down by gender, but by measuring how respondents express
their own perceptions of how things work and who they are.
Here's an idea: someone find a place on-line where we can take this test
ourselves. Then let's all take it, see what results each person gets, and
discuss it. Maybe we will find that it helps us understand ourselves and each
other better, and if it has advice on how each type should treat other types,
it may help us come to good terms with Marvin's obstinacy, Dave B's constant
analysis of other posters, Dave of G's hyperfi-, I mean, polyfidelity;), and my
tendency for spamming the group with "inspirational" quotations. I'm serious
about this. As a group, let's try a little quasi-scientific experiment: can
these tests and understanding where everyone is generally coming from effect a
change for the better in the relations and discourse here in this newsgroup, or
do the tests fail to offer real tools for harmonizing human relationships?
This will take real honesty on everyone's part, and some trust(since
we'll be exposing what our answers were, and therefore what our personalities
may be). But the benefits might be many, and the experiment oughta be fun.
Who thinks this might be a good idea?
Peace be with you,
Jeff
BJAZZIE
> This will take real honesty on everyone's part, and some trust(since
>we'll be exposing what our answers were, and therefore what our personalities
>may be). But the benefits might be many, and the experiment oughta be fun.
>Who thinks this might be a good idea?
>
>Peace be with you,
>Jeff
Okay. I'm game. I just took the test and it says I am a ESTP. Haven't read the
description yet, so I'm not sure what it means, but for any one else into
self-exposure here is the link to the on-line test.
Darn, thought I could create a hyper-link. So here is the URL.
http://www.humanmetrics.com
Beth Knoer Jastram (BJa...@aol.com)
MayuTzu
Bjazzie:
•weakly expressed extravert
•distinctly expressed intuitive personality
•weakly expressed feeling personality
•moderately expressed perceiving personality >I just took the test and it says
I am a ESTP. Haven't read the
>description yet, so I'm not sure what it means, but for any one else into
>self-exposure here is the link to the on-line test.
>Darn, thought I could create a hyper-link. So here is the URL.
>http://www.humanmetrics.com
Thank you very much for the link, Beth. In the future, I suggest that we do
include the descriptions for our results along with our outcomes, to facilitate
communication. They claim you are:
<<Portrait of the Promoter (eStP)
Copyrighted © 1996 Prometheus Nemesis Book Company.
The Artisans called Promoters are not only concrete in speech and utilitarian
in achieving their goals, they are also directive and expressive in their
social interactions. They have no hesitation at all in approaching strangers
and persuading them to do something. And others do their bidding, even on
slight acquaintence.
Promoters are men and women of action. When someone of this personality is
present, things begin to happen: the lights come on, the music plays, the game
begins. And a game it is for the eStP, the entrepreneur, the troubleshooter,
the negotiator. Promoting is the art of winning others to your position, giving
them confidence to go along with what you propose, and eStP's seem especially
able to maneuver others in the direction they want them to go. In a sense, they
are able to handle people with much the same skill as iStP's handle tools,
operate machines, or play musical intruments. You might say that people are
instruments in the eStPs' hands, and that they "play" them with great artistry.
eStP make up approximately ten per cent of the general population, and if only
one adjective could be used to describe them, "resourceful" would be an apt
choice.
Life is never dull around Promoters. Witty, clever, and fun, eStP live life
with a theatrical flourish which makes even the most routine events seem
exciting. Not that they waste much time on routine events. Promoters have a
knack for knowing where the action is. They always seem to have tickets to the
"hot" show or "big" game (or can get them when others can't), and they usually
know the best restaurants, where the headwaiters are likely to call them by
name. To be sure, eStPs have a hearty appetite for the finer things of life,
the best food, the best wine, expensive cars, and fashionable clothes. And they
are extremely attentive to others and smooth in social circles, knowing many,
many people by name, and knowing how to say just the right thing to most
everyone they meet. None are as socially sophisticated as eStPs, none as suave
and polished-and none such master manipulators of the people around them.
Ernest Hemingway is an example of a Promoter Artisan temperament style. >>
I took the test at the link you provided. As I took it, I thought it might not
be very accurate. But here is what I got:
<<Your Type is ENFP
Extraverted Intuitive Feeling Perceiving
Quantative analysis of your type formula
You are:
Portrait of the Champion (eNFp)
Copyrighted © 1996 Prometheus Nemesis Book Company.
