• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

Type Theory Hasn't Conquered All Because...

entropie

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 24, 2008
Messages
16,767
MBTI Type
entp
Enneagram
783
I personally think of mbti as a very weak form of religion. The faculties are similiar, it can be a guidebook to understanding each others in a society that grows away from each other more and more.

But still the most best way to find out about others will only be through own personal experience and the study of self. If one does never start with that in puberty, but instead directly starts to live after a foreign set of perception of the world, he not only endangers himself to become a drone in thought to this religion but also that he may have choosed a framework of thought that will never really fit the person he is.

Best example for this is me, my mind goes crazy about discovering new things about me on a daily basis that presents me with ideas on what other type I could be. So I am caught in an endless loop of tought about my type, which became at a point so intense that I bored my friends so deeply with it that they thought I've lost it.

Caught in the dangerous loop of possibilities is tho not the only issue, the other one is limitation. Tho I recently was introduced to the concept of shadow functions, which does widen the theory to such an extent that it looses its charme to be mistaken as a rulebook, I nevertheless can not accept the fact for example that one function is the strongest. Then again, shadow function theory doesnt demand that, therefore I can let go of that, but then I can let go of the whole system itself, cause if it has no rules no more and no borders, I can try to come to the same solutions the systems suggests thru own experience.

I wont criticize mbti as a helpful tool for lonely souls, but it walks a dangerous line between mental sanity and insanity, like every moral or ethical guidebook
 

edcoaching

New member
Joined
Jun 30, 2008
Messages
752
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
7
Yes, this forum often highlights ways to misuse the theory because many people here are self-taught with no exposure to the ethics of proper use of the theory, let alone how to use instruments, free or otherwise.

It's like a knife. You can use one to cut out cancer or to murder.
 

highlander

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 23, 2009
Messages
26,562
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
6w5
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Yes, listening skills are essential. Sometimes called Active Listening or Empathy Training.

However these skills don't come naturally to most of us and need to be taught and practised and practised.

Whereas MBTI is easy, cheap and nasty and appeals to neurotic narcissism in most of us.

So we might say, MBTI is in bad taste while listening skills are in good taste and are necessary to establish rapport.

On second thought, it probably takes less effort to learn and apply active/effective listening skills than it takes to learn/apply typology of any kind. I have no idea why you can't use both at the same time however.
 

entropie

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 24, 2008
Messages
16,767
MBTI Type
entp
Enneagram
783
Yes, this forum often highlights ways to misuse the theory because many people here are self-taught with no exposure to the ethics of proper use of the theory, let alone how to use instruments, free or otherwise.

It's like a knife. You can use one to cut out cancer or to murder.

I see, tho that means at the same time that one as a layman is obliged to lay his faith into the knowing hands of a single being that supposingly understands a theory righteously.

You know, psychology is no science, it's marketing. The one with the best public charme has the most followers.
 

Usehername

On a mission
Joined
May 30, 2007
Messages
3,794
All that said, you'd think I'm anti-MBTI but I am not. I'm strongly against misuse and abuse which I tend to see more than proper usage. I'm glad most people take the tests go "oh" and then toss it in the category of astrology.

Like Scanty passing the job requirements with flying colours but they made everyone take the MBTI, because they wanted an ESTJ and she was an INFP. So they didn't hire her!

You can't trust people to be thoughtful.
 

ThatsWhatHeSaid

Well-known member
Joined
May 11, 2007
Messages
7,263
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w4
You might read Navigating Midlife and Creative Aging by Millner for examples of how the theory brings insights into these things.

Or not. It doesn't change the fact that we're talking about a classification scheme. You can never glean that much insight from a classification scheme unless you start merging it with other, more analytical disciplines. But then of course, we're not just talking about a type theory anymore.
 

cascadeco

New member
Joined
Oct 7, 2007
Messages
9,083
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
9w1
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
But you're describing unethical use of type. People aren't supposed to type other people.

edcoaching said:
this forum often highlights ways to misuse the theory because many people here are self-taught with no exposure to the ethics of proper use of the theory, let alone how to use instruments, free or otherwise

This forum highlights the Reality of how Type gets used. That seems plain and simple to me. I don't care whether it's 'unethical', it's how the theory gets used. The end. You can throw all the 'If's' out there that you want - IF everyone was properly trained, IF every single organization/institution was warm and fuzzy about using mbti, IF every individual/organization had access to properly trained facilitators so they could get properly trained in, if everyone wanted to totally believe said expert without theorizing on their own.... but this is human nature on display here. We'll never be to a point on this planet where everyone is ethical and everyone is responsible (and has the desire to be so). Is there always going to be an ethical Type Expert to guide everyone?

