User Tag List

First 152324252627 Last

Results 241 to 250 of 276

  1. #241
    Society
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SolitaryWalker View Post
    Modern folk typology is far too rigorous for some of our forum users, so they want to take it down another notch. Instead of placing people into neat and simplistic boxes based on observations of superficial, highly visible behaviors, they want to type them on fleeting whim.
    to play a bit of DA...
    Introverted Thinking often involves finding just the right word to clearly express an idea concisely, crisply, and to the point. - source
    if you take it as true, then the expectation of others to have the right words can be considered Ti-bias.

    that's a big if... go on google in icognito (so it doesn't match your past searches), and google any function in it's full name - that website will be the first entry - making it a very common way people learn about functions when they first see them. would you consider those descriptions folk typology?

  2. #242
    Senior Member Mal12345's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    MBTI
    IxTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ti
    Posts
    13,993

    Default

    Even I have a messy desk!
    "Everyone has a plan till they get punched in the mouth." Mike Tyson
    “Culture?” says Paul McCartney. “This isn't culture. It's just a good laugh.”

  3. #243
    Analytical Dreamer Coriolis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/sx
    Posts
    17,559

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mane View Post
    while we're talking about faulty typology... can someone please explain to me "vibe"?

    this has being a particular annoyance for me in regards to enneagram (somewhat rarer but still in use in regards to MBTI)... wtf does it mean? "i associate you with person A & B which were type X"? "i don't have the words to explain this"? is this the adult-acceptable form of "because!"?
    I don't use the term myself, but understand what it means. For me it is an overall impression of someone's type that comes fully-formed, and is not the result of any deliberate analysis, consideration of functions, or enumeration of traits/behaviors/etc. I have always attributed it to Ni, working on the sum total of my experience with the person in question. I don't place much stock in these impressions, or at least prefer to cross-check them with more considered analysis, and usually don't share them unless specifically asked. I don't get impressions like this from everyone, only a small minority of people I meet, and I rarely have the opportunity to check their accuracy, so don't know their track record. It's a bit like navigating by rough sense of direction, rather than following a map and looking for specific streets. Sometimes it works, for some people.
    I've been called a criminal, a terrorist, and a threat to the known universe. But everything you were told is a lie. The truth is, they've taken our freedom, our home, and our future. The time has come for all humanity to take a stand...

  4. #244
    Senior Member Tiltyred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    468 sx/sp
    Socionics
    EII None
    Posts
    4,383

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SolitaryWalker View Post
    I am not looking for converts, but in a nutshell, the abuse of typology is essentially a deviation from the original principles Jung laid down in Psychological Types. For Jung, type represented general cognitive tendencies and that is why he primarily analyzes works of poetry, philosophy and the sciences in his attempts to shed light on the key characteristics of each type. Modern typologists, from Isabella Briggs to Keirsey repudiated Jung's method and reconstructed typology as an analysis of highly visible behavioral traits that are taken to be the defining characteristics of each type. The problem with this approach is that it commits the fundamental attribution error or the unwarranted assumption that one's behavior is a reflection of his or her fundamental temperament rather than that of circumstances. As you may see, the evidence that most of the authors of fallacious quotes cited in this thread frequently misinterpreted the way people behaved in response to certain situations for infallible indicators of their type.
    I blame the behaviorists and the sweeping popularity of cognitive therapy.

  5. #245
    Senior Member Tiltyred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    468 sx/sp
    Socionics
    EII None
    Posts
    4,383

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SolitaryWalker View Post
    I am not looking for converts, but in a nutshell, the abuse of typology is essentially a deviation from the original principles Jung laid down in Psychological Types. For Jung, type represented general cognitive tendencies and that is why he primarily analyzes works of poetry, philosophy and the sciences in his attempts to shed light on the key characteristics of each type. Modern typologists, from Isabella Briggs to Keirsey repudiated Jung's method and reconstructed typology as an analysis of highly visible behavioral traits that are taken to be the defining characteristics of each type. The problem with this approach is that it commits the fundamental attribution error or the unwarranted assumption that one's behavior is a reflection of his or her fundamental temperament rather than that of circumstances. As you may see, the evidence that most of the authors of fallacious quotes cited in this thread frequently misinterpreted the way people behaved in response to certain situations for infallible indicators of their type.
    I blame the behaviorists and the sweeping popularity of cognitive therapy.

  6. #246
    Anew Leaf
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SolitaryWalker View Post
    What's the rush? Let everyone make their contributions and then we will analyze the input in our concluding assessments.



    I don't know if that's a fact, but I appreciate your attempt to psychologize my motives. Please carry on, the value of your incisive critiques can never be underestimated.





    I am not looking for converts, but in a nutshell, the abuse of typology is essentially a deviation from the original principles Jung laid down in Psychological Types. For Jung, type represented general cognitive tendencies and that is why he primarily analyzes works of poetry, philosophy and the sciences in his attempts to shed light on the key characteristics of each type. Modern typologists, from Isabella Briggs to Keirsey repudiated Jung's method and reconstructed typology as an analysis of highly visible behavioral traits that are taken to be the defining characteristics of each type. The problem with this approach is that it commits the fundamental attribution error or the unwarranted assumption that one's behavior is a reflection of his or her fundamental temperament rather than that of circumstances. As you may see, the evidence that most of the authors of fallacious quotes cited in this thread frequently misinterpreted the way people behaved in response to certain situations for infallible indicators of their type.
    Soo... would Jung be looking at us and then telling his therapist where we are touching him in the bad places by using a doll?

    I guess I don't understand getting ones panties in a twist over something that isn't exact or accurate.