The Champion Idealists are abstract in thought and speech, cooperative in
accomplishing their aims, and informative and extraverted when relating with
others. For Champions, nothing occurs which does not have some deep ethical
significance, and this, coupled with their uncanny sense of the motivations of
others, gives them a talent for seeing life as an exciting drama, pregnant with
possibilities for both good and evil. This type is found in only about 3
percent of the general population, but they have great influence because of
their extraordinary impact on others. Champions are inclined to go everywhere
and look into everything that has to do with the advance of good and the
retreat of evil in the world. They can't bear to miss out on what is going on
around them; they must experience, first hand, all the significant social
events that affect our lives. And then they are eager to relate the stories
they've uncovered, hoping to disclose the "truth" of people and issues, and to
advocate causes. This strong drive to unveil current events can make them
tireless in conversing with others, like fountains that bubble and splash,
spilling over their own words to get it all out.
Champions consider intense emotional experiences as being vital to a full
life, although they can never quite shake the feeling that a part of themselves
is split off, uninvolved in the experience. Thus, while they strive for
emotional congruency, they often see themselves in some danger of losing touch
with their real feelings, which eNFps possess in a wide range and variety. In
the same vein, eNFps strive toward a kind of spontaneous personal authenticity,
and this intention always to "be themselves" is usually communicated
nonverbally to others, who find it quite attractive. All too often, however,
eNFps fall short in their efforts to be authentic, and they tend to heap coals
of fire on themselves, berating themselves for the slightest self-conscious
role-playing. >>
Frankly, this is an uncanny description of my personality. I have to admit
that I am shocked that some psychologist I never met could devise a form test
and post it on the internet, and I would fit right into a very specific
category. I did not consider this possible, and it makes me wonder if I'm
really as individualistic as I generally beleive I am. Thank you to Karen for
pointing this stuff out to me.
Come on folks, let's all get in on the act. I want to see what we all
get, and then try to stretch this science a bit. Can it help us understand
each other? Will it help us communicate more effectively and less
judgementally, something I believe we all desire? Or is this stuff fun but
ultimately futile, a kind of science-lite? Let's see if we can figure it out.
Gila Jones
.
BJAZZIE wrote:
>
> > This will take real honesty on everyone's part, and some trust(since
> >we'll be exposing what our answers were, and therefore what our personalities
> >may be). But the benefits might be many, and the experiment oughta be fun.
> >Who thinks this might be a good idea?
> >
> >Peace be with you,
> >Jeff
>
> Okay. I'm game. I just took the test and it says I am a ESTP. Haven't read the
> description yet, so I'm not sure what it means, but for any one else into
> self-exposure here is the link to the on-line test.
> Darn, thought I could create a hyper-link. So here is the URL.
> http://www.humanmetrics.com
>
> Beth Knoer Jastram (BJa...@aol.com)
Marie Houck
may...@aol.com (MayuTzu) wrote:
> Howdy,
> This will take real honesty on everyone's part, and some trust(since
> we'll be exposing what our answers were, and therefore what our personalities
> may be). But the benefits might be many, and the experiment oughta be fun.
> Who thinks this might be a good idea?
>
> Peace be with you,
> Jeff
OK, I took the test (thanks to Beth for posting the site.)
I have resisted taking this particular test for a number of years, because
I was around some people who treated the results like Revealed Truth. I
swear, they didn't seem to think they could talk to anyone unless they
knew their Myers-Briggs type. They had their "letters" on name plates on
their desks. Since I see all of these sorts of tool as just that --
tools, with strenghts and weaknesses, uses and abuses -- I got pretty fed
up with the whole thing. (They also said my resistance to talking the
test was indicative of my "type", which they were guessing at.) However,
having not been around these folks for a while, I was curious.
I've been sitting here debating whether or not to post the results; like
everyone else here, I hate being pigeonholed. However, in the interest of
furthering discussion and in the free and responsible search for truth and
meaning wherever that search may take us.......
I turned up ENFP. Now I suppose I'll have to spend a little more time
figureing out exactly what that means.
Marie Houck
Karen Lona Allendoerfer
Wow, it's neat that people have gotten into this . . .
I also hate being pigeonholed . . . but I had an experience similar to
Jeff's when I first took the test; I found the description to be uncannily
like how I perceive my own personality.