Also..many on this forum aren't sold on the 'usefulness' of the instruments - so haven't accepted the theory in the first place. So, there's skepticism (which I think is a good thing) with some. Also, when you begin digging deeper into the theory, you start to realize that the 'experts' have conflicting ideas on it - hence those who are wanting to learn more run into conflicting ideas and might come up with their own instead (justifiably so) - so it's no wonder that misuse is rampant.

And, people on here tend to know a lot more about type theory than your average joe - so more knowledge tends to lead towards more misuse. People use it for their own devices. Same would apply to larger organizations - they'd pick and choose the pieces they wanted to pay attention to and that would suit their own goals/business needs/objectives, most especially once they learn more of the details of the theory.

Big-picture, before you learn the supposed nitty-gritty of the system, there's usefulness and truth to it. Yes, we can classify people into various temperaments and types. Humans have been doing that for millenia. But I'm in agreement with Protean - I think it's probably a good thing that most people who take the test and read their profiles just shrug their shoulders and don't dig any deeper.

The ultimate truth of mbti is that we all have different prefences/communication styles/needs/priorities - we're all different. But as others have already mentioned, you don't really need mbti to figure that out or to communicate effectively. Mbti's just one categorization/classification system.
 

Venom

Babylon Candle
Joined
Feb 10, 2008
Messages
2,126
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
1w9
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Like Scanty passing the job requirements with flying colours but they made everyone take the MBTI, because they wanted an ESTJ and she was an INFP. So they didn't hire her!

You can't trust people to be thoughtful.

Besides just making a priori assumption of "thats unethical", what's really wrong with that? I mean, there are some jobs where I think it makes sense to want to hire a certain style of person. When we dont label this "style" people dont think twice about it. An MBTI label, and everyone gets upset. Yes, people could game the MBTI tests and all try and get EXTJ, but lets steer clear of that point for a second:

If you have two equally qualified candidates, what's wrong with hiring the ESTJ over the INFP, if ESTJ qualities are what you wanted to hire in the first place?
 

Usehername

On a mission
Joined
May 30, 2007
Messages
3,794
Besides just making a priori assumption of "thats unethical", what's really wrong with that? I mean, there are some jobs where I think it makes sense to want to hire a certain style of person. When we dont label this "style" people dont think twice about it. An MBTI label, and everyone gets upset. Yes, people could game the MBTI tests and all try and get EXTJ, but lets steer clear of that point for a second:

If you have two equally qualified candidates, what's wrong with hiring the ESTJ over the INFP, if ESTJ qualities are what you wanted to hire in the first place?

IIRC, she was significantly more qualified than the others. They were dismayed to see her type because they had it figured out that they couldn't have any INFP for the job when there were candidates whose letters matched more clearly with the letters that they wanted. So they hired someone less qualified (by their own measurements of what "qualified" was--the MBTI was one of the last tests) because of nothing but her type.
 

Jaguar

Active member
Joined
May 5, 2007
Messages
20,647
Besides just making a priori assumption of "thats unethical", what's really wrong with that? I mean, there are some jobs where I think it makes sense to want to hire a certain style of person. When we dont label this "style" people dont think twice about it. An MBTI label, and everyone gets upset. Yes, people could game the MBTI tests and all try and get EXTJ, but lets steer clear of that point for a second:

If you have two equally qualified candidates, what's wrong with hiring the ESTJ over the INFP, if ESTJ qualities are what you wanted to hire in the first place?

The fact that you don't see why it's unethical is more than a little disturbing.
 

Mole

Permabanned
Joined
Mar 20, 2008
Messages
20,284
The largest repository of people that I know who know about MBTI/type theory are here, on this forum.

Two million Americans do the MBTI personality test every year. And the MBTI personality test has been operating for seventy years.

Why, just yesterday, on the opposite side of the world, sitting alfresco at the Bakery, a complete stranger asked what my type was. And we entered an animated conversation about introversion and extroversion.

MBTI was created in the USA and exported to the rest of the world along with American popular culture.

Unfortunately MBTI is not a personality test. It is just another American scam.

MBTI has the same truth value as astrology and is used in the same way.

When someone asks me my star sign in a bar, I know they are trying to pick me up. And when someone asks for my type over coffee at the Bakery, I know their interest in me is not entirely platonic.
 

