your mbti type does not change!

[Venom]

Great attitude Jaguar! MBTI actually, is not so well researched as is likely claimed. In psychology, it is recognized as a very limited, but semiuseful tool. The reason is that MBTIs have shown to be fluctuating and therefore only be a temporary snapshot of what might be called personality.

Since personality itself is defined as "characteristics which are stable over time" the MBTI has been shown to not qualify as a real personality test. Often we overlook certain smaller parts that just do not fit all because of a bias function. You can give such a text to a whole class and all of them will be surprised, how everyone thinks that is describes him.


For all those, that want a rather timestable test :

http://www.outofservice.com/bigfive/

Big Five of Personality.

I mostly agree. The global 5 test pretty much disqualifies the following MBTI myths:
<> All types are created equal!
<> Your Type Doesnt Change!
<> There are "functions"!

Global 5 tests, using factor analysis, locate 5 traits, that test independently. There are 4 that line up pretty well with MBTI. The traits that dont line up as well (T/F), frankly, kind of suck anyways. The mbti's absence of neuroticism factor is a HUGE HUGE HUGE problem. A neurotic of any "type" will be like night and day compared with a calmer variety. Tests using global 5 are much more time stable, but still show consistent change until about age 25. As people get older, they generally become more agreeable, less neurotic and more organized. . Also, research on big 5 doesnt seem to reveal the concentrations we'd expect from actual mutual exclusive "S vs N" etc. People are gradients between points, as we would expect from a 5 factor test (where each point tests independent). Also, there is pretty solid evidence that certain traits are more likely to be found in "Happy people" and therefore, some types are happier than others. That seems to imply type superiority. In general:
<> social over non social
<> agreeable over egocentric
<> organized over unorganized
<> calm over neurotic
<> inquisitive over non inquisitive is somewhat non essential, but it'd make sense that society would benefit from more inquisitive people... This roughly equates E (sociable), J (organized), F (agreeable), N (inquisitive).

so... ENFJ...


...but I may be biased

 

[Thalassa]

The Global 5 Test is one of the stupidest, most simplistic things I've ever seen. It's called the stranger test because they're things that an 11 year old child could see in a stranger.

I believe that MBTI type is functionally innate, which is why typing people by certain stereotypes or behaviors doesn't necessarily work, because those functions manifest in a uniform way but can produce different behavior pending on the individual's life experience, culture, blah blah blah.

 

[Thalassa]

I mostly agree. The global 5 test pretty much disqualifies the following MBTI myths:
<> All types are created equal!
<> Your Type Doesnt Change!
<> There are "functions"!

Global 5 tests, using factor analysis, locate 5 traits, that test independently. There are 4 that line up pretty well with MBTI. The traits that dont line up as well (T/F), frankly, kind of suck anyways. The mbti's absence of neuroticism factor is a HUGE HUGE HUGE problem. A neurotic of any "type" will be like night and day compared with a calmer variety. Tests using global 5 are much more time stable, but still show consistent change until about age 25. As people get older, they generally become more agreeable, less neurotic and more organized. . Also, research on big 5 doesnt seem to reveal the concentrations we'd expect from actual mutual exclusive "S vs N" etc. People are gradients between points, as we would expect from a 5 factor test (where each point tests independent). Also, there is pretty solid evidence that certain traits are more likely to be found in "Happy people" and therefore, some types are happier than others. That seems to imply type superiority. In general:
<> social over non social
<> agreeable over egocentric
<> organized over unorganized
<> calm over neurotic
<> inquisitive over non inquisitive is somewhat non essential, but it'd make sense that society would benefit from more inquisitive people... This roughly equates E (sociable), J (organized), F (agreeable), N (inquisitive).

so... ENFJ...


...but I may be biased

Are you seriously trying to argue that there's a superior type, and that it's your own and using the Big 5 as justification?

Yeah, as soon as you figure out that in order to keep the world functioning smoothly that a variety of types of people with varying strengths and weaknesses are needed...

If the world were all ENFJs I doubt very seriously we'd be as scientifically advanced as we are, and there surely wouldn't enough "followers" to do the practical work required to make things go the way they should.

There'd probably be no war, but we'd also probably be all living in grass huts.

 

[ZPowers]

<> social over non social
<> agreeable over egocentric
<> organized over unorganized
<> calm over neurotic
<> inquisitive over non inquisitive is somewhat non essential, but it'd make sense that society would benefit from more inquisitive people... This roughly equates E (sociable), J (organized), F (agreeable), N (inquisitive).

Absurd. Even assuming these are the key elements, which I don't, a lot of these are debatable.

I'll give you the sociable.

Agreeable over egocentric could be T or P over F. People who operate on reason general don't get their egos hurt or bolstered as easily and are agreeable as long something makes sense. Even then, they would respond with reason, not emotional reaction. P people are more relaxed and are less likely to posit strong opposition.

Organized over unorganized can be fairly J, though the last one seems like it might favor the opposite trait, so it's a wash.

Calm over neurotic, which you skipped, seems maybe P or S.

Inquisitive over non-inquisitive, maybe the N argument could be made. It's not super-strong, but I can see it a bit.

So we have ExTP as the weighted best answer. Leaning toward ENTP.

Of course, the next person could interpret it differently from you or I.

 

[Venom]

Are you seriously trying to argue that there's a superior type, and that it's your own and using the Big 5 as justification?

Yeah, as soon as you figure out that in order to keep the world functioning smoothly that a variety of types of people with varying strengths and weaknesses are needed...

If the world were all ENFJs I doubt very seriously we'd be as scientifically advanced as we are, and there surely wouldn't enough "followers" to do the practical work required to make things go the way they should.

There'd probably be no war, but we'd also probably be all living in grass huts.

We probably should take this to another thread ...but anyways...

You're proving my point by only choosing to view this through your "MBTI goggles". Of course the world wouldn't function if everyone was the "mbti caricature" of "enfj". A person who only viewed the world through two functions. ie a person who never used logic or sensing preferences. The problem, Marm, is that when we use tests that actual have some time stability, and can reflect normalization, THERE ARE NO NORMAL PEOPLE LIKE the "enfj", or "intj" etc. The only people who resemble these stupid MBTI types are people who would score:
100 % non social (I) 100% unorganized (P) 100% inquisitive (N) and 100% non agreeable (T) or any other extremes. When we compare people who score to these ridiculous extremes, it doesn't matter, they all end up as screwed up as the people Jung based his "research" on. However, REAL, "normal people", tend to score in the middle of these ranges, and dont really resemble ANY of these stupid type extremes.

It is a FACT though, that the happier people tend to score as more sociable, more agreeable, more organized, and more inquisitive.

 

[Thalassa]

We probably should take this to another thread ...but anyways...

You're proving my point by only choosing to view this through your "MBTI goggles". Of course the world wouldn't function if everyone was the "mbti caricature" of "enfj". A person who only viewed the world through two functions. ie a person who never used logic or sensing preferences. The problem, Marm, is that when we use tests that actual have some time stability, and can reflect normalization, THERE ARE NO NORMAL PEOPLE LIKE the "enfj", or "intj" etc. The only people who resemble these stupid MBTI types are people who would score:
100 % non social (I) 100% unorganized (P) 100% inquisitive (N) and 100% non agreeable (T). When we compare people who score to these ridiculous extremes, it doesn't matter, they all end up as screwed up as the people Jung based his "research" on. However, REAL, "normal people", tend to score in the middle of these ranges, and dont really resemble ANY of these stupid type extremes.

It is a FACT though, that the happier people tend to score as more sociable, more agreeable, more organized, and more inquisitive.

Yeah I understand function theory and apparently you don't because you're arguing with yourself about Keirsey stereotypes.

 

[Thalassa]

It's also a FACT that happier people are more organized?

So help me god....

 

[Venom]

Absurd. Even assuming these are the key elements, which I don't, a lot of these are debatable.

I'll give you the sociable.

Agreeable over egocentric could be T or P over F. People who operate on reason general don't get their egos hurt or bolstered as easily and are agreeable as long something makes sense. Even then, they would respond with reason, not emotional reaction. P people are more relaxed and are less likely to posit strong opposition.

Organized over unorganized can be fairly J, though the last one seems like it might favor the opposite trait, so it's a wash.

Calm over neurotic, which you skipped, seems maybe P or S.

Inquisitive over non-inquisitive, maybe the N argument could be made. It's not super-strong, but I can see it a bit.

So we have ExTP as the weighted best answer. Leaning toward ENTP.

Of course, the next person could interpret it differently from you or I.

I agree and disagree with some of your stuff. No hard feelings. This guys says it better than I could... So I'll just quote him...

The biggest problem I have with the MBTI is the T/F (Thinking/Feeling) trait. It combines elements of Accommodation, Intellect, and Emotional Stability (with the strongest correlation being Accommodation). The problem is, based on actual personality research, these three traits don’t correlate at all so they have no business being measured together in one trait. For example, based on actual personality research, an analytical person is as likely to describe themself (or be described by others) as unstable as they are to describe themselves as stable. The same is true for Altruistic or Egocentric typing, each are equally as possible. According to the structure of the Myers- Briggs system though, these three traits are linked. This means that some Ts are objective intellectuals, some are unsympathetic jerks, and some are both. You have no way of telling from their test score. This hinders the descriptive value of the system. The N/S dichotomy, which comes closest to the Intellect element, is biased towards right- brained (Unstructured type) intellectuals. The I/E dichotomy is a pretty close match to the Extroversion element. The J/P dichotomy is also pretty close to the Orderliness element.

