User Tag List

First 56789 Last

Results 61 to 70 of 85

  1. #61
    Senior Member Tiltyred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    468 sx/sp
    Socionics
    EII None
    Posts
    4,383

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by highlander29 View Post
    Did you ask him if he learned about projection in his workshop?

    Maybe it was a joke. In either case, what an ass.
    He was serious. For what he wanted me for, I AM worthless. He found an ISTJ to help him with that stuff. My talents have come to be valued even if they're not what he had hoped for. One of them is putting up with him.

    So I do very much see how MBTI in the workplace can be abused.

  2. #62
    Tenured roisterer SolitaryWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 so/sx
    Posts
    3,467

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by edcoaching View Post
    You've illustrated its misuse well. S and N have different styles of creativity. N is not more creative. Unfortunately many of the creativity tests were developed by Ns,a s were tests of giftedness, so there's a bias that puts one preference over the other. The question isn't which type is the best leader, or the most creative, or the best teacher, etc., but in which way does each type achieve excellence in those areas. Check Marci Segal's work on creativity..
    Suppose we grant that the Intuitive is not more creative than a sensor by definition. By implication, it would follow that the Extrovert is not more outgoing than the introvert by definition. Simply put, both sensors and intuitives engage in creativity, but they have different ways of doing so. Similarly, both Extrovert and Introvert can be outgoing, yet they simply go about it differently.

    Very well, however, the MBTI folks will then ask, why is it the case that more Extroverts are outgoing than Introverts? An advocate of your typological method will claim that perhaps social outings are biased in favor of introverts and discourage them from being active in interpersonal activities.

    I think this is rather plausible. Any shy and reserved person is likely to be labelled as an introvert. In many cases, indeed taking a different approach to encouraging people to socialize can be successful; that is, a method that often inspires an outgoing person to interact with others is ineffective once applied to introverts. However, a new method could be designed specifically for helping reserved people to become more adept at interacting with people.

    I admit that this does solve the problem of unwarranted personality labels advanced by the MBTI authors, as it suggests that one type of personality can master the skill-set that a different type is expected to have.

    Regrettably, it runs into difficulties at a further stage of inquiry. Although in many cases a person's MBTI test-results are based on a person's life-experiences led him to perceive himself and are irrelevant to his temperament or innate dispositions. In other cases a person's temperament has a great deal to do with the MBTI persona he identifies with. For instance, a person who is of the introverted temperament is frequently led to 'type' himself as an introvert.

    Empirical studies have shown that Introverts by their nature tend to become more easily stimulated than extroverts and therefore tend to require less interaction. On that note, I do not believe that you can avoid conceding that there is something about the MBTI definition of the Extrovert that makes him better adjusted to be outgoing than the Introvert.

    This fact does not show that Introverts are necessarily less talented at being outgoing or less talented at doing so, however, it does imply that there is a certain inequality between types. Some are by their nature drawn to one kind of an activity and others to another. As for example, an introvert, by the constitution of his mind is subtly drawn away from activities of high social interaction. He certainly can fight this natural tendency and become more outgoing than any Extrovert, however, he will have one certain hindrance that the Extrovert shall lack.

    The implication of the temperament perspective on the issue shows that at least in some cases, a person of one MBTI type is going to be at a disadvantage to learn a certain set of skills that the person of the other type will not. Although the disadvantage is far from insurmountable, it contradicts the thesis that in all cases all MBTI types have equal strength, as can be exemplified by the dictum that sensors are not less creative then intuitives, introverts not less outgoing than extroverts and so forth.

    In summary, by definition one type does not have a virtue that the other lacks, as a type in this context is a temperament which is nothing but a tendency. However, in the context of your argument, a type is not defined as a temperament, but a collection of personality qualities. As noted, in some cases, a person's temperament will influence his personality profile and manifest in existence or lack thereof of certain qualities that are present in another personality profile. If you claim that extroverts are not inherently better socializers than introverts but are so because of a certain social biases inherent in our society, the argument from temperament still holds. Even if Introverts are given a fair opportunity to become better socializers, they will be hindered by their natural dispositions. In that respect, it is a mistake to claim that all types have equal strength.
    "Do not argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience." -- Mark Twain

    “No man but a blockhead ever wrote, except for money.”---Samuel Johnson

    My blog: www.randommeanderings123.blogspot.com/

  3. #63
    & Badger, Ratty and Toad Mole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    18,524

    Garbage In, Garbage Out

    Garbage in, garbage out.

    If you apply logic to garbage, you get garbage in return.

    But we seem to think that if we are only more logical, if only our logic is more detailed and focused, then we can turn garbage into gold.

    This is exactly the same thinking behind alchemy which seeks to turn lead into gold. It's called magical thinking. But the magical thinking of alchemy had been replaced by chemistry based on evidence and reason.

    But it doesn't matter how much logic we apply to MBTI, it is simply garbage and we get garbage in return.