Tiltyred

New member
Joined
Dec 1, 2008
Messages
4,322
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
468
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
IIRC, she was significantly more qualified than the others. They were dismayed to see her type because they had it figured out that they couldn't have any INFP for the job when there were candidates whose letters matched more clearly with the letters that they wanted. So they hired someone less qualified (by their own measurements of what "qualified" was--the MBTI was one of the last tests) because of nothing but her type.

My own boss went to a workshop where everyone was typed, came back and talked with me about it, I mentioned I was an INFJ, and he registered shock on his face and then looked me straight in the eye and said "You're worthless!"
 

Venom

Babylon Candle
Joined
Feb 10, 2008
Messages
2,126
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
1w9
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
IIRC, she was significantly more qualified than the others. They were dismayed to see her type because they had it figured out that they couldn't have any INFP for the job when there were candidates whose letters matched more clearly with the letters that they wanted. So they hired someone less qualified (by their own measurements of what "qualified" was--the MBTI was one of the last tests) because of nothing but her type.

what sort of "qualified" did it mean? I dont mean to pick a fight. I have a real life example to sort of "flush this out":

There is an industry that I have worked in the past few summers of college. There are some people who still work in this industry after college as supplemental income/volunteer. Being qualified could be an assortment of:
--years of experience/age
--credentials from related fields
--prior levels of responsibility
--credentials from the field itself
--past success
--general book knowledge of the field

However, with ALL of that above, there really are certain personalities that just do it better and fit in better with the rest of the staff.

There was a really young ENFJ who turned out 10x times better than 2 ESFJs that were 'more qualified' (all three were hired at one point). The difference is largely accounted for that the ENFJ was more of an "In Charge" personality. To be fair, im retroactively analyzing this.

Another example was a situation where I was working with an ENFP. We were both qualified, and got along fine outside of work. However, our styles could not be more ill-matched. He never wanted to plan anything out. He would agree to sit down and plan, but he would never want to finish it ("hey lets finish this later/ya whatever/thats all fine whatever who cares"). He basically wanted to wing it day by day. It actually worked fine for him the year before (so im not hating on him). It was just a terrible match. The following year I was working with an ISTJ. This match was perfect. We were able to plan things out, map out some goals, tasks and checkpoints. The ISTJ however, would be less qualified than the ENFP. The end result of the team work, was however, better with the ISTJ due to personality.

The moral of the story is, I think being more qualified can be a curse if its "the wrong fit".
 

sculpting

New member
Joined
Jan 28, 2009
Messages
4,148
And i assume you mean that everyone was taught to make constructive use of normal differences, vs. using type to label others and flaunt their own particular strengths...

When we've taught it that way in schools--reinforcing concepts over an entire year through literature analysis, help with planning projects, etc., we found that students were kinder to each other, more understanding of teachers, and...we took the failure rate on major projects from 25% to zero (it was a high-poverty school). so I'm thinking if people actually invested the time it takes to understand ethical use, things could be good...

I wonder about this. Take the ENTP-ENFP Ti-Fi arguments as a good example. We have upwards of several thousand cumulative posts on this topic. We understand that these are very different things. More than any other people, we should be able to work through these discussions logically an dreach a reasonable conclusion.

Yet we fight endlessly around the issue. The more we learn about ourselves, the more we learn how different we are from the other. To transition away from the fighting we have to be able to admit a vastly different perspective may be equally as valid as our own and that our own may even be flawed-even if it is our primary approach to life.

I'd guess that few people could do this-if anybody, we should be able to.

So even if you extensively educated everyone, perhaps all they would ever learn is how very different they are.

Perhaps it is better just to throw some happy feelings using DISC or MBTI-just enough to say "It's okay, people are different, it's good" and then take the Jung approach-recognize most folks will think they are connecting over the same ideas-when in reality they are living in different worlds.

Let the pretend game continue?
 

heart

heart on fire
Joined
May 19, 2007
Messages
8,456
My own boss went to a workshop where everyone was typed, came back and talked with me about it, I mentioned I was an INFJ, and he registered shock on his face and then looked me straight in the eye and said "You're worthless!"

I see a Gattica world where they would find a way to vaccinate against INFP.
 

Usehername

On a mission
Joined
May 30, 2007
Messages
3,794
what sort of "qualified" did it mean? I dont mean to pick a fight. I have a real life example to sort of "flush this out":

There is an industry that I have worked in the past few summers of college. There are some people who still work in this industry after college as supplemental income/volunteer. Being qualified could be an assortment of:
--years of experience/age
--credentials from related fields
--prior levels of responsibility
--credentials from the field itself
--past success
--general book knowledge of the field

However, with ALL of that above, there really are certain personalities that just do it better and fit in better with the rest of the staff.