My church in Brooklyn last year had an adult RE evening on it, too. But
then I took the on-line test at work, and came out INTJ, whereas when I
took it otherwise, either at home or in church, I came out INFP.
I don't think it's a perfect tool, at all (and I'm really sorry, Marie,
for evoking those people that made it into some kind of religion--that's
not how I intended it)--and people change, especially over time. Our
minister also noted that.
But it gave me some insight into myself and some self-acceptance. Most
importantly for my own mental health and sanity, it helped me to stop
beating myself up for being emotionally "sensitive."
Karen
Novakthere
>I have resisted taking this particular test for a number of years, because
>I was around some people who treated the results like Revealed Truth.
I've taken the test twice in management training courses. Came out a ENTP both
times and the description seemed to fit. Just took the cybertest and came out
ENFJ. Is one or two tests wrong or am I changing? My scores on all 3 tests
were very high on the E and N parts, but less so on the T and P. It's a little
like reading and trying to interpret the bible I think. It can be thought
provoking and you can learn things, but it sure shouldn't be taken as an
absolute!
Theresa
UUCM
Marin County, CA
Fifinella
><snip>
> figureing out exactly what that means.
I'm ENFP, also. I read that ENFPs make up only 3% of the
population.
And there are two already on this NG. Hmmmmmmm....
--
Kortney
te...@bigfoot.com
-----
Jargon Watch
Prebuttal: A rebuttal written in anticipation of
the need to rebut. A common preemptive tactic
in online flame wars.
Gila Jones
>
> Marie Houck wrote:
> ><snip>
> > I turned up ENFP. Now I suppose I'll have to spend a little more time
> > figureing out exactly what that means.
>
> I'm ENFP, also. I read that ENFPs make up only 3% of the
> population.
> And there are two already on this NG. Hmmmmmmm....
The thing that interests me is that all but one of the people who've
responded so far have been E's.
The last time I took the test I was ENFJ, but I'm always pretty weak on
everything except the E.
Novakthere
>The thing that interests me is that all but one of the people who've
>responded so far have been E's.
>
>
Doesn't surprise me at all. The first time I took the test the instructor put
all the e's together and all the i's together. Both groups had to plan a
party. Needless to say, the E's were all talking at once, including over each
other as well as together. The I's took turns and were much much quieter.
Gila Jones
Well, yes, there IS that...
The reasons it surprises me is that
1) People who post on the net a lot are purported to be introverts
2) The majority of UUs are introverts, statistically, I'm told
3) A lot of the people I've met in person who I previously knew online
and who were very chatty online often turned out to be extremely quiet
(and apparently introverted) in person.
The reason it doesn't surprise me is that the people who have answered
so far have mostly, or maybe all, been the regular posters. Ever so
often a fairly neutral subject comes up and people come out of the
woodwork and respond to it and then disappear again. I figure those
people are always around, lurking, but happy to leave most of the
chit-chat to the extraverts.
Marie Houck
> The thing that interests me is that all but one of the people who've
> responded so far have been E's.
>
> The last time I took the test I was ENFJ, but I'm always pretty weak on
> everything except the E.
I show up as weak on the E, which would surprise most people who know me,
but doesn't surprise me in the least.
Marie Houck
Marie Houck
rav...@alumni.princeton.edu (Karen Lona Allendoerfer) wrote:
>
> I don't think it's a perfect tool, at all (and I'm really sorry, Marie,
> for evoking those people that made it into some kind of religion--that's
> not how I intended it)--and people change, especially over time. Our
Heavens, Karen, no apology necessary: what you've actually done is
resurface this away from that rather oppresive atmosphere, and allow me to
learn more about it. As with any of the many, many personality
inventories out there, this one has some good things.
Marie Houck
Karen Lona Allendoerfer
>1) People who post on the net a lot are purported to be introverts
The site where I first took the test, but which is no longer up and running
(which is why I didn't post the URL) had a survey of the internet
respondents who had taken it. I's were overrepresented on the net relative
to the more "general" population, where E's are the majority.
I'm surprised at the number of P's in the group, because I seem to meet, in
my own life, only J's.
>3) A lot of the people I've met in person who I previously knew online
>and who were very chatty online often turned out to be extremely quiet
>(and apparently introverted) in person.