    Of course the phrase 'garbage in, garbage out' is usually applied to your computer, but it equally applies to MBTI.

    Bananatrombones has pointed out, "The appeal of conspiracy theories is that they are logically consistent". And this is the appeal of MBTI. But garbage in, garbage out.

    If you are digging a hole for water and find none, the temptation is to keep on digging. So you find the aficionados of MBTI keep getting more and more logical as they become more and more absurd.

    This relationship between logic and absurdity has an interesting name. It is called schismogenesis.

  4. #64
    Tenured roisterer SolitaryWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 so/sx
    Posts
    3,467

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Victor View Post
    Garbage in, garbage out.

    If you apply logic to garbage, you get garbage in return.

    But we seem to think that if we are only more logical, if only our logic is more detailed and focused, then we can turn garbage into gold.

    This is exactly the same thinking behind alchemy which seeks to turn lead into gold. It's called magical thinking. But the magical thinking of alchemy had been replaced by chemistry based on evidence and reason.

    But it doesn't matter how much logic we apply to MBTI, it is simply garbage and we get garbage in return.

    Of course the phrase 'garbage in, garbage out' is usually applied to your computer, but it equally applies to MBTI.

    Bananatrombones has pointed out, "The appeal of conspiracy theories is that they are logically consistent". And this is the appeal of MBTI. But garbage in, garbage out.

    If you are digging a hole for water and find none, the temptation is to keep on digging. So you find the aficionados of MBTI keep getting more and more logical as they become more and more absurd.
    MBTI isn't logically consistent, the more logic you 'apply to it', the more compelling reasons you will find to reject it. Of course, there are many species of MBTI theory floating around, many of which I am ignorant of, however, those of the conventional online or Keirseyan variety are indeed incoherent. Type profiles attribute incompatible qualities to one person and maintain that a person can only be one type, yet there is nothing about the MBTI system in itself that precludes a person from having many types. MBTI notions only characterize fleeting personality features all of which are commonly displayed by nearly all kinds of people. This alone shows thats a rendition of a single personality profile is untenable or must include contradictory qualities, since MBTI is willing to accept neither premise, it collapses.
    "Do not argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience." -- Mark Twain

    “No man but a blockhead ever wrote, except for money.”---Samuel Johnson

    My blog: www.randommeanderings123.blogspot.com/

  5. #65

    Default

    I wouldn't say MBTi doesn't exist. It just doesn't say that much which I didn't already know.

    The key things it tells us are:
    - People are different and we don't all work the same way (Hands up everyone who hadn't realised this and needed Hollywood or MBTi to tell them.)
    - People learn in different ways (I've taught for longer that I've known MBTi and was actually better at adapting when I assumed everyone was different rather than a type.)
    - People are better suited to different career paths (Yes, but they should do what interests them. It would be a sad world if we all just did what our type said. You would lose diversity in many fields, and they'd go down hill as a result.)
    - MBTi is a way to communicate what I know pseudo-scientifically so some people who otherwise wouldn't believe the obvious will. (Probably where I've found it most useful. Sounds a bit like religion.)

    I'm quite happy that it hasn't conquered all, because it would be beyond scary. I skipped the IQ test at my school because I was sick and that was enough that I didn't have merit for acceleration maths after one bad exam. Imagine if MBTi was used extensively? You can say everyone will learn to use it well, but if people on TC don't learn these things, why would teachers in schools? Since when did teachers stay impartial, unbiased, impersonal?

    I know there is an ideal and a dream behind having it. We will all suddenly know our way and be happy. But not everyone wants to know the way, or needs to. Getting lost can be far more constructive. As proud as I am to be my type, it is a limit and a box. It is a simplification of me rather than an amplification of my strengths. And people using it to describe me or decide my future, how I learn, what I'll love, sounds like a nightmare. They might call it caring, but caring would be asking for my input and learning about me to know these things. Not being lazy and expecting a theory to describe humans on a mass scale.
    Freude, schöner Götterfunken Tochter aus Elysium, Wir betreten feuertrunken, Himmlische, dein Heiligtum! Deine Zauber binden wieder Was die Mode streng geteilt; Alle Menschen werden Brüder, Wo dein sanfter Flügel weilt.

  6. #66
    & Badger, Ratty and Toad Mole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    18,524

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by noigmn View Post
    I wouldn't say MBTi doesn't exist. It just doesn't say that much which I didn't already know.

    The key things it tells us are:
    - People are different and we don't all work the same way (Hands up everyone who hadn't realised this and needed Hollywood or MBTi to tell them.)
    - People learn in different ways (I've taught for longer that I've known MBTi and was actually better at adapting when I assumed everyone was different rather than a type.)
    - People are better suited to different career paths (Yes, but they should do what interests them. It would be a sad world if we all just did what our type said. You would lose diversity in many fields, and they'd go down hill as a result.)
    - MBTi is a way to communicate what I know pseudo-scientifically so some people who otherwise wouldn't believe the obvious will. (Probably where I've found it most useful. Sounds a bit like religion.)