There was a really young ENFJ who turned out 10x times better than 2 ESFJs that were 'more qualified' (all three were hired at one point). The difference is largely accounted for that the ENFJ was more of an "In Charge" personality. To be fair, im retroactively analyzing this.

Another example was a situation where I was working with an ENFP. We were both qualified, and got along fine outside of work. However, our styles could not be more ill-matched. He never wanted to plan anything out. He would agree to sit down and plan, but he would never want to finish it ("hey lets finish this later/ya whatever/thats all fine whatever who cares"). He basically wanted to wing it day by day. It actually worked fine for him the year before (so im not hating on him). It was just a terrible match. The following year I was working with an ISTJ. This match was perfect. We were able to plan things out, map out some goals, tasks and checkpoints. The ISTJ however, would be less qualified than the ENFP. The end result of the team work, was however, better with the ISTJ due to personality.

The moral of the story is, I think being more qualified can be a curse if its "the wrong fit".

I don't agree with you but I have a question:

how do you confirm which type any one individual is if you're going to be making consequential decisions?

There's a reason why this is not a science--there's no data in which to root this except for self-recognition (which I think could be argued would vary by self-awareness, which would vary by type).
 

Venom

Babylon Candle
Joined
Feb 10, 2008
Messages
2,126
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
1w9
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
I don't agree with you but I have a question:

how do you confirm which type any one individual is if you're going to be making consequential decisions?

There's a reason why this is not a science--there's no data in which to root this except for self-recognition (which I think could be argued would vary by self-awareness, which would vary by type).

I hope you noticed that I included: "To be fair, I'm retroactively analyzing this". Also notice that all three of ESFJ, ESFJ and ENFJ were hired. I only used the directing/informing as a ex-post descriptor of why I think the ENFJ ended up succeeding despite less 'qualifications'.

The only one of the bunch that I know has taken the test was the ENFP. I would trust his self awareness. The others I type basically by using the "multiple models" method which crosses "interaction style" and "temperament" to get a single type. Its one of the stickies in the "whats my type" section (vagrant I think).

I think giving people a test isn't ethically wrong. I think its more that it just isnt always effective in typing a person. However, if the tests were more accurate, then I dont think it would be unethical.
 

Lark

Active member
Joined
Jun 21, 2009
Messages
29,569
:coffee:
Type theory says, "We hold different views...and yours may be just as legitimate as mine. Let's compare our perceptions and share the rationale behind our judgments." It usually involves compromise or a complete revision of what we thought we knew. Human nature rails against both. It's easier to accept theories that say, "I'm right; you're a jerk."

I at least thought this has some merit. I'd put bets most of Congress has taken the MBTI at some point in business school or something and has managed to conveniently forget anything they learned about constructive use of differences...

I think you make good points about the distinctiveness of MBTI versus the theory of multiple intelligences. These paragraphs in particular interest me. The first bit I bolded because I wanted to ask does it? Is it human nature to rail against both?

I consider the ability to compromise or completely revise thinking as indicative of maturity, you have to be able to proceed from a position of relative security, ie no emotional or affective crisis occurs as a result of compromise/pragmatism or revisionist thinking. Which isnt the same as nature per se.

I bolded the second part because I just tend to think isnt that the truth but that any theory is prone to the same thing, people learn from it but unless they really properly integrate the learning its superficial, lasts as long as it suits their purposes and then is dispensed with.

That goes for multiple intelligences too, there's people I know have read the books on emotional and social intelligence and done exactly what you've said or rather begun to imagine "I've nothing to learn" and consequently also "you've a lot of learn" of everyone else. I'm reminded of the "devil's beatitudes" in which the devil out lines behaviour he finds appreciable, the twist being that the final one is commending those that read all the others and immediately thought of others conforming to them instead of themselves.

I find it interesting that you consider MBTI to be about knowing your limits and faults rather than development. I think I know where you're coming from but I'm not sure that certain sorts of shared behaviour or thinking cant be developed by all irrespective of traits or trait preferences. :coffee::coffee:
 

highlander

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 23, 2009
Messages
26,562
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
6w5
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
My own boss went to a workshop where everyone was typed, came back and talked with me about it, I mentioned I was an INFJ, and he registered shock on his face and then looked me straight in the eye and said "You're worthless!"

Did you ask him if he learned about projection in his workshop?

Maybe it was a joke. In either case, what an ass.
 
Top