User Tag List

First 56789 Last

Results 61 to 70 of 81

  1. #61
    Senior Member King sns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    enfp
    Enneagram
    6w7 sp/sx
    Socionics
    IEE
    Posts
    6,748

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by YourLocalJesus View Post
    ^ That's all pretty narrow-minded. Try listening a little instead... MBTI isn't a perfect system, and you can't force people to accept something as impossible because the system says so.
    Besides, like someone said earlier... Too many false assumptions and shoddy research.
    This is true. Like I mentioned earlier, I guess technically you can't change your "MBTI type" if MBTI theorists say so. Since that is the going theory, you'd almost have to change the entire theory all together and it wouldn't be called MBTI anymore. For me, I just question the entire theory. (Not it's excellent ability to describe people and situations, but the fact that people are all one of 16 types biologically.)
    06/13 10:51:03 five sounds: you!!!
    06/13 10:51:08 shortnsweet: no you!!
    06/13 10:51:12 shortnsweet: go do your things and my things too!
    06/13 10:51:23 five sounds: oh hell naw
    06/13 10:51:55 shortnsweet: !!!!
    06/13 10:51:57 shortnsweet: (cries)
    06/13 10:52:19 RiftsWRX: You two are like furbies stuck in a shoe box

    My Nohari
    My Johari
    by sns.

  2. #62
    Senior Member INTP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    MBTI
    intp
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx
    Posts
    7,823

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by YourLocalJesus View Post
    ^ That's all pretty narrow-minded. Try listening a little instead... MBTI isn't a perfect system, and you can't force people to accept something as impossible because the system says so.
    Besides, like someone said earlier... Too many false assumptions and shoddy research.
    i listened in school, thats why i was able to write that stuff. they talked about this on personality psychology, neuropsychology and little on developmental psychology courses.

    the basics:

    Quote Originally Posted by http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nature_versus_nurture#Personality_traits
    Personality is a frequently cited example of a heritable trait that has been studied in twins and adoptions. Identical twins reared apart are far more similar in personality than randomly selected pairs of people. Likewise, identical twins are more similar than fraternal twins. Also, biological siblings are more similar in personality than adoptive siblings. Each observation suggests that personality is heritable to a certain extent. However, these same study designs allow for the examination of environment as well as genes. Adoption studies also directly measure the strength of shared family effects. Adopted siblings share only family environment. Most adoption studies indicate that by adulthood the personalities of adopted siblings are little or no more similar than random pairs of strangers. This would mean that shared family effects on personality are zero by adulthood. As is the case with personality, non-shared environmental effects are often found to out-weigh shared environmental effects. That is, environmental effects that are typically thought to be life-shaping (such as family life) may have less of an impact than non-shared effects, which are harder to identify. One possible source of non-shared effects is the environment of pre-natal development. Random variations in the genetic program of development may be a substantial source of non-shared environment. These results suggest that "nurture" may not be the predominant factor in "environment."
    before you start to disagree with this, would be nice to hear where you got your info from. i mean if you just refuse to listen to me(not trying to understand me) and say that im narrow minded, it just means that you are the one who is narrow minded to my(scientific) approach. if you wont be able to support what you say in any way, its not narrow minded for me to not believe you, because what you offer is narrow..
    "Where wisdom reigns, there is no conflict between thinking and feeling."
    — C.G. Jung

    Read

  3. #63
    Senior Member INTP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    MBTI
    intp
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx
    Posts
    7,823

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by shortnsweet View Post
    I think I'd feel more miserable and tired in situations where ESFP was the best way to be all the time. Everyone (balanced) needs generalizations, big picture, theory, details, hindsight, present moment, introspection, reflection, socialization, external stimulation, justice, mercy, adaptability, and structure to happily survive. The only rating system for personality has to do with relativity to another person. Who is anyone to say what that's supposed to mean? Who is anyone to say how these preferences might change throughout the course of a life? I don't think it's easy- or even common. Certainly not impossible.