    I'm quite happy that it hasn't conquered all, because it would be beyond scary. I skipped the IQ test at my school because I was sick and that was enough that I didn't have merit for acceleration maths after one bad exam. Imagine if MBTi was used extensively? You can say everyone will learn to use it well, but if people on TC don't learn these things, why would teachers in schools? Since when did teachers stay impartial, unbiased, impersonal?

    I know there is an ideal and a dream behind having it. We will all suddenly know our way and be happy. But not everyone wants to know the way, or needs to. Getting lost can be far more constructive. As proud as I am to be my type, it is a limit and a box. It is a simplification of me rather than an amplification of my strengths. And people using it to describe me or decide my future, how I learn, what I'll love, sounds like a nightmare. They might call it caring, but caring would be asking for my input and learning about me to know these things. Not being lazy and expecting a theory to describe humans on a mass scale.
    Some personality tests are valid and reliable. And we know they are valid and reliable because they have been subject to many double blind experiments.

    But in seventy years MBTI has not been subject to even one double blind experiment.

    This is not surprising as MBTI is not a personality test, rather it is another American scam.

    However they claim it is a personality test, but this is simply a confidence trick to ensnare the gullible and the vulnerable.

  7. #67

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Victor View Post
    Some personality tests are valid and reliable. And we know they are valid and reliable because they have been subject to many double blind experiments.

    But in seventy years MBTI has not been subject to even one double blind experiment.

    This is not surprising as MBTI is not a personality test, rather it is another American scam.

    However they claim it is a personality test, but this is simply a confidence trick to ensnare the gullible and the vulnerable.
    It is essentially self fulfilling. You select certain traits and compare them. Then you put a person in a section based on these traits. Then you say the person is more likely to prefer certain things because they are in a certain section. That works and seems quite simple.

    The problem is the "sections" and the "more likely"s. It is statistical. It doesn't really say anything solid about anyone. You can't guarantee that I will do or prefer anything as an ENFP, any more than you can say a middle class mother reads women's magazines. You can guess that I might because I come from a certain group, but you can predict nothing. All you have is the information I gave in testing. If something fits this information directly then you can conclude something. If I said I do a certain thing, you can say I do a certain thing.

    The question is why not use that information? Why suddenly bundle the other things I said I don't do but are in the same section with it? What is the point of that except to decrease accuracy? Why not have a student questionnaire that says, "What do you like?" "What do you want to be when you grow up?" "Why?" "How sure are you?" etc, and then tailor their curriculum to help them achieve it. Why bundle crap with it and assume something which might only be partly true for them instead? Does it fit better in a spreadsheet or something?
    Freude, schöner Götterfunken Tochter aus Elysium, Wir betreten feuertrunken, Himmlische, dein Heiligtum! Deine Zauber binden wieder Was die Mode streng geteilt; Alle Menschen werden Brüder, Wo dein sanfter Flügel weilt.

  8. #68

    Default Question

    Why don't they make a test that maps thinking styles and interests to careers? Why is there a middle step which brings in lots of inaccuracies and assumptions? ie. Why must I go: thinking styles->ENFP->possible careers (most of which I have no interest in)?

    Obviously careers are constantly changing, but the criteria matching each career could be updated as they change (especially in the computer age). It seems like it would be far more effective.
    Freude, schöner Götterfunken Tochter aus Elysium, Wir betreten feuertrunken, Himmlische, dein Heiligtum! Deine Zauber binden wieder Was die Mode streng geteilt; Alle Menschen werden Brüder, Wo dein sanfter Flügel weilt.

  9. #69
    & Badger, Ratty and Toad Mole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    18,524

    Default

    You can ask an atheist to study theology but there is no point because the atheist does not accept the existence of God.

    In the same way there is no point in learning the ins and outs of MBTI because it is not a personality test.

    So why do they keep telling us it is a personality test? Are they lying to us or do they believe their own propaganda?

  10. #70
    Babylon Candle Venom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    1w9 sp/sx
    Posts
    2,128

    Default

    Victor, can you explain to me step by step how MBTI could be administered using "double blind" methods?

Similar Threads

  1. Reynierse's revised type theory
    By Seymour in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 07-02-2017, 08:30 PM
  2. Type me (once and for all)
    By King sns in forum What's my Type?
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 04-29-2009, 01:36 PM
  3. Bones of type theory contention! My Te is hanging out...
    By maliafee in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 03-30-2009, 11:05 PM
  4. Deliberate use of type theory in fiction
    By Quinlan in forum Popular Culture and Type
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 12-13-2008, 09:35 AM
  5. Type Theory vs. Temperament Theory
    By proteanmix in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 07-19-2007, 10:38 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO