Is MBTI a valid instrument?

[Victor]

Originally Posted by Athenian200

.
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?

This is a truely excellent question.

And the answer lies in enchantment and disenchantment.

For instance when we fall in love it takes us over and we think it will last forever. But in real life, we fall in love for a time then we fall out of love - first we are enchanted then, after a while, we become disenchanted.

At the point of disenchantment we quite often make the mistake of blaming the other person - we say, they are not what we thought they were - or we can start to see their faults. But in fact the other person hasn't changed - they are still the same whole person. Tne only thing that has changed is that we have changed our minds.

And this is what learning is. It is simply changing our mind.

It is not putting something into our mind, it is becoming familiar and comfortable with the process of changing our mind.

The corollary is that we start to see that we are not our mind - if we can change our mind and the world doesn't end, we see we are separate from our mind and indeed even our personality.

In other words we become delightfully free of our minds.

We are not losing our minds, we are coming into their full possession.

Another way to look at it is in order of learning. So keeping one idea in your mind is the first order. Keeping two ideas in your mind at the same time is the second order and keeping three ideas in your mind at the same time is the third order and so on.

But the big step is from keeping one idea in mind to keeping two ideas in mind, 'cause once you learn two there is no reason not to have three or even four.

However in taking this big step from one to two, we find we are quite naturally disorientated. We don't know what to do - which idea should we folllow?

But after a while we learn that, "not knowing what to do", is as sign learning it taking place.

So first we are enchanted with MBTI then we become disenchanted with MBTI, but this is not the time to reject MBTI. Now is the time to keep the enchantment and the disenchantment in your mind at the same time.

In that way we are learning and indeed we are transcending, but not rejecting, MBTI.

Victor.

[Evan]

i think nocap was kinda saying this, but i think about it this way:

if you take all possible behaviors and cognitive processes and draw lines between them -- make 8 distinct categories, i don't see any problem. since all 8 cover everything a human can do, all of human action can be described by a combination of those 8. it's also true that certain ones work together better than others, and that it varies from person to person which functions they prefer. MBTI type is merely an indication of which functions you prefer to use -- that doesn't even mean you use them 50% of the time.

and that's the thing: it's hard to use type as any kind of a predictive tool since everyone uses functions outside of their primary two. two people of the same type can have drastically different distributions of functions. so, if used correctly, MBTI is not about putting people into 16 boxes. it's just about describing what you see in terms of a well defined framework. without the framework, it'd be harder to communicate about such things.

btw, you are TOTALLY an extroverted thinker

edit: people seem to think that two functions working together can accomplish a full analysis. this is completely untrue. every analysis requires sensing, intuiting, feeling, and thinking. sensing for sensory input, intuiting for connecting the data to concepts that make sense, thinking to label and conclude things about the data, and feeling to motivate everything else.

[nightning]

Originally Posted by dissonance

if you take all possible behaviors and cognitive processes and draw lines between them -- make 8 distinct categories, i don't see any problem. since all 8 cover everything a human can do, all of human action can be described by a combination of those 8. it's also true that certain ones work together better than others, and that it varies from person to person which functions they prefer. MBTI type is merely an indication of which functions you prefer to use -- that doesn't even mean you use them 50% of the time.

and that's the thing: it's hard to use type as any kind of a predictive tool since everyone uses functions outside of their primary two. two people of the same type can have drastically different distributions of functions. so, if used correctly, MBTI is not about putting people into 16 boxes. it's just about describing what you see in terms of a well defined framework. without the framework, it'd be harder to communicate about such things.

btw, you are TOTALLY an extroverted thinker

edit: people seem to think that two functions working together can accomplish a full analysis. this is completely untrue. every analysis requires sensing, intuiting, feeling, and thinking. sensing for sensory input, intuiting for connecting the data to concepts that make sense, thinking to label and conclude things about the data, and feeling to motivate everything else.

By assuming 8 distinct categories exists... you are creating boxes.

MBTI, cognitive functions... the whole framework is just a theory. It's less well defined as you imagined. Even if you can mix and match any combination of these 8 things, I truly doubt you can replicate human personality.

Darn it! I just saw a greenish yellow bird! It left before I can identify it
Golden head black cap, brownie green wings... thanks birdy
I want my camera! Dang it! Flew away before I got my camera...

[Victor]

Originally Posted by dissonance

btw, you are TOTALLY an extroverted thinker

Who me?

I am a TOTALLY extroverted thinker?

Hey, I think I kinda like that.

However I do know that I am highly suggestible, so if you suggest to me that I am a TOTALLY extroverted thinker, I become one, at least for a while.

And I have only you to thank.

Victor.

[Edahn]

Originally Posted by Nocapszy

You could say that each function is a theory in itself.

How it is a theory? Theories are falsifiable. How can you falsify this stuff? You can't.

[Evan]

Originally Posted by nightning

By assuming 8 distinct categories exists... you are creating boxes.

MBTI, cognitive functions... the whole framework is just a theory. It's less well defined as you imagined. Even if you can mix and match any combination of these 8 things, I truly doubt you can replicate human personality.