Yep. Guilty as charged.
Karen
(chit-chatting introverted regular poster)
Lance A. Brown
> The reasons it surprises me is that
> 1) People who post on the net a lot are purported to be introverts
> 2) The majority of UUs are introverts, statistically, I'm told
> 3) A lot of the people I've met in person who I previously knew online
> and who were very chatty online often turned out to be extremely quiet
> (and apparently introverted) in person.
An important point to remember about the Introvert/Extrovert axis is
that the terms are not being used in their 'normal' sense of shyness
vs. outgoing. The I/E axis describes how people process ideas and
thoughts. Do they prefer to think something through before acting on
it or do they like to chew it over with other people, for example.
When I first took the Meyers-Brigg assessment my freshman year in
college I came out INXP: strongly I, N, and P, and nearly equal on
the F/T axis. Since then I've taken it periodically and have seen my
own personal growth reflected in the changes in my scores. Now, I'm
XNXP, still strongly N and P, but balanced on the I/E and T/F axes.
--[Lance]
Michael James Tino
On 1 Sep 1998, Fifinella wrote:
> Marie Houck wrote:
> ><snip>
> > I turned up ENFP. Now I suppose I'll have to spend a little more time
> > figureing out exactly what that means.
>
> I'm ENFP, also. I read that ENFPs make up only 3% of the
> population.
> And there are two already on this NG. Hmmmmmmm....
three (OK, so I'm really ENXP, since I usually score somewhere around a 0
on the T-F scale)...
peace,
m
**********************************************************************
* ____ Michael James Tino *
* \ / mjt...@acpub.duke.edu *
* \/ *
* "Do not ignore what you don't understand." - Jo Rae Wright *
**********************************************************************
Laurie Barlow, AIA
I've seen far more accurate asessments from MMVI.
Laurie
Marie Houck
<barl...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> INTP, reporting here. Meyers-Briggs is an interesting benchmark, but
> I've seen far more accurate asessments from MMVI.
What's MMVI?
And, I guess, define "accurate". When it comes to any of these
personality inventories, I prefer to use words like "useful". Each one
has strengths and weaknesses, each uses some different group of "traits"
to measure folks against. One of the strengths of MBTI is that it uses
four traits (more than many others); one of it's weaknesses is that in
its simplist form it assumes everyone is at one end or the other: there
is little gradation. It is useful in helping folks understand certain
types on conflict, IMHO especially at work. It is also useful in helping
folks realize that they are not "wrong" for being different from others in
some way.
I know many churches have used it as well; I am less convinced of it's
usefulness there. I was at a Board retreat a while back where something
else was used (wish I could remember the name....but it isn't important,
since my point is NOT to recommend any particular tool) that had to do
primarily with how ideas get developed and implemented, and puts everyone
on a 2 dimensional grid. After we'd taken the test, we heard about the
five basic "types" for this particular tool (one for each quadrant, one
for folks in the center), we scored our tests and everyone put a dot on
the grid where they ended up. When we were done, we all cracked up: it
became obvious why this particular group was so damned good at developing
wonderful ideas -- and lousy at implementation. ("THAT'S why we never get
anything done!")
MBTI is currently popular; there have been other personality tests that
have been popular at different times, and more will come along in the
future. One of the problems I see whenever one of them becomes *very*
popular is that it becomes the only one in use for anything -- whether or
not it is particularly useful in any given setting. A good organizational
consultant (and this is used by those folks a LOT) will have at his or her
disposal many different tools to assess a situation. The biggest problem
I have with folks who swear by one particular tool is that it is too
limiting. It's like the old hammer line: when the only tool you have is
a hammer, pretty soon everything starts to look like a nail.
Marie Houck
Holli Emore
Fifinella wrote:
> Marie Houck wrote:
> ><snip>
> > I turned up ENFP. Now I suppose I'll have to spend a little more time
> > figureing out exactly what that means.
>
> I'm ENFP, also. I read that ENFPs make up only 3% of the
> population.
> And there are two already on this NG. Hmmmmmmm....
Make that three.
Holli Emore
Marie Houck wrote:
Ditto again. I also feel I am very slowly changing as I age. Some say the
distinction is not in our actions (friends see how outgoing we are but are not
around when we are being renewed with "down" or quiet time), but in what gives us
energy. Does interaction with others give us energy or drain us of it?