    Lets say an INTP went into the military, became typical military material. Most people around here will say, "oh, they developed their Fe or Si" (some J function.) or some other pathological/ shadow (whatever thing that neatly fits with the theory.) Who are we to say that he's not simply a J now? (or an "x", has a preference for both, completely disregarding functions.) He's just now happy with schedules, plans, and routines. And that's it. These theories are so fuzzy that you can mold them to fit any piece of any situation, (which makes a good theory, but doesn't necessarily mean that it's true all of the time.)
    J isnt about being happy with schedules. you are just looking at stereotypes, not the actual personality types. J is about most dominant J function being extraverted. this usually leads to being happy with schedules, but thats a stereotype of personality type, not actual personality type..
    "Where wisdom reigns, there is no conflict between thinking and feeling."
    — C.G. Jung

    Read

  4. #64
    Senior Member King sns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    enfp
    Enneagram
    6w7 sp/sx
    Socionics
    IEE
    Posts
    6,748

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by INTP View Post
    i listened in school, thats why i was able to write that stuff. they talked about this on personality psychology, neuropsychology and little on developmental psychology courses.

    the basics:



    before you start to disagree with this, would be nice to hear where you got your info from. i mean if you just refuse to listen to me(not trying to understand me) and say that im narrow minded, it just means that you are the one who is narrow minded to my(scientific) approach. if you wont be able to support what you say in any way, its not narrow minded for me to not believe you, because what you offer is narrow..
    I don't think anyone is questioning nature vs. nurture. I'd like to see the solid science that MBTI is actually representative our biological makeup (aside from introversion and extroversion) and the study where they show that once an MBTI type, always an MBTI type. And that dichotomies are scientifically proven to remain the same in our chemical makeup- (that we can't simply change our preference for one thing over the other with behaviors and habits.) MBTI is represented by behaviors to start with, not DNA.

    I haven't heard (or found) anything that said- "The DNA/ PET scan activity of that ENFJ is very similar to the ones of this ENFJ, and when this ENFJ starts to act like an ENTP and test like an ENTP, studies are showing that they are still an ENFJ anyways."

    I'm not assuming that MBTI is the end-all of our personalities, that it is indeed the theory that fully describes human nature at it's core.
    06/13 10:51:03 five sounds: you!!!
    06/13 10:51:08 shortnsweet: no you!!
    06/13 10:51:12 shortnsweet: go do your things and my things too!
    06/13 10:51:23 five sounds: oh hell naw
    06/13 10:51:55 shortnsweet: !!!!
    06/13 10:51:57 shortnsweet: (cries)
    06/13 10:52:19 RiftsWRX: You two are like furbies stuck in a shoe box

    My Nohari
    My Johari
    by sns.

  5. #65
    Senior Member LEGERdeMAIN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    2,545

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by shortnsweet View Post
    I don't think anyone is questioning nature vs. nurture. I'd like to see the solid science that MBTI is actually representative our biological makeup (aside from introversion and extroversion) and the study where they show that once an MBTI type, always an MBTI type. And that dichotomies are scientifically proven to remain the same in our chemical makeup- (that we can't simply change our preference for one thing over the other with behaviors and habits.) MBTI is represented by behaviors to start with, not DNA.

    I haven't heard (or found) anything that said- "The DNA/ PET scan activity of that ENFJ is very similar to the ones of this ENFJ, and when this ENFJ starts to act like an ENTP and test like an ENTP, studies are showing that they are still an ENFJ anyways."

    I'm not assuming that MBTI is the end-all of our personalities, that it is indeed the theory that fully describes human nature at it's core.
    I agree with this. There's no scientific study in existence that bridges the gap between personality as an inherited trait and the personality model of MBTI, which doesn't take into account neuroplasticity. To say that personality type doesn't change implies that a brain functions the same from birth to death... don't completely ignore the many studies that show(literally, with the help of neuroimaging) the changes in the brain that can be caused by a variety of environmental factors, trauma, meditation, etc, etc....
    “Some people will tell you that slow is good – but I’m here to tell you that fast is better. I’ve always believed this, in spite of the trouble it’s caused me. Being shot out of a cannon will always be better than being squeezed out of a tube. That is why God made fast motorcycles, Bubba…”


  6. #66
    Courage is immortality Valiant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Enneagram
    8w7 sx/so
    Socionics
    EIE
    Posts
    3,919

    Default

    Shorty, I have no idea how you can be so patient with this... I simply facepalmed one more time.

    Mightier than the tread of marching armies is the power of an idea whose time has come

  7. #67
    Senior Member INTP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    MBTI
    intp
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx
    Posts
    7,823

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by shortnsweet View Post
    MBTI is represented by behaviors to start with.

    I haven't heard anywhere said that "The DNA/ PET scan activity of that ENFJ is very similar to the ones of this ENFJ, and when this ENFJ starts to act like an ENTP and test like an ENTP, studies are showing that they are still an ENFJ anyways."
    bold is simply a false view at MBTI, socionics and big 5 is represented that way, not MBTI/jungian typology.

    http://www.aptinternational.org/asse..._1105_apti.pdf

    too bad if you dont have access to full text, but abstract says few things
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11190091
    http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/1...151.x/abstract

    use google scholar for more
    "Where wisdom reigns, there is no conflict between thinking and feeling."
    — C.G. Jung

    Read

  8. #68
    Senior Member INTP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    MBTI
    intp
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx
    Posts
    7,823

    Default

    oh and you guys dont seem to tell behaviorism apart from cognitive psychology.

    basically behaviorism looks at input -> behavioral output

    cognitive psychology looks at input -> cognition(psychological processes that effect the output) -> behavioral output. and focuses on the cognition.

    jungian functions are in the field of cognitive psychology, not behaviorism, thats why they are called cognitive functions.. socionics is in the field of behaviorism, because it looks at functions from behavioristic point of view, not cognitive
    "Where wisdom reigns, there is no conflict between thinking and feeling."
    — C.G. Jung

    Read

  9. #69
    Senior Member LEGERdeMAIN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    2,545

    Default

    Oh...well, i finished reading the thread. I was going to reply to some more posts but apparently this is part of your lecture series. /evaporates
    “Some people will tell you that slow is good – but I’m here to tell you that fast is better. I’ve always believed this, in spite of the trouble it’s caused me. Being shot out of a cannon will always be better than being squeezed out of a tube. That is why God made fast motorcycles, Bubba…”


  10. #70
    Senior Member Jaguar's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    12,409

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by YourLocalJesus View Post
    MBTI isn't a perfect system, and you can't force people to accept something as impossible because the system says so.
    Exactly.

    There are people who can't seem to differentiate between a theoretical construct and an observable fact.

    Picture this scenario in your head:

    I take you to a park that has 20 trees.
    I place my hands over your eyes in a certain way that partially obscures your vision.
    I ask you how many trees you see.
    You answer 10.

    There's 20.

    Now, imagine a type theory that partially obscures your vision of a person.
    What will you believe - the theory or what is actually true?

    Years ago the DISC assessment was only a one-letter result.
    People were categorized as D, I, S or C.
    Today, people have the ability to be categorized as a blend, rather than only one letter.
    That means someone can be categorized a D-I-C rather than just a D.
    For years, people's vision was partially obscured by that theory.

    MBTI is no different in its ability to obscure one's vision.
    You can only see what a theory *allows* you to see, based on its construction.

    The question you have to ask yourself is - does it matter if you can only see 10 trees when there are actually 20?

    Food for thought.

Similar Threads

  1. Why do you or do you not put your MBTI type on your TypoC profile?
    By Esoteric Wench in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 70
    Last Post: 12-08-2017, 02:22 PM
  2. If you were obliged to change your mbti type.
    By Rasofy in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 53
    Last Post: 05-25-2011, 02:41 PM
  3. Your MBTI type has changed
    By CuriousFeeling in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 04-04-2011, 08:32 PM
  4. Does your MBTI type determine what you think is funny?
    By simpleamazement in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 43
    Last Post: 06-28-2009, 04:51 PM
  5. What expectations about your MBTI type do you not fit?
    By Misty_Mountain_Rose in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 69
    Last Post: 05-29-2009, 09:12 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