Typing people on the internet

[redacted]

Is stupid.

I know I've done it. And that was stupid of me.

Any type can make any argument. Maybe their internal reasoning looks different, but all anyone here has access to is the output after cognition has taken place.

Its hilarious to me to see people say stuff like "that's a little cold-hearted for an F", or "that's too value-oriented for a T".

I've seen way too much of these posts recently and must say I'm losing my tolerance.

The funniest (and most stupid) instance of this trend is when people disagree and label the opposing poster as a type with fewer letters in common with them. Might not even be conscious when it happens. But it's just dissonance resolution.

It's easier to believe people in your type have your views. When that assumption is challenged, either you a) accept that your assumption is incorrect or b) change your perception of the other person's type. I keep seeing option b all over the place.

This is not directed at all of you, but jesus, people, MBTI doesn't just explain personality. It would be nice and easy if it was so aesthetic and simple. But its scope is soooo much more limited than many of you want to believe.

Edit: crap, I said "way too much" of these posts instead of "way too many".

 

[stalemate]

Total ISTJ.

 

[garbage]

The funniest (and most stupid) instance of this trend is when people disagree and label the opposing poster as a type with fewer letters in common with them.

ahahahahahaahahaha

yeah

It sort of just circles around into itself and confirms itself

"The other. The other. The other. The other."

 

[Eric B]

There's a certain "expert" in the field who is infamous for that. (The fewest function-attitudes in common, moreso than letters).

 

[Devil Flamingo]

XD Yes. Though I've always been NF, and most online places I frequent people that know me know this about me, I've been accused quite a few times of being cruel, abrasive, insensitive, etc. I've even been told I ought to learn empathy! So I'm totally not ENFP at all, right? Riiight. XD Because feelers can't be cruel or brash or insensitive or dismissive of others' feelings at all, yet I am obviously not a thinker, so what could I possibly be, loool?

 

[rav3n]

Evan, without the help of people willing to type others on the Internet, I'd still be stumbling around blindly as an xNTx. A few people were generous enough with their time and efforts, particularly Kasper, to point me in the right direction.

Once type was ascertained, reading and learning more about it has helped me to understand some of my own knee-jerk reactions or approaches to problem solving.

So I have to protest your thread to some degree although I do agree that MBTI or any sociological or psychological theories aren't exacting sciences and shouldn't be considered as such.

 

[skylights]

Evan, without the help of people willing to type others on the Internet, I'd still be stumbling around blindly as an xNTx. A few people were generous enough with their time and efforts, particularly Kasper, to point me in the right direction.

Once type was ascertained, reading and learning more about it has helped me to understand some of my own knee-jerk reactions or approaches to problem solving.

So I have to protest your thread to some degree although I do agree that MBTI or any sociological or psychological theories aren't exacting sciences and shouldn't be considered as such.

the same goes for me as well. i thought for several years that i was an INFP, since that's how i always tested, and was quite frustrated with the MBTI because i never felt comfortable when reading explanations of the typing. i came here because i really like the MBTI and was intrigued but frustrated. the kind people here - marmalade.sunrise, eckhart, and petra pan especially - helped point me in the direction of ENFP, which has made things much clearer for me, and already helped me a lot in my personal life. not to mention encouraging my interest in all things MBTI and personality. thanks guys

what i do have real a problem with is when people say "no you cannot be ____" - and, like you said, assign a type further away from their own letters. that gets on my nerves very much, and i try to avoid it myself, though i am certainly not infallible.

i don't think internet typing is a bad thing... we just have to keep open minds about it.

 

[Craft]

How do you look at 'before cognition'? And can you not view videos 'on the internet'?


If you want to argue about the plausibility of typing via an indirect means, lets. Words still contain enough degree of information. Although, there are definite disadvantages, enough honesty can usually determine a most suited label for the average person. Some are slightly harder, of course.

 

[redacted]

Evan, without the help of people willing to type others on the Internet, I'd still be stumbling around blindly as an xNTx. A few people were generous enough with their time and efforts, particularly Kasper, to point me in the right direction.

Once type was ascertained, reading and learning more about it has helped me to understand some of my own knee-jerk reactions or approaches to problem solving.

So I have to protest your thread to some degree although I do agree that MBTI or any sociological or psychological theories aren't exacting sciences and shouldn't be considered as such.

Okay, I guess I should make my point more explicit...

I'm not saying other people can't help you gain perspective on yourself, or even have valid insights about your personality that you aren't conscious of.

I'm just saying it should always be taken with a grain of salt.

Body language is ~50% of communication.

 

[Atomic Fiend]

And this is half of why I've never posted a 'what type am I' thread...

 

[rav3n]

Okay, I guess I should make my point more explicit...

I'm not saying other people can't help you gain perspective on yourself, or even have valid insights about your personality that you aren't conscious of.

I'm just saying it should always be taken with a grain of salt.

Body language is ~50% of communication.

I hear you in reference to body language being meaningful but it can also be deceptive. Some individuals have clear body language, others are muted.

Isn't it like anything else? Garbage in, garbage out? The more you understand yourself, where your words and actions don't conflict, the easier it is for others to type you. Also, the more clear your thoughts translated into words, the easier.

But it also depends on the quality of the individuals doing the typing. The more cognitive function knowledgeable, as well as objective abilities to view the "subjects", the better the results. Kasper didn't type me directly. She showed me some excerpts from multiple types which discussed inferior functions. Bang, nailed! Wonky Fi.

I also hear you about the grain of salt. If something doesn't ring true, the individual should intuitively know/feel it.

 

[redacted]

How do you look at 'before cognition'? And can you not view videos 'on the internet'?


If you want to argue about the plausibility of typing via an indirect means, lets. Words still contain enough degree of information. Although, there are definite disadvantages, enough honesty can usually determine a most suited label for the average person. Some are slightly harder, of course.

Okay, I wasn't specific enough here.

I really meant typing people from posts (and not posts where someone's listing personality traits off for the purpose of being typed) is stupid.

I think I have my logic bases covered now.

 

[redacted]

I hear you in reference to body language being meaningful but it can also be deceptive. Some individuals have clear body language, others are muted.

Isn't it like anything else? Garbage in, garbage out? The more you understand yourself, where your words and actions don't conflict, the easier it is for others to type you. Also, the more clear your thoughts translated into words, the easier.

But it also depends on the quality of the individuals doing the typing. The more cognitive function knowledgeable, as well as objective abilities to view the "subjects", the better the results. Kasper didn't type me directly. She showed me some excerpts from multiple types which discussed inferior functions. Bang, nailed! Wonky Fi.

I also hear you about the grain of salt. If something doesn't ring true, the individual should intuitively know/feel it.

See, I think that mentality is problematic, too.

Suppose you subconsciously favor thinking of yourself as a certain type (type x). Now, if someone tells you, "you are probably type x", even if they are wrong, it's going to feel "intuitively right" because, well, it is psychologically beneficial in the short term to feel that. At this point, you could settle on the wrong type and not feel the need to question it as much.

(This is only true given my assumption that wrong typings are more frequent on the internet, I guess.)

 

[rav3n]

See, I think that mentality is problematic, too.

Suppose you subconsciously favor thinking of yourself as a certain type (type x). Now, if someone tells you, "you are probably type x", even if they are wrong, it's going to feel "intuitively right" because, well, it is psychologically beneficial in the short term to feel that. At this point, you could settle on the wrong type and not feel the need to question it as much.

(This is only true given my assumption that wrong typings are more frequent on the internet, I guess.)

Can you expand on the bolded?

 

[redacted]

Can you expand on the bolded?

People want to feel good about themselves. The subconscious steps in to distort reality in a way that feels good. Everybody does it.

Your only recourse is to use your consciousness to constantly fight your own biases.

