• 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.

How NOT to do typology

SolitaryWalker

Tenured roisterer
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
3,504
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
Do Blacks copy ESTP black culture? Do white people sometimes even copy it too?

Because it seems very much like they all want to be gangsters, and your archetypal gangster is a black ESTP (or ISTP I guess).

Thank you for your unwitting contributions to this thread.


Much appreciated, it takes enormous talent to reinvigorate a discussion without devoting the slightest effort to doing so. You're a very special person and I'll make it a habit to analyze your quoted posts with greater diligence.


let me help you with that:

Jaguar's truth, noun, a half-assed construct built upon easily countered pseudo-intellectual arguments maintained in spite of reason and rationality through the savoring of ignorance and the warm acceptance of easily identifiable fallacies. Synonyms: bullshit, mental masturbation, nonsense.


Thank you, but this display is more appropriate for another thread I started yesterday. Please re-submit it there, it might win you a nomination or two.

so at the absolute minimum, we have a typology of ego's - a typology matching some people's sense of identity :D

That's an interesting take on how typology should not be done, albeit unless you plan on implementing the method you're denouncing, please re-locate your comments to my other thread I apprised you of.
 

miss fortune

not to be trusted
Joined
Oct 4, 2007
Messages
20,589
Enneagram
827
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
that seems a bit off - just because something doesn't tell you everything there is to know about a person shouldn't be the basis for assuming that it tells you absolutely nothing :unsure:

But how do you sort out the unknown which could apply and that which doesn't? It's smarter to figure it out instead of assume... :)
 
S

Society

Guest
SW - witty ;)

ok, bringing it back on topic, i've recently found one that fits here quite well (and probably in the other thread):
Wow, you associate black and white thinking with "J"? That shows that your understanding of typology is quite rudimentary, black and white thinking is a symptom of intellectual immaturity. Any person with highly developed critical thinking skills generally understands that most dichotomies are false and have a more nuanced understanding of theoretical topics they comment on. One's level of intellectual sophistication has little to do with the P/J discrepancy, it would probably be more applicable to the N/S discrepancy, if anything. However, even there, the assessment is rather superficial because a Sensing preference generally does not prevent one from developing their critical thinking capabilities.

while superficially the statements are true,it somewhat ironically misses the nuance of what it attempts to be critical of, and so doesn't actually discount the possibility that certain ways of thinking (possibly represented by functions) can be more inclined towards different fallacies then others - meaning that the process of developing critical thinking would require overcoming a different set of natural inclinations. unless we assume any of the types would have a fully developed capacity for critical thinking, it stands to reason there would be plenty members of every type that haven't (as demonstrated by the quote), providing plenty of opportunities for people to interact with them, observe them making certain errors of understanding and associate those with that type.
 

SolitaryWalker

Tenured roisterer
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
3,504
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
SW - witty ;)

ok, bringing it back on topic, i've recently found one that fits here quite well (and probably in the other thread):


while superficially the statements are true,it somewhat ironically misses the nuance of what it attempts to be critical of, and so doesn't actually discount the possibility that certain ways of thinking (possibly represented by functions) can be more inclined towards different fallacies then others - meaning that the process of developing critical thinking would require overcoming a different set of natural inclinations. unless we assume any of the types would have a fully developed capacity for critical thinking, it stands to reason there would be plenty members of every type that haven't (as demonstrated by the quote), providing plenty of opportunities for people to interact with them, observe them making certain errors of understanding and associate those with that type.


Deft repartee, nearly a cogent analysis of the above cited criticism. The author of the passage whom you've quoted stated that equating black and white thinking with the J dichotomy of the MBTI displays a serious misunderstanding of typology. It seems that you are suggesting this criticism is inadequate, but how does the criticism that you've cited represent an instance of abuse of typology? If you make a typological fallacy and I mount an inept criticism of your statements, my claim in and of itself would not be regarded as an instance of abuse of typology. In other words, by conducting an untenable assessment of another person's typological is not an act of doing typology: it is only an act of criticizing how others do it. There is a fundamental distinction between engaging in a task and engaging in criticisms of another's performance, the latter clearly cannot be construed as an act of erroneous performance of a task. To assert that it can be would be just as preposterous as to maintain that an incompetent judge of figure-skating is himself a poor figure-skater because his evaluations of the skaters' performances are manifestly inaccurate.