    And I would like to again point out that you still haven't addressed my analysis of the quotes far above. Which leads me to the truth of this thread in that you are just going to cherry pick the bizarre berries that fulfill your crazy basket of crazy.

  7. #247
    girl with a pretty smile Honor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    MBTI
    ESTJ
    Enneagram
    3w2 so
    Posts
    1,671

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by skylights View Post
    See my problem is, ok, you've mentioned "high-level analysis, reasoning, and [...] memory" as attributes of intelligence. That all sounds reasonable to me considering a common concept of "intelligence".
    Sweet.

    At the same time, why is empathy not included in that measure? After all, empathy is linked to mirror neurons and ability to recreate another person's state of being, which is certainly a sort of analysis and reasoning in and of itself.
    I addressed this in my post, namely discussing how some forms of empathy or interpersonal skills could be construed as intelligence and some cannot.

    So what is it, exactly, that intelligence measures? Until we have a definition of "intelligence" that is abundantly clear about what exactly it is a measurement of, and what it is not a measurement of, people will continue conflating it with self-worth and individual value, and in that sense it will only serve to obfuscate actual ability and stir up negative feelings. I am not one to follow "political correctness" either, but I find "intelligence" a useless concept at the moment - and a dangerous one, as we even sort children into being "gifted" or not. It is my opinion that this sort of testing and analysis - which we know will never be perfect - is far more likely to hamper people who have undiscovered talents than it is to benefit society by pushing the "gifted" forward, especially as those "gifted" students have an overwhelming tendency to be affluent white children raised in stable homes with abundant resources. In other words, I don't think the concept of intelligence is being used in an objective or constructive way. I think it's poorly defined, conflated into individual worth, poorly tested for, and mired in sociocultural prejudices. There is little benefit to be had in applying it to typology.
    You just argued in favor of what I was arguing for. The point is that some people and/or some types are more intelligent than others though the common definition of "intelligence" and the way society categorizes people into "intelligent" or "not" may be not accurate. However, people don't want to discuss it because it hurts their feelings, makes them question their value, and those categories may prevent people from "realizing their potential."

    Also, many people do have measures of intelligence for their studies that are abundantly clear, and those definitions still "stir up negative feelings." So, (a) I think you're using 'We don't have a great definition of intelligence' as a cover-up for 'I don't want to separate people into 'intelligent' and 'not intelligent' because it will hurt people's feelings and prevent them from actualizing their potential which I agree that it will, (b) the argument isn't valid anyway because I could send you myriad studies that have clear definitions of intelligence, and (c) simply because a fact creates social problems doesn't mean that we can pretend it isn't true. I should warn you that obfuscating facts to make people feel better has been the cause of many social problems; I don't think it should be regarded as a proper method to solving them.
    RobertCalifornia: TL thinks im black
    RobertCalifornia: shes my homegurl
    Hive: arent you
    SpankyMcfly: wait... you arent?

    thoughtlost: I am not really religious. I just like getting free stuff from churches.

  8. #248
    Tenured roisterer SolitaryWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 so/sx
    Posts
    3,467

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mane View Post
    would you consider those descriptions folk typology?
    Absolutely, such descriptions have little to do with cognitive processes and focus on the supposed behavioral manifestations of functions. Finding the right word to clearly express a point is a skill that novelists, academic writers and journalists cultivate. Many of them will not use Introverted Thinking to do so as it is certainly possible to use other functions to obtain that capability.
    "Do not argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience." -- Mark Twain

    “No man but a blockhead ever wrote, except for money.”---Samuel Johnson

    My blog: www.randommeanderings123.blogspot.com/

  9. #249
    i love skylights's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 so/sx
    Socionics
    EII Ne
    Posts
    7,835

    Default

    @Honor...

    You are implying that I am in favor of covering up people's "lack of intelligence" to make them feel better.

    I am arguing that "intelligence" is a non-existent catch-all construct, and it is therefore pointless to link it to self-worth.

  10. #250
    girl with a pretty smile Honor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    MBTI
    ESTJ
    Enneagram
    3w2 so
    Posts
    1,671

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by skylights View Post
    @Honor...

    You are implying that I am in favor of covering up people's "lack of intelligence" to make them feel better.

    I am arguing that "intelligence" is a non-existent catch-all construct, and it is therefore pointless to link it to self-worth.
    Sorry if I misunderstood what you were arguing, but it really seemed to me that was what you were arguing for. I agree with you that it is pointless to link it to self-worth...and I'd also agree with you that people use it as a catch-all, but I think as long as you ignore the common definition, it can be a useful concept. *shrug*
    RobertCalifornia: TL thinks im black
    RobertCalifornia: shes my homegurl
    Hive: arent you
    SpankyMcfly: wait... you arent?

    thoughtlost: I am not really religious. I just like getting free stuff from churches.

Similar Threads

  1. [ISTJ] How NOT to Mislead an ISTJ?
    By Bubbles in forum The SJ Guardhouse (ESFJ, ISFJ, ESTJ, ISTJ)
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 06-03-2015, 03:37 PM
  2. [ENFJ] ENFJ Communication/ how not to annoy them?
    By paddington bear in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 03-16-2011, 08:23 PM
  3. ENFJ Communication/ how not to annoy them?
    By paddington bear in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-07-2011, 09:35 PM
  4. [ISTJ] How not to pursue an ISTJ
    By raz in forum The SJ Guardhouse (ESFJ, ISFJ, ESTJ, ISTJ)
    Replies: 94
    Last Post: 09-15-2010, 12:24 PM
  5. How not to geocache
    By Martoon in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 06-23-2008, 04:48 AM

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