foopityfop

> When she is face to face with an addicted patient, Friedman explains, what is at stake is that patient’s very ability “to become a full person without the shadow of always needing something.”

The more I think about it, the whole idea of using stimulants if very Icarus-esque. Societal pressures urge us to become productive, the sub-C-level tasks involved with being productive tend to be tedious and despite our natural inclination to be bored out of our minds when performing them, we force ourselves to face them. One way we do this is through the ingestion of stimulants, most notably caffeine and now, amphetamine. Staytner's ex-artist patients who have sold out for "productivity" seem to embody this ideology to the greatest extent.

Yes I would. Given the inconsistency of results that the Myers-Briggs test outputs for individuals, the personality of that person who tested as an INTJ could be far from it normally.

Furthermore, your willingness to buy into the narrative (and others' willingness to also believe it) that by categorizing certain people into stereotypes and assuming that most of these people tend to excel at a particular set of tasks is most likely what limits them from excelling at tasks that lie outside of their respective sets just as much as their true predisposition to not excelling at them.

Try googling the article name and opening it from the search results.