• 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.

Can anyone give me scientific proof that mbit or cognitive functions exist?

The Great One

New member
Joined
Apr 27, 2012
Messages
3,439
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
6w7
Not too long ago, someone saw one of my youtube videos and tried to tell me that I was a dumbass and that mbti nor jungian functions existed. They have actually done this with several people that have posted mbti videos and they try to debunk their theories. However, their theory is based on a set of four cognitive functions that go completely contradictory to any modern theory of how the brain works. Here is the video and you will see just how ridiculous his theory is...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZTTCjFwBsxw&list=FL2A93WgKrh6k_WWi5hUG02Q&feature=mh_lolz

I pretty much have observed the patterns in my head and know that mbti and cognitive functions exist. However, my problem is that I have Ne, which picks up the psychological patterns naturally and just intuitively understands them, but yet I can't just show people what I pick up with my intuition so it makes it hard to convey to others what I see. Then, I have Ti which is a very internally based logic and it is hard to explain to people what makes logical sense to me as well. I have tried and tried to convince these people that mbti is real, and their theory is shit but I can't find any concrete scientific evidence on mbti or functions. Can anyone show me some scientifically credible evidence?
 

Standuble

New member
Joined
Aug 23, 2011
Messages
1,149
I'm assuming it was Pod'lair who made this statement? I've had dealings with them before (I think they blocked me after I called their leader, Adymus a sensor when I went into ad hominem attack mode against him) and they are essentially a religion, seeking to only supercede or destroy MBTI so they can flourish instead. Which ever way is easiest but they are irrational; from their simplistic understanding of morality to their goal to "heal the world" which is completely removed from reality. NFgeeks made a long video about them and they did not enjoy it one bit.

I think the best "evidence" you will get is Nardi but that's not saying much. My understanding of functions (though perhaps its just judging functions) is that a "function" is just a general term for a collection of neurons and its connections in a certain area(s) of the brain. The bigger the quantity of neurons and the higher degree of connections and complexity in the respected "governed" area of the brain, the stronger the function. It's a simplifed definition of the whole process and no matter whether functions do or do not exist does not invalidate what your mind does. Your inner world and personal experiences do not need the permission of a scientific theory to be considered valid and real.

I personally think at the end of this MBTI, the Big 5, Enneagrams and Socionics will all be superceded and sent to the dustbin of history without any chance of synthesis simply because I think they are holistic interpretations which will be bested by neuroscience which can operate and observe at a much more refined and precise level. It would be like replacing Newtonian physics with Einstein's. In the end all that will happen is that you would replace being an NeTi user to someone with "a large amount of activity in neurons located in location xyz with an ability to light up large amounts of neurons in area abc when he has a good idea."
 

Randomnity

insert random title here
Joined
May 8, 2007
Messages
9,485
MBTI Type
ISTP
Enneagram
6w5
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Scientific proof doesn't exist because they aren't really in the realm of science. It's more a categorizing/labeling system which is basically arbitrary but self-consistent enough to be useful in describing human interaction. More like a language than a scientific explanation. Science is a very specific method for understanding more concrete, observable, quantifiable, falsifiable things. Typology is a descriptive model which can be used to predict human interaction - some observation has been used to form the models, but that doesn't make it scientific.
 

RaptorWizard

Permabanned
Joined
Mar 19, 2012
Messages
5,895
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
Neuroscience of Personality: Brain Savvy Insights for All Types of People

•How type shows up in the brain
•How background, age, gender, and type all blend
•The trick to engaging people of various types
•The link between emotions and type
•How to present type from a neuroscience perspective

source - http://www.ccc-apt.org/node/175

Dario’s interests and teaching include social neuroscience, artificial intelligence and robotics, personality and organizational behavior, modeling and simulation of complex systems, and undergraduate curriculum design. Methods include computer models, live group simulations and phenomenological research. The core theme is “social situated action” — understanding behavior through a “systems” lens.

source - http://www.personalityapps.com/Personality_Types/Welcome.html
 

Stanton Moore

morose bourgeoisie
Joined
Mar 4, 2009
Messages
3,900
MBTI Type
INFP
No one can provide scientific proof because MBTI/typology is not science.
 

Honor

girl with a pretty smile
Joined
Jul 11, 2012
Messages
1,580
MBTI Type
?
Instinctual Variant
so
It exists, believe it or not. Introversion and extroversion have been scientifically established. I think we're getting closer to establishing sensing and intuition. T/F and J/P...well, if there's scientific evidence, I ain't read those articles yet.
 

Coriolis

Si vis pacem, para bellum
Staff member
Joined
Apr 18, 2010
Messages
27,230
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
It exists, believe it or not. Introversion and extroversion have been scientifically established. I think we're getting closer to establishing sensing and intuition. T/F and J/P...well, if there's scientific evidence, I ain't read those articles yet.
I have read many accounts of demonstrated connections between E/I and brain physiology. More recently, I have started to see papers connecting traits associated with J/P to physiology as well. People attempt to connect F/T differences to hormones, though I'm not sure how credible that is, as people with similar hormones can display vastly different preferences on this scale (more study needed). I have not run across anything (yet) relating to N/S.
 
W

WALMART

Guest
Geology doesn't exist, thermodynamics doesn't exist, astronomy doesn't exist.


More contextually accurate: economics doesn't exist, political science doesn't exist, paleontology doesn't exist, and on, and on, and on.
 

The Great One

New member
Joined
Apr 27, 2012
Messages
3,439
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
6w7
I'm assuming it was Pod'lair who made this statement? I've had dealings with them before (I think they blocked me after I called their leader, Adymus a sensor when I went into ad hominem attack mode against him) and they are essentially a religion, seeking to only supercede or destroy MBTI so they can flourish instead. Which ever way is easiest but they are irrational; from their simplistic understanding of morality to their goal to "heal the world" which is completely removed from reality. NFgeeks made a long video about them and they did not enjoy it one bit.

I think the best "evidence" you will get is Nardi but that's not saying much. My understanding of functions (though perhaps its just judging functions) is that a "function" is just a general term for a collection of neurons and its connections in a certain area(s) of the brain. The bigger the quantity of neurons and the higher degree of connections and complexity in the respected "governed" area of the brain, the stronger the function. It's a simplifed definition of the whole process and no matter whether functions do or do not exist does not invalidate what your mind does. Your inner world and personal experiences do not need the permission of a scientific theory to be considered valid and real.

I personally think at the end of this MBTI, the Big 5, Enneagrams and Socionics will all be superceded and sent to the dustbin of history without any chance of synthesis simply because I think they are holistic interpretations which will be bested by neuroscience which can operate and observe at a much more refined and precise level. It would be like replacing Newtonian physics with Einstein's. In the end all that will happen is that you would replace being an NeTi user to someone with "a large amount of activity in neurons located in location xyz with an ability to light up large amounts of neurons in area abc when he has a good idea."

Yes it was Pod'lair. I really hate that guy. I've provided the guy with boatloads of evidence to support my theories and they just shoot it all down. However, they in contrast, offer no evidence to support their theory what-so-ever.
 

lunalum

Super Senior Member
Joined
Dec 20, 2008
Messages
2,706
MBTI Type
ZNTP
Enneagram
7w6
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
As much as I think it's a waste of time to continue to talk to someone who needs scientific evidence for something as obvious as the fact that we don't all think the same way, I heard somewhere Nardi recently uncovered that people of the same type have much more brain activity in common than people of different types.
 

ThatsWhatHeSaid

Well-known member
Joined
May 11, 2007
Messages
7,263
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w4
Lots of comments in this thread that I don't agree with.

MBTI and cog functions are constructs. They aren't things that can be touched. It's like intelligence or creativity. We categorize certain behaviors a certain way. The behaviors exist. The classification is constructed. Now, think about your question. Can you "prove" that it exists? How would you go about proving that creativity exists?
 

Jaguar

Active member
Joined
May 5, 2007
Messages
20,647
Lots of comments in this thread that I don't agree with.
MBTI and cog functions are constructs. They aren't things that can be touched.

To finally be able to agree with someone is a pleasure in this case. I may fall off my chair, Edahn.
Cheers, man.
 
W

WALMART

Guest
Lots of comments in this thread that I don't agree with.

MBTI and cog functions are constructs. They aren't things that can be touched. It's like intelligence or creativity. We categorize certain behaviors a certain way. The behaviors exist. The classification is constructed. Now, think about your question. Can you "prove" that it exists? How would you go about proving that creativity exists?

To finally be able to agree with someone is a pleasure in this case. I may fall off my chair, Edahn.
Cheers, man.




Intelligence is physically expressed in reality, as is creativity.
 

pinkgraffiti

New member
Joined
Mar 20, 2011
Messages
1,482
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
748
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
No one can provide scientific proof because MBTI/typology is not science.

how about statistics? mbti has been verified on a wide number of people. you do know that science is based on observation and statistic validity, right? MBTI has both. science is not a synonym for truth, by the way. the only "strict" science is maths, all the rest has a margin of error and uncertainty, which can be estimated statistically, same as MBTI.
 

Stanton Moore

morose bourgeoisie
Joined
Mar 4, 2009
Messages
3,900
MBTI Type
INFP
how about statistics? mbti has been verified on a wide number of people. you do know that science is based on observation and statistic validity, right? MBTI has both. science is not a synonym for truth, by the way. the only "strict" science is maths, all the rest has a margin of error and uncertainty, which can be estimated statistically, same as MBTI.

Typology is too vague to be tested scientifically. This is why no one can come to consensus about historical figures or celebrities, or even how to describe the functions. There is no way around this. It's more akin to astrology.
 

Jaguar

Active member
Joined
May 5, 2007
Messages
20,647
Intelligence is physically expressed in reality, as is creativity.

This is the part of Edahn's post I was specifically agreeing with, which is why I quoted it the way I did:

ThatsWhatHeSaid said:
Lots of comments in this thread that I don't agree with.
MBTI and cog functions are constructs. They aren't things that can be touched.

But since I'm here, can you touch intelligence? What's it feel like, Jon?
Is it rough or sticky?
 

Stanton Moore

morose bourgeoisie
Joined
Mar 4, 2009
Messages
3,900
MBTI Type
INFP
This is the part of Edahn's post I was specifically agreeing with, which is why I quoted it the way I did:



But since I'm here, can you touch intelligence? What's it feel like, Jon?
Is it rough or sticky?

tastes...like chicken.:D
 

pinkgraffiti

New member
Joined
Mar 20, 2011
Messages
1,482
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
748
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
Typology is too vague to be tested scientifically. This is why no one can come to consensus about historical figures or celebrities, or even how to describe the functions. There is no way around this. It's more akin to astrology.

did you actually read what i said? i said MBTI has been tested using large samples of people (ie statistically). it's not up for discussion, it's a fact.
 

Stanton Moore

morose bourgeoisie
Joined
Mar 4, 2009
Messages
3,900
MBTI Type
INFP
did you actually read what i said? i said MBTI has been tested using large samples of people (ie statistically). it's not up for discussion, it's a fact.

What is the value of parsing data that has no verifiable basis?
 
Top