Our thumic norm is how our thumos, our spirit, is naturally. It is how our spirit is when it is free to be itself.
As a way to help us determine our thumic norm, I developed the following assessment tool with four rating scales:
My spirit is normally-
Very Low <--------------------------------------------------> Very High
1 3 5
Very Introverted <------------------------------------------> Very Extroverted
1 3 5
Very Troubled <---------------------------------------------> Very Well
1 3 5
Very Constant <--------------------------------------------> Very Changing
1 3 5
Explanation
The Low/High scale provides a reading of the degree of our spiritedness. Are we normally low-spirited, high-spirited, or somewhere in between? NOTE: In this context "Low" is descriptive. It has to do with our degree of liveliness rather than our mood.
The Introverted/Extroverted scale provides a reading of the normal orientation of our spirit. Is our spirit directed inward to our thinking, imagining, and/or emotional processes; outward toward external people, places, things, and events; and to what degree?
The Troubled/Well scale helps us assesses the normal overall health of our spirit. Are we normally ill-spirited, well-spirited, or somewhere in between?
Finally, the Constant/Changing scale gives us a reading on normal consistency of our spirit. Is our spirit consistently the same or consistently changing?
The Constant/Changing scale can refer to the three scales above it. Are we normally the same place on the Low/High scale or is our place on that scale normally changing? Is our place on the Introverted/Extroverted scale normally the same or is it normally changing? Is our place on the Ill/Well-spirited scale normally the same or is it normally changing?
Part 2 Will be about some practical applications of determining our thumic norm.
I've been trying to comment on your blog posts in sequence, however I find your ideas here so intriguing that I decided to jump ahead, in order to comment.
ReplyDeleteI confess it took me several reads to begin to make some sense of this, and I hope you will help me work with this model a bit more.
If I understand correctly, you are suggesting that each of us has an individual and personal "thumotic norm" that is ours alone. Others may end up with the same "number" though for different spirit reasons. Is this correct?
Perhaps some of my difficulty lies in the use of the word "norm", which had me thinking that there was a "normal" number which I should strive to attain, thus returning my spirit to balance when it was out of sync. Instead, my "number" serves as a baseline for my own spirit. Is that accurate?
Some of my difficulty lies in the scale--I've been trained by consumer surveys to see "5" as good and "1" as bad. Here, there is no such value judgement attached, right?
Before I write about the individual scales, I want to be sure I understand their use. Help, please.
Hello, Sara! Sorry for my delay. We had a storm and power outage that hindered me making a reply.
DeleteYes, I'm suggesting that each living being has a thumic norm. That's my hypothesis anyway. I look forward to testing it and seeing what I learn. My hunch is that it will stand up to the test but the elements for determining it could change.
Yes, just as two or more individuals can have, for example, the same Myers-Briggs type and still be unique, so two or more can have the same thumic norm numbers and still be unique.
No, I do not use "norm" as a standard to attain. I use it to refer to how we are naturally. It's our base-line. Just as we do not strive to be our Myers-Briggs type, we do not strive to be our thumic norm. We do not have to. It's just the way we naturally are.
LOL, isn't being #1 the best? I'm teasing. No, there is no bad/good in the ranges. They're descriptive rather than prescriptive.
Hope this helps. Part 2 might alos help.
No worries; I'm glad your power is restored and you are back on-line. I always appreciate your replies. And this one helped a great deal. It would seem that I grasped what you were going for here.
ReplyDeleteI do find your Myers-Briggs analogy interesting. I do agree that we don't strive to be a Myers-Briggs type. It is the outcome of how we respond to a series of questions. Certainly it serves as a descriptor of who we are. However there is some literature that suggests that the concept is also to shift the profile over time. I've read an article, though for the life of me I can't remember where, that suggests the idea is to move towards an equal or balanced profile where both descriptors of each dimension are equally represented. There is also some expression in Jungian theory that over time, we migrate toward our opposite in each.
Are you intending then to develop a questionnaire to help us assess our thumotic norm?
LOL, perhaps I'd best move to part two.
Again, I haven't suggested that either the concept of a thumic norm or the ranges function as standards to comply with in any way. They are for descriptive purposes.
ReplyDeleteCan you say what excatly it is that you're struggling with? Is it the concept of living beings having a thumic norm, using a tool to help us determine our thumic norm, using ranges in the tool, the items I used on the ranges, all of the above, none of the above, or something else?
No, I'm not working on a questionaire yet but I am certainly open to doing so or collaborating with others in doing so.
Hello. You asked what I was struggling with. I wouldn't say "struggle" is accurate. It's really more about seeking clarity. I don't have any issues whatsoever with the idea of a a thumotic norm, or of having something that helps me to determine mine. Yes, the ranges did give me pause because I needed to disconnect them from other tools/surveys that use a similar scaling.
ReplyDeleteAs for the parameters themselves, after spending time thinking about them, I believe I understand what they are intended to suggest I consider for my own thumotic norm. The one I still have some uncertainty about is the "Low-High" scale. I am interpreting this to refer to my energy level, which is what I think of when I hear the phrase "liveliness". Is this a fair interpretation?
So let me try to give you my assessment of my thumotic norm, based on what I understand so far.
Low-High - Based on my interpretation as "energy" here, I see myself as High to Very High
Introverted-Extroverted - This one was a little more difficult. I would say that I am primarily on the Introverted side, though not totally introverted. I say this because I am social, and because I often present as an extrovert. I think you are looking for who I think I am though, not the way I present. Is that right?
Troubled - Well - I would say that I am in the middle toward Well on this one. There are aspects of my spirit that are troubled, and aspects that are very well indeed. I felt some broadness here that made this a little harder to frame/assess.
Constant-Changing - Here, I see myself as more on the Constant side of the equation.
Is this the right idea? Am I also correct in my understanding that this is a personal assessment, so it is inappropriate or incorrect to ask you if you see me the same way? Can someone else have an assessment of my spirit? Can it differ from mine?
Sara, thank you so much for your response. Thanks even more for trying the tool and sharing your results.
DeleteYes, the tool gives you an opportunity to reflect on yourself and gain some insight into your thumic norm. Having used the tool, do you think it provides a succint verbal snap shot of your thumic norm?
No, I personally do not see anything inappropriate or incorrect with asking someone else to use the tool to describe their view of your thumic norm. In fact, I think it would be interesting to do so.
Sure, another person's view of your thumic norm can differ from your own, especially when you, for example, present as an extrovert but know that your spirit is really inwardly directed.