Magdalen
percentage of us here than in the general population?
Magdalen
Fifinella wrote:
ydo...@phoenix.princeton.edu
gila...@home.com writes:
>Fifinella wrote:
[...]
>> I'm ENFP, also. I read that ENFPs make up only 3% of the
>> population.
>> And there are two already on this NG. Hmmmmmmm....
>
>responded so far have been E's.
>
>The last time I took the test I was ENFJ, but I'm always pretty weak on
>everything except the E.
Ok, I missed how this discussion morphed into a thread about
Myers-Briggs types, but I test out INTP (weak on the fourth parameter,
emphatic on the first three, results consistent between two different
versions of the test). The description seemed accurate to me, too,
though it seems to me that any social scientist worth his or her salt
should be able to come up with sixteen differently-expressed Barnum
texts. As a Neopagan, I found it interesting that my "type" is grossly
overrepresented in my religious path (something like 30%, vs. 5% of the
general population). Correlations with self-selected group membership
suggests that the Myers-Briggs scale is at least identifying something
about people's preferences, though I have no idea whether it does
anything more useful.
Stephen B. Kimble
(or is it IPTJ?); opposites except the J.
very interesting thread.. there is a Keirsey Temperment test on the net.
I got the same result - ENFJ.
Regards,
-jpJane
I received the following by e-mail
it's a FUN test but don't peek.
scroll down slowly and answer as you go.
== = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
> Subject: A cute test on yourself
> Date: Wednesday, August 26, 1998 8:11 PM
>
>
> < **Make a wish before you start the quiz***
> >>
> >>
> >>Warning! Do take the quiz as you read, there are only 4 questions,
> and
> >>if you scan all the way to the end before finishing you won't get the
> >>honest results.
> >>
> >>Don't cheat. Scroll slowly and do each exercise. Don't look ahead.
> >>Get pencil and paper and write it down. You will need it at the end.
> >>This is an honest quiz, that will tell you about your true self.
> >> Enjoy!
> >>
> >>
> >>********************************************************
> >>
> >> Chapter I.
> >>
> >>
> >>Arrange the following 5 animals according to
> >>your preference:
> >>
> >> Cow
> >> Tiger
> >> Sheep
> >> Horse
> >> Monkey
> >>
> >>
> >>**************************************************
> >>
> >> Chapter II
> >>
> >>Write one word to describe each of the following:
> >>
> >> Dog
> >> Cat
> >> Rat
> >> Coffee
> >> Ocean
> >>
> >>
> >>*****************************************************
> >>
> >> Chapter III
> >>
> >>
> >>Think of somebody (who also knows you) that
> >>you can relate to the following colors:
> >>(Please don't repeat your answer twice. Name only
> >>one person for each color.)
> >>
> >> Yellow
> >> Orange
> >> Red
> >> White
> >> Green
> >>
> >>
> >>******************************************************
> >>
> >> Chapter IV
> >>
> >>
> >>Finally, indicate your favorite number and
> >>favorite day of the week.
> >>
> >>
> >>*******************************************************
> >>
> >>Are you done?? Make sure your answers are what you TRULY
> >>feel.......
> >>
> >> Last chance............
> >> See interpretations below:
> >> But before going on, repeat your wish!
> >>
> >>
> >>*******************************************************
> >>
> >> Chapter I
> >>
> >> This will define your priorities in life
> >>
> >> Cow means career
> >> Tiger means pride
> >> Sheep means love
> >> Horse means family
> >> Monkey means money
> >>
> >>*********************************************************
> >>
> >> Chapter II
> >>
> >>Your description of Dog implies your own personality
> >>Your description of Cat implies your partner's personality
> >>Your description of Rat implies your enemy's personality
> >>Your description of Coffee is how you interpret sex
> >>Your description of Ocean implies your own life
> >>
> >>******************************************************************
> >>Chapter III
> >>
> >>Yellow - somebody who will never forget you
> >>Orange - someone whom you can consider as your real friend
> >>Red - someone you really love
> >>White - your soul mate
> >>Green - a person whom you will always remember for the rest of your
> >life.
> >>
> >>******************************************************************
> >> Chapter IV
> >>
> >>You have to send this to as many people as your number states, and
> >>your wish will come true on the day you stated.
> >>
> >> Enjoy!!
>
================================