 

[rav3n]

People want to feel good about themselves. The subconscious steps in to distort reality in a way that feels good. Everybody does it.

Your only recourse is to use your consciousness to constantly fight your own biases.

Maybe so but isn't this assuming that people want to be the type that's suggested? I didn't care which NT type. They were all fine with me. And I know I don't try to fit myself into my type, although playing into the stereotype can be tongue-in-cheek fun.

Anyways, it looks like you're struggling with your type right now so my pushing this any further could be treading on uncomfortable ground. And if you're as explicit as you come across on TypoC, you might not find "Was that really me?" by Naomi Quenk helpful which discusses inferior functions (thanks again, Kasper). It's not scientific but for me, it hit hard. A backwards way to define type by pegging the way your inferior function reacts.

One thing's for certain and probably fairly obvious. I'm no expert on MBTI so aren't a member who has the expertise to type anyone.

 

[redacted]

Maybe so but isn't this assuming that people want to be the type that's suggested? I didn't care which NT type. They were all fine with me. And I know I don't try to fit myself into my type, although playing into the stereotype can be tongue-in-cheek fun.

Anyways, it looks like you're struggling with your type right now so my pushing this any further could be treading on uncomfortable ground. And if you're as explicit as you come across on TypoC, you might not find "Was that really me?" by Naomi Quenk helpful which discusses inferior functions (thanks again, Kasper). It's not scientific but for me, it hit hard. A backwards way to define type by pegging the way your inferior function reacts.

One thing's for certain and probably fairly obvious. I'm no expert on MBTI so aren't a member who has the expertise to type anyone.

I dunno, I guess your mentality is fine if you're past some threshold of believing your type.

I'm just saying, when you're in the questioning stage (especially at the point you're asking other people their opinions), you should be extremely wary of the information you're getting. Especially when people have such limited perspective on your communication style.

 

[skylights]

yeah. that's true, about short-term satisfaction. like the entire day where i thought i was an INFJ

i think though, that if we pull back and ask, so what if we and/or they have their type wrong?, it's not really that big of a deal. even those of us who have gotten quite familiar with MBTI have occasional oh-shit moments where we realize we've had something off. not that i'm advocating ignorance. just that my day as an INFJ didn't have many significant negative impacts, really, besides feeling dumb later. i just was trying to use a hammer on a screw, so to speak. it wasn't working, and i figured that out soon enough.



it would be fascinating to meet in person with someone of your type who is very, very different than you.

has anyone had this experience?

 

[5231311252]

It's easier to believe people in your type have your views. When that assumption is challenged, either you a) accept that your assumption is incorrect or b) change your perception of the other person's type. I keep seeing option b all over the place.

I agree and don't understand why people try so hard to prove someone else wrong about their own personality. This doesn't include analyses like the "Video Challenge" thread, but an analysis based off a bunch of words on a screen. From an MBTI site:

"Does the MBTI tool stereotype people?

No, the MBTI tool does not stereotype. Among the basic principles of the instrument, as stated in the Introduction to Type® booklet written by Isabel Briggs Myers, are the following:

* Each type has special gifts.
* Each person is unique and expresses type in a unique way.
* There are no right or wrong types.
* You are the final judge of your own psychological type; your MBTI results suggest your type based on your responses, but the individual is the final judge of his or her own type.
* Type does not explain everything; humans are complex.
* Type may be used to understand and forgive, but never as an excuse.
* Become aware of your type biases to avoid negative stereotyping.

Some persons who use the MBTI tool may not be aware of their type biases and may stereotype persons based on MBTI type. This is NOT a proper use of psychological type. "

Speculations and suggestions are different from forcing a type onto someone else.

 

[redacted]

I agree and don't understand why people try so hard to prove someone else wrong about their own personality. This doesn't include analyses like the "Video Challenge" thread, but an analysis based off a bunch of words on a screen. From an MBTI site:



Speculations and suggestions are different from forcing a type onto someone else.

Thanks, I think you articulated my point a bit more clearly than I could.