Darn it! I just saw a greenish yellow bird! It left before I can identify it
Golden head black cap, brownie green wings... thanks birdy
I want my camera! Dang it! Flew away before I got my camera...

i don't really understand. there are only certain things that humans are capable of doing, yes? let's call those things x. well, take x, divide it into some arbitrary number (in this case, 8), and label the categories. obviously, if you add up the categories, you get back to x. so the categories cover all of x.

i'm not saying we have the computing capacity to entirely quantify a set of actions as an interaction between the functions. but that doesn't matter. all actions are a combination of the functions. period. because that's how the functions are defined.

our measuring ability is really what's at fault. the system is fine.

Originally Posted by Victor

Who me?

I am a TOTALLY extroverted thinker?

Hey, I think I kinda like that.

However I do know that I am highly suggestible, so if you suggest to me that I am a TOTALLY extroverted thinker, I become one, at least for a while.

And I have only you to thank.

Victor.

heh, all i mean is you seem to prefer 'thinking' according to external standard (something you can see or measure).

[nightning]

Originally Posted by Edahn

How it is a theory? Theories are falsifiable. How can you falsify this stuff? You can't.

Let's not be too nit picky about definitions. If you want to use "theory" in the strict scientific sense of the word, then no part of MBTI is acceptable since none of it can be falsify. And with that, there's no point to this discussion. MBTI is merely pop-culture garbage.

You know that he means "theory" as the layperson's term for a system of ideas...

Originally Posted by dissonance

i don't really understand. there are only certain things that humans are capable of doing, yes? let's call those things x. well, take x, divide it into some arbitrary number (in this case, 8), and label the categories. obviously, if you add up the categories, you get back to x. so the categories cover all of x.

i'm not saying we have the computing capacity to entirely quantify a set of actions as an interaction between the functions. but that doesn't matter. all actions are a combination of the functions. period. because that's how the functions are defined.

our measuring ability is really what's at fault. the system is fine.

I disagree, the system is flawed. You admitted that we're arbitrary dividing up personality into 8 parts. There is no justifiable rational behind why these 8 categories should exist. Without that, MBTI is just a house made of cards...

Even if they truly exist, there's no way we can prove that they completely make up our personality. Actually, if we do field observations on people, we can see that they couldn't possibly be the only thing in human personality...

That bird is such a tease... fluttering around right outside my window.

[PinkPiranha]

Originally Posted by Victor

In fact MBTI is used here simply to reinforce narcissism.

And very poor hygiene!

(Watch your step - big steaming piles of B.S. too.)

[Evan]

Originally Posted by nightning

I disagree, the system is flawed. You admitted that we're arbitrary dividing up personality into 8 parts. There is no justifiable rational behind why these 8 categories should exist. Without that, MBTI is just a house made of cards...

what do you mean "should exist"? there's no objective reason we should break down wavelengths of light into colors. there's no objective reason we should categorize people by their age. there's no objective reason we should categorize animals by whether or not they can mate with one another...

how far do you want to take that line of reasoning?

i'm not saying the 8 parts are each arbitrary. i'm saying the number 8 is arbitrary.

Even if they truly exist, there's no way we can prove that they completely make up our personality.

first of all... "truly exist"...what does that mean? numbers don't "truly exist". sounds don't "truly exist". with that rationale, no concepts truly exist.

let me break down my argument.
premise: human beings are limited.
therefore: human beings have a finite set of actions and cognitive processes possible. let's call that set x.

so, if we take set x and divide it into distinct subsets that added together, contain all of x, we can use the subsets to represent anything in x.
therefore: if we divide set x into 8 distinct subsets that add together to include all of x, we can use those subsets to represent anything in x.

if you disagree, please point out a premise you disagree with or a logical flaw.

Actually, if we do field observations on people, we can see that they couldn't possibly be the only thing in human personality...

please elaborate on this point. it seems quite unsubstantiated.

i don't see why people are so inclined to think that human action is somehow uncategorizable. if you think about it, we're all just specific groupings of subatomic particles. those subatomic particles respond to their surroundings according to natural laws. it's not like this rule doesn't apply to humans for some reason. no atom can just say, "hey, i'm not gonna follow the laws of physics right now!". we're really not that complicated at a basic level.

[Nocap]

Originally Posted by Edahn

How it is a theory? Theories are falsifiable. How can you falsify this stuff? You can't.

You're right. Thank you for correcting me.

It's fact. Even better.

In the same direction the problem with those who cling to the notion that MBTI is only a theory, is that they don't realize that it's simply a description of what's already been happening.

The functions themselves are literally undeniable. I don't agree that as ENTP I have to use Ne Ti followed by Fe and Si.

I do however see that, in order to make sense of the world around you (object information Ne, or Se) You have to use introverted judgement, as extroverted judgement can only organize the objects themselves, not the subjectively interpreted qualities.

On the other side, Extroverted judgement favors work with introverted perception, because judgement strives to enforce, or reinforce the subjective perceived ideal. Vision of self and surroundings... Using the object information has little value when we're trying to impose an ideal on the world.

But even so, it's POSSIBLE for a Te type to use Se, just as much as it's possible for an Fe type to use Te. Ni types can use Ti. I've seen it.

The boxes we're talking about.... function analysis it's nothing more than understanding a dictionary. You can't say the word "as" is only a theory.