Is MBTI a valid instrument?

[mippus]

Hm, I do think the remark is legitimate and I don't see why it should be seen as an isult.

As far as I know, in the academic world MBTI is not taken seriously. It is a system that should not be seen as scientific. It is not. This is where I agree with Victor.

However, it offers a useful frame to think about human differences and diversity and it may offer a good startingpoint for introspection. In this way it does have practical value. Amen to Xander

Even though Victor's statement was quite provocative (especially the last two paragraphs), I don't see why it should be a taboo here.

[Nadir]

MBTI is as valid as people are willing to believe in it -- like religion, which is Victor's point. It is not a science, and I echo mippus' sentiments also.

And I think it sucks that this forum, intended to house people who perceive themselves to be "against the tide", (the much beloved "intuitive preference" is a direct result of that perception, objective truth notwithstanding -- as there isn't any) doesn't seem very tolerant towards those who speak against the new tide dictated by this forum. I'm referring to Victor, of course. Why do you dismiss him as a troll so readily? Are you trolls yourselves?

[Eric B]

Originally Posted by mippus

As far as I know, in the academic world MBTI is not taken seriously.

This I have noticed too, and I was surpised. I recently asked a psychologist who was a friend fo former coworker with my wife about it, and he had never even heard of MBTI or modern temperament theory! He vaguely remembered about the ancient temperaments. It's also not covered in APA manuals like the DSM. (Though that's more specifically about disorders).

I remembered reading how years ago, it had sort of become like almost a pop-culture fad, with everyone having stickers or placards of their four letter type on their desk or door. It probably took a hit in credibility right there. Now, you have all these copycat tests online, as well, and you can take 16 of them, and come out each of the 16 types, practically.
It seems other tests, such as TJTA have more respect in the psychological community. That test doesn't name "temperaments" as such, but focuses more on the behavioral factors. I think even Type A theory is more respected as well. Others have expanded it into yet another several-"type" system, but originally, it was just seemed to be a general distinguishing of the A type.

I have found the concept of temperaments and types to be a great guideline for understanding people, so it's a shame that they're dismissed by the higher "scientific" community. It seems like it's just too familiar to and too toyed with by the "commoners" to be seen as scientific.

[Nocap]

Originally Posted by Victor

psychometricians

That a field with this name exists makes me weep.

I also know that MBTI was invented by a mother and daughter who had no qualifications at all - and in particular they had no psychometric qualifications and so had no way of making a Valid and Reliable personality test.

The pair of them were morons. They took Jung's prime cuts and turned them into McDonalds.

Also their test is plaigerised from, "PersonalityTypes", by Carl Jung who was a collaborator in WW II and a guru of the New Age religion.

It was not plagiarized. He gave them permission. He disagreed from the beginning -- he wanted nothing to do with a test.

He was right too. The test is far too superficial. It's humiliating that I ever once bought into it.

In fact qualified psychometricians regard MBTI as Invalid and Unreliable as astrology. And all qualified astronomers know that astrology has no truth value.

I figured that shit out when I was 11. You don't need an advanced degree to recognize the absurdity inherent in the idea that the random configuration of the stars, inappropriately named based on things they don't actually resemble is able anything as sensitive intricate and delicate as a brain just on the coincidence that we happen to be in just the right positions relative to these forms, of which relations we've somehow mapped out to precision even despite the fact that the entire macro changes dramatically by the millisecond because of the micro.

In fact MBTI is used here simply to reinforce narcissism.

Okay what?

[Nocap]

Originally Posted by Night

Nice user title.

Taken.

[SolitaryPenguin]

If by narcissism you mean that it gives us more confidence in being able to talk about ourselves and others more on a core level than just chit chat, I would agree with you there.

Any type of personality discussion where the contributors and participants are able to cut through all the bullshit and get to the root of where these emotions, feelings, thoughts and beliefs come from, is completely valid to me and 100% of the reason why I come here.

If you meant narcissism in a different way, then I don't don't understand, but at least I got to have a mini-rant.

[MetalWounds]

An instrument must have a purpose, the question is; is MBTI a valid instrument for what purpose?

Scientific classification of people into 16 concrete types? No. People tend to think that MBTI is supposed to be used for this. Not entirely so.

When used to measure the differences between people and how they interact with others, it is a valid instrument. We can use MBTI to learn a lot about different people, and even better ourselves. The key is not to take it too seriously. Don't try to make MBTI something it's not. (I know this conflicts with many peoples' beliefs)

On a related subject, some of the prevailing ideas accepted today were quite controversial, and thought to be weakly scientific when they were pioneered.

[sriv]

It is definitely not a scientific tool, more of a personal tool for interactive and self-fulfilling purposes.

That is probably why NT's are so common on online boards like this. They need a tool, modeled after science and made by scientists, to figure and make sense of people.

[Nocap]

Originally Posted by sriv

It is definitely not a scientific tool, more of a personal tool for interactive and self-fulfilling purposes.

Everything has self fulfilling purposes.

[Athenian200]

Originally Posted by Victor

Well, I'm here and I know all qualified psychometricians know that MBTI is formally Invalid and Unreliable.

I also know that MBTI was invented by a mother and daughter who had no qualifications at all - and in particular they had no psychometric qualifications and so had no way of making a Valid and Reliable personality test.

Also their test is plaigerised from, "PersonalityTypes", by Carl Jung who was a collaborator in WW II and a guru of the New Age religion.

In fact qualified psychometricians regard MBTI as Invalid and Unreliable as astrology. And all qualified astronomers know that astrology has no truth value.

In fact MBTI is used here simply to reinforce narcissism.

.
You know... I hate to say it, but I think you might be right. I see all these patterns in people, but I think it's only because I was given the pattern, and then fit all my perceptions into it.

The only reason I haven't rejected it yet is because it's the whole basis for this site. If I reject it, I have to leave, because there's no good reason for me to be here if I accept that it's invalid. Everything I've studied is pushing me towards the idea that it's an incomplete or inaccurate picture. I mean, if you accept the theory and several common extensions of it on face value, it seems to me that my use and awareness of abstract logic should be lower than all NT's, about equal to an average ENFP and INFJ, and higher than all other types. When I met some alleged NT's who seemed clearly less intelligent than myself, I decided to write them off as misidentified ST's... but then it kept happening, and I realized there had to be a better explanation. So I applied various, subtle methods of measuring various kinds of intelligence, and I found little correlation with type (even the ones that were supposed to exist by the very nature/description of the type). And when I examined it closely, I found that the way the theory is applied has so many loopholes and exceptions that you could feasibly use it to justify yourself being any type you wished. People are always encouraged that they're right about themselves, regardless of what type they think they are.

There are a few basic patterns according with groups of letters that you could have predicted from observation anyway, but much more is speculation. Basically, all it really does is confirm our suspicions, rather than explain any new differences between people that weren't apparent.

The problem is, most people don't have access to or interest in the resources they'd need to get a more thorough understanding, so this is the best they can do in furthering it. It does help people in dealing with basic differences in some cases (and that's what I like about it), don't get me wrong. But I think it's more that it shows people how differently they could perceive things, and makes them more open to those who think differently, than anything in the theory itself.

So my question is... if MBTI is invalid, what do we do? Just leave? Give up? What's left here for us? You seriously make me contemplate whether I have any business staying here because of my own doubts about it...

Anyway, do you have any ideas about what might be superior to MBTI?