To answer your claim, it is true that a temperament may lead one to be more likely to commit one fallacy as opposed to another, however, these are merely predispositions. Whether or not a person commits a fallacy is a reflection of their critical thinking capabilities and the predispositions of type will not exert a significant influence there, especially when we are dealing with a rather crude fallacy of bifurcation or black and white thinking. On average, people with weak critical thinking skills tend to make fallacies that their type predisposes them to and people with strong critical thinking skills tend to avoid them. Hence, it would be a mistake to assert that a certain kind of fallacious thinking is to be first and foremost associated with a particular set of cognitive dispositions because the plausible association can only be made with people of the type in question whose critical thinking skills are deficient. Clearly, because such people cannot be presumed to represent the key cognitive predispositions of the type that they have, the association between a certain fallacy and the cognitive dispositions of a certain type is simply unwarranted.
 
S

Society

Guest
Deft repartee, nearly a cogent analysis of the above cited criticism. The author of the passage whom you've quoted stated that equating black and white thinking with the J dichotomy of the MBTI displays a serious misunderstanding of typology. It seems that you are suggesting this criticism is inadequate, but how does the criticism that you've cited represent an instance of abuse of typology? If you make a typological fallacy and I mount an inept criticism of your statements, my claim in and of itself would not be regarded as an instance of abuse of typology. In other words, by conducting an untenable assessment of another person's typological is not an act of doing typology: it is only an act of criticizing how others do it. There is a fundamental distinction between engaging in a task and engaging in criticisms of another's performance, the latter clearly cannot be construed as an act of erroneous performance of a task. To assert that it can be would be just as preposterous as to maintain that an incompetent judge of figure-skating is himself a poor figure-skater because his evaluations of the skaters' performances are manifestly inaccurate.

this isn't really the argument i was making (i don't see much value in arguing that someone is incompetent unless i'm debating whether i should hire them) , but while we're at it: an incompetent judge of figure-skating is judging a skill set whose quality can be divorced form how well one understands it, so even without understanding why he's good and applying the same criteria to the students he can still be good. in contrast, if your judging people's physics tests and you corrected people that E=MC^7000, then either you or einstein really screwed up. likewise with typology, when you judge how it's applied you are contrasting someone else's understanding of it with your own - you are demonstrating your application of typology in the process, your showing what assumptions your making and your showing your take on it.

On average, people with weak critical thinking skills tend to make fallacies that their type predisposes them to and people with strong critical thinking skills tend to avoid them. Hence, it would be a mistake to assert that a certain kind of fallacious thinking is to be first and foremost associated with a particular set of cognitive dispositions because the plausible association can only be made with people of the type in question whose critical thinking skills are deficient. Clearly, because such people cannot be presumed to represent the key cognitive predispositions of the type that they have, the association between a certain fallacy and the cognitive dispositions of a certain type is simply unwarranted.

it would be wrong to assume that people of a certain type would make the disposed error in judgement without knowing anything about their capacity for critical thinking prior to them making one at all, but once they are making the error in judgement it wouldn't be incorrect to make note of it's predisposition. let's say you had two groups of L.D. students, both can overcome it and become very proficient in related fields and it would be incorrect to assume they couldn't - but once you see someone isn't overcoming it, it wouldn't be wrong to diagnose what L.D. they have based on identifying the obstacles they have most difficulty with. doing the first isn't the same as doing the later.
 

Jaguar

Active member
Joined
May 5, 2007
Messages
20,647
let's see: i explained why your argument was incorrect

Posting a quote and a link to Myers and Briggs.org had nothing to do with forming an argument. If you don't know The MBTI instrument sorts for preferences and does not measure trait, ability, or character, why are you in this discussion? Go get educated. You don't know the basics, so to compensate for the ignorance you got on your horse and rode through the town square shouting "Fallacy! Fallacy! Ad hominem!" That cheap tactic is not a substitute for knowledge.

Furthermore, you posted:

Mane said:
what would you call being a [insert function]-dom if not a trait?

If that's what you want then look into the Big 5 which is based on traits: extraversion, openness to experience, conscientiousness, neuroticism and agreeableness.
If you get a wild hair up your ass and decide to try something different (like learning), go here: http://psychology.about.com/od/personalitydevelopment/a/bigfive.htm

I'll post this—again—for the misguided lad:

The MBTI instrument sorts for preferences and does not measure trait, ability, or character.

Get it through your head - it's not about traits.
I'm going to bring this back to why I cranked up this old thread to begin with. This post:

Nonsense said:
You don't remind me enough of Elfboy in my opinion to be an ENFP.

If an explanation is actually necessary for why it is in this thread, then some people should just forget about Typology and take up basket weaving.
 