I agree with you that it's wishy washy to make straight associations, but some just make more "intuitive sense" ...

About traits and happiness:

It's also a FACT that happier people are more organized?

So help me god....

Life tends to be easier when you can find your car keys and pay your bills on time... Anyways, the global 5 simply reflects actual data that people can see of other people. The MBTI is near religion status, as the functions exist as described merely because Jung says so...



ABOUT CHANGING TYPE: (back on topic)

A big topic in personality theory is whether personality changes. At least based on personality research, there is a lot of change from infancy to age thirty at least in the measurable expression of personality. Age thirty seems to be the bottom of the ramp of measured personality flexibility for most, and the closer you are to thirty the less change there is. Those thirty and over tend to have a correlation between personality inventories of about ninety percent from year to year. Teenagers are more in the range of 50%. By the age of 30, most people are supporting themselves and on consistent career paths, both of which would seem to contribute to personality stability. The lack of change after thirty may mean that the changes while younger were superficial; to fit into a more diverse environment where one had less autonomy. Or it could reflect reduced mental flexibility. There is research to support the latter, but both could be true.

 

[entropie]

26 and already a master ? I am 28 and still working on it -.-

 

[Jaguar]

"normal people", tend to score in the middle of these ranges

Agreed.

It is a FACT though, that the happier people tend to score as more sociable, more agreeable, more organized, and more inquisitive.

You must have been pretty busy observing almost 7 billion people. Worn out, yet?

 

[Ginkgo]

Agreed.



You must have been pretty busy observing almost 7 billion people. Worn out, yet?

Well, if what he says is true, then happier people tend to be abnormal.

 

[Venom]

You must have been pretty busy observing almost 7 billion people. Worn out, yet?

...the frequent flier miles have been pretty good...

 

[Venom]

Well, if what he says is true, then happier people tend to be abnormal.

actually. being more serious (did no one seriously catch my "but i might be biased " ?) ... I've read that its more like: 50% sociable, 75% calm, 60% orderly, 75% inquisitive, 60% agreeable would sort of equate what some of the big 5 people have said "off the cuff" as being more happy people. It really wouldn't test well as any MBTI type. However, even highly limbic people, while fairing more poorly during normal stuff, are more likely to "fight back" when pushed around and therefore have had their time and place over the years...

 

[Jaguar]

Well, if what he says is true, then happier people tend to be abnormal.

The definition of happiness will vary from person to person.
Heaven help us all if corporations who create the MBTI or the FFM are going to dictate to the world what constitutes a happy person.

 

[Ginkgo]

The definition of happiness will vary from person to person.
Heaven help us all if corporations who create the MBTI or the FFM are going to dictate to the world what constitutes a happy person.

True, but I have a hunch they don't tell people what happiness should be before they ask them how happy they are.

 

[Thalassa]

Happiness is being organized, haven't you heard?

Now go hang up your clothes.

 

[Jaguar]

True, but I have a hunch they don't tell people what happiness should be before they ask them how happy they are.

And I have a hunch that even a suicidal person would claim they were "happy" if asked by an outsider, in order to project an air of normalcy.

Happiness is being organized, haven't you heard?

Now go hang up your clothes.

When I was a kid, I was very organized. Everything has its place, right?
Mom came upstairs, opened my closet, and piles of shit fell out all over the floor.

Yep, I was "organized."
In mere seconds I could clean my room by throwing everything in sight behind a closed door.

 

[Ginkgo]

And I have a hunch that even a suicidal person would claim they were "happy" if asked by an outsider, in order to project an air of normalcy.

What's your point?

 

[Jaguar]

What's your point?

The definition of happiness is variable and/or elusive. For any corporation to claim "happier" people have certain percentages of x, y, and z from their model—such as the Five Factor Model— is ludicrous.

 

[Thalassa]

The definition of happiness is variable and/or elusive. For any corporation to claim "happier" people have certain percentages of x, y, and z from their model—such as the Five Factor Model— is ludicrous.

I agree with this.

Even people who are Limbic can be happy, in fact some might even claim to feel happiness "more intensely" when they experience or something than Calms. I've also met some really angry, stressed-out Organized people.

What makes one person happy might make another miserable. Plus, contentment or satisfaction is far more likely than happiness, which tends to come in spurts.