S

Society

Guest
The MBTI instrument sorts for preferences and does not measure trait, ability, or character.


lets be clear about this:
trait,Noun: A distinguishing quality or characteristic, typically one belonging to a person.


so when your stating that MBTI doesn't describe personality traits....

you are stating that this:
xs are less interested in developing plans of actions or making decisions than they are in generating possibilities and ideas. Following through on the implementation of an idea is usually a chore to the x. For some xs, this results in the habit of never finishing what they start. The x who has not developed their Thinking process will have problems with jumping enthusiastically from idea to idea, without following through on their plans. The x needs to take care to think through their ideas fully in order to take advantage of them.

is not a set of characteristics distinguishable from this:
xs are very career-focused, and fit into the corporate world quite naturally. They are constantly scanning their environment for potential problems which they can turn into solutions. They generally see things from a long-range perspective, and are usually successful at identifying plans to turn problems around - especially problems of a corporate nature. xs are usually successful in the business world, because they are so driven to leadership. They're tireless in their efforts on the job, and driven to visualize where an organization is headed. For these reasons, they are natural corporate leaders.

...you are stating that the MBTI, a typology aiming to distinguish between different personality types belonging to different people, doesn't describe distinguishing characteristics belonging to different people...

...do you see the problem there?
 

Jaguar

Active member
Joined
May 5, 2007
Messages
20,647
so when your stating that MBTI doesn't describe personality traits.

Who stated it? Hell, you can't even get the original source correct.
Go email the Myers & Briggs foundation and tell them they're full of shit.

Knock yourself out.
 
G

Glycerine

Guest
not to be picky here... (ok, yeah, I'm going to be picky here because it warms the cockles of my heart... whatever) but isn't ALL of the stuff about personality theory pseudo-intellectual and unable to be proven with hard science or even a rigorous statistical study of things? :huh:

I mean, you can't call something bullshit if you're defending bullshit on your own in the same breath :doh:

Haha. Just go check some academic databases.... most of it was inconclusive, had little to correlation, and was from the 80s to the early 2000s. Nardi seems the most legit though with the neuroscience. This is why I consider this site a "guilty pleasure" lol
 
S

Society

Guest
Who stated it? Hell, you can't even get the original source correct.
Go email the Myers & Briggs foundation and tell them they're full of shit.

Knock yourself out.

rofl, they said what they needed to say to avoid negative social reactions & the stigma that comes with it out of previous faulty systems attempting to distinguish the nature of individuals (eugenics, race, etc), it's you that is reading a PC disclaimer completely out of context and in flat out contradiction to the nature of MBTI. simply put, if it is describing anything - real or hypothetical - those can only be defined as personality traits. their statement is reasonable within a social context, your naive interpretation of it isn't - and you are the source of that.
 

greenfairy

philosopher wood nymph
Joined
May 25, 2012
Messages
4,024
MBTI Type
iNfj
Enneagram
6w5
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
In response to me saying that an NT should be able to handle criticism:
Well you clearly couldn't handle it when I told you what I like. If you "were" an NT you clearly handle my comment as well without flying off the handle like you did.
For the record, I think it is a myth (and a bad way of doing typology) that thinkers are better at taking criticism than feelers. I was being facetious, holding this person to common (I think false) standards, which he proceeded to uphold.
 

Stigmata

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Feb 16, 2011
Messages
8,779
In response to me saying that an NT should be able to handle criticism:

For the record, I think it is a myth (and a bad way of doing typology) that thinkers are better at taking criticism than feelers. I was being facetious, holding this person to common (I think false) standards, which he proceeded to uphold.

This is a pretty accurate example of how I deal with criticism in the workplace.

 

greenfairy

philosopher wood nymph
Joined
May 25, 2012
Messages
4,024
MBTI Type
iNfj
Enneagram
6w5
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Lol, I love it!
 

Jaguar

Active member
Joined
May 5, 2007
Messages
20,647
For the record, I think it is a myth (and a bad way of doing typology) that thinkers are better at taking criticism than feelers.

If you "were" an NT you clearly handle my comment as well without flying off the handle like you did.

Whoever posted that hasn't seen the last 5 years of several female NTs losing their cool in this forum.
 

SolitaryWalker

Tenured roisterer
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
3,504
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
this isn't really the argument i was making (i don't see much value in arguing that someone is incompetent unless i'm debating whether i should hire them) , but while we're at it: an incompetent judge of figure-skating is judging a skill set whose quality can be divorced form how well one understands it, so even without understanding why he's good and applying the same criteria to the students he can still be good. in contrast, if your judging people's physics tests and you corrected people that E=MC^7000, then either you or einstein really screwed up. likewise with typology, when you judge how it's applied you are contrasting someone else's understanding of it with your own - you are demonstrating your application of typology in the process, your showing what assumptions your making and your showing your take on it.



it would be wrong to assume that people of a certain type would make the disposed error in judgement without knowing anything about their capacity for critical thinking prior to them making one at all, but once they are making the error in judgement it wouldn't be incorrect to make note of it's predisposition. let's say you had two groups of L.D. students, both can overcome it and become very proficient in related fields and it would be incorrect to assume they couldn't - but once you see someone isn't overcoming it, it wouldn't be wrong to diagnose what L.D. they have based on identifying the obstacles they have most difficulty with. doing the first isn't the same as doing the later.

Thank you for your nifty ripost, almost seems like you've kicked the habit of speaking with your mouth full.


Whoever posted that hasn't seen the last 5 years of several female NTs losing their cool in this forum.

I think this is part of a more general category of fallacies I'd describe as "Keirseyism" that essentially equates certain virtues of character with one's four letter temperament code. NTs are cool-headed and analytical, NFs are compassionate and sentimental, SJs are dutiful and loyal and SPs are adventurous. I'd say Keirseyism is the most prevalent typological fallacy on MBTI forums, would you agree with that statement?
 

Jaguar

Active member
Joined
May 5, 2007
Messages
20,647
I think this is part of a more general category of fallacies I'd describe as "Keirseyism" that essentially equates certain virtues of character with one's four letter temperament code. NTs are cool-headed and analytical, NFs are compassionate and sentimental, SJs are dutiful and loyal and SPs are adventurous. I'd say Keirseyism is the most prevalent typological fallacy on MBTI forums, would you agree with that statement?

If you're defining Keireyism as what is contained within your post, of course I agree. Furthermore, the line of thought: "If you do X, you can't possibly be a certain type" needs to be eradicated. Why can't an NT be compassionate? Why can't an NF be uncompassionate? If the truth is more difficult to accept, how many will choose the path of least resistance? For many, it's easier to regurgitate stereotypes.
 

Dancing_Queen

New member
Joined
Jul 18, 2013
Messages
128
MBTI Type
ENTJ
Enneagram
8w7
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
^ at least now i know what one can expect from you ;)



let me guess - you've being hiding on PerC? anyway, while people using the N/S dichotomy to rationalize their "nobody understands me" angst is one of the most common things i've seen, it was actually addressing posts by a specific person here. but i've being trying to play nice - by the thread rules - with no mention of origins. i'm not sure if i agree with that (a bit like talking behind someone's back)... but i guess it avoid derails.

I was actually talking about another thread on this very forum. Good for you you're not aware of it, it's not very good for most people's nerves.

I do realize that, but it's a fitting explanation to what was going over that at the time, so I thought I'd comment on that.

I also don't think this is talking behind someone's backs, I had someone I quoted private message me earlier so I think at least some of them are aware.
 

SolitaryWalker

Tenured roisterer
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
3,504
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
If you're defining Keireyism as what is contained within your post, of course I agree.

Yes, Keirseyism is the principle that certain qualities of character are to be regarded as a consequence of their temperament.

Why can't an NT be compassionate? Why can't an NF be uncompassionate? If the truth is more difficult to accept, how many will choose the path of least resistance? For many, it's easier to regurgitate stereotypes.

Keirsey didn't quite say that, but it is easy to see how such conclusions seem to follow from his premises. If certain virtues of character such as compassion stem from one's "NF" temperament, it would follow that an absence of such a temperament entails an absence of compassion. It seems that the central fallacy of Keirseyism is that it exaggerates the influence that one's temperament carries upon the development of virtuous character traits. There are many ways to cultivate morally commendable traits and they all take enormous dedication and a temperament is largely influenced by one's innate biological dispositions.

I'd say Keirseyism contains numerous traits including but not limited to the following.

1. Presence of a certain temperament leads one to cultivate admirable character traits
2. Absence of a certain temperament is to be interpreted as synonymous with an absence of the traits in question
3. People of some temperament by their nature have more admirable qualities than people of other temperaments, at least from the general perspective of the Western culture concerning what is considered praiseworthy
4. Because temperaments shed light on one's immutable and fundamental personality qualities, it is possible to determine the professional or a social environment that any person is best suited for simply by knowing their temperament.
5. Temperaments by definition consists of virtuous character traits, hence, if someone has been identified as a member of a privileged temperament group and seem to lack those qualities, their membership in the group must be revoked. This seems to lead to the conclusion that most people cannot be typed accurately with Keirsey's Temperament Sorter, otherwise his profiles would not be fraught with lavish and gratuitous praise for each of the 16 temperaments.
6. When someone apparently engages in action that is associated with a certain type, it should be assumed that they do so because their Temperament leads them to do so and not because of external circumstances that have nothing to do with their personal identity. This is the Fundamental Attribution Error.
 
Top