The New Type Community

[highlander]

The new type community

A recent thread pointed to this article and I found it to be pretty interesting.

First - what bothers me. There were a number of "stupid quotes" about type that people were making online, which were interspersed throughout the article. I think a few are good because it does illustrate a point but the number of them (18) just serves to paint a picture that people on typology forums are a bunch of ignorant noobs, which is a bit insulting.

However, I think there are a number of points that are relevant and worthy of discussions. She basically paints these things as reality - that it is the new world and that type practioners need to deal with it.

1. The free online tests aren't very good - On the whole, I completely agree with this. Nothing on the Internet compares with the official MBTI test or being assessed by an experienced professional practitioner. Time is money and it continues to surprise me that there are so many people who will spend hours on end on Internet forums but not pay the nominal fee for a worthwhile assessment. I'm curious as to how or why people don't realize this.

2. Democratization of information - A second point the author mentions is that because of all of the free information dissemination, she runs into situations where people seem unwilling to pay for certain services or information because it is free. She also mentions that there is one line of thought in the type community that the popularity this drives is good for business because more people are interested in the topic and its potential. I have some definite opinions on this which I will elaborate on later.

3. The dangers of inaccurate information dissemination and how that information is used - She refers to the "cult of the amateur". Because there are so many people making comments that are misinformed or wrong, it is potentially damaging. People don't understand the theory, concepts or how they should be applied.

4. What can be done by type professionals? - She mentions the following, "How do we retain the value of our education and experience? Most of us haveinvested time and money to acquire our certifications. These credentials were the destination, but during our journey we grasped the value of ‘gifts differing’.Now that value is being trampled by boorish dilettantes who perceive us as price-gouging ‘middle men’ raking in profits andpreying on their vulnerability. How do werefute that image." It's a valid question and one that is faced by any kind of consultant that has invested years in their craft. How do they continue to be relevant and be financially rewarded for the work that they do? (by the way, I am a consultant with numerous certifications of a different kind, so I understand a little bit of where the author is coming from).

Any thoughts on this? I have a number of opinions that I will elaborate on later.

Also, please refrain from any attacks on the publisher of the article. Focus on the the content - the points and the arguments contained in it. I'd like to know your opinion and if you have to resort to attacks on a person to make your point, it demonstrates a weakness in your arguments.

 

[highlander]

2. Democratization of information - A second point the author mentions is that because of all of the free information dissemination, she runs into situations where people seem unwilling to pay for certain services or information because it is free. She also mentions that there is one line of thought in the type community that the popularity this drives is good for business because more people are interested in the topic and its potential. I have some definite opinions on this which I will elaborate on later.

4. What can be done by type professionals? - She mentions the following, "How do we retain the value of our education and experience? Most of us haveinvested time and money to acquire our certifications. These credentials were the destination, but during our journey we grasped the value of ‘gifts differing’.Now that value is being trampled by boorish dilettantes who perceive us as price-gouging ‘middle men’ raking in profits andpreying on their vulnerability. How do werefute that image." It's a valid question and one that is faced by any kind of consultant that has invested years in their craft. How do they continue to be relevant and be financially rewarded for the work that they do? (by the way, I am a consultant with numerous certifications of a different kind, so I understand a little bit of where the author is coming from).

First - to comment on a couple of these points.

Being a consultant for quite a number of years, I've run into these issues myself. Or at least, I've been concerned about it. I have 4 different certifications. They all require some number of years of experience, passing a test, and some ongoing educational credits. For one of them, I had to study 15 - 20 hours a week for six months prior to taking the test. Do I think these certifications are important? In many respects, I don't think I do. In my personal interactions with others, I care about what they know and can deliver, not what certifications they have. I'm working with a guy who never got a college degree right now. He kicks ass. So, I don't really care what his educational credentials are. I got my certifications because my perception is that other people do care about them, because of a thirst to learn and because it was some form of achievement. On the whole though, I think certifications are a relevant part of any profession. I think I'd rather go to a doctor that graduated from a good medical school, completed their residency and passed State 1, 2 and 3 boards. It says something about what they know. If I wanted legal advice, I'd rather talk to someone who holds a license to practice law.

With regards to "how do you stay relevant", I think as a consultant, you are valued for what you deliver. I have worked with a number of "experts" over the years that were just plan wrong. They didn't know what they were talking about. There were others that were knowledgeable but were unable to add value or make an impact in their interaction with others. For MBTI, Enneagram and other things like this, I believe many members of the type community are focused on the "instrument." Ok, so you determine your type. That requires a certain level of expertise. It's the type of thing that becomes a commodity though. The important thing in my mind is then how that information can be applied and used. That's what's difficult and what people will pay money for. Being able to assess or determine another person's type without them having taken a test, and how to use that information, is also something seems like it would be of value.

 

[thoughtlost]

It's true though... I am a big noob xDDDD

Anyway, the way I see it is like a battle between public opinion about what personality is and something slightly more objective (if I can say that). It's not exactly a bad thing to have the general public try to understand personality (I am sure we can get at least a few obvious things correctly whatever they may be), but when you have something like Jungian psychology... that's knowledge I am willing to pay for. It's the kind of interpretation that takes a lot of training and observation. The only thing there is that different psychologists have their own interpretations of things... but that is what makes them relevant; they can see the exact same person and use different concepts/theories to describe them.

I can understand the point of not giving a crap about typologists who say "you're an INFJ" ...and then the client is left with a confused look on his/her face because she/he doesn't say anything else. I mean... I'll pay her to explain to me what that means ...otherwise I am left with my basic lay person knowledge xDD ...but I don't know, whatever.

 

[say yes]

I just read the article, and I do think it brings some good points. What I do like is the ambition of more serious takes on Jungian typology. However I do not believe that those MBTI-tests you pay for is much superior to tests on the Internet. Things don't always turn better when money is involved. Quite often the contrary I'd say.
I think it's worth to notice that the MBTI business (CPP) has a very bad reputation among professional psychologists. They mostly seem to think of it as scam.

I would like to see a new, better, typing community, but I don't really think this will be accomplished by more people taking paid MBTI-tests. What is need is rather more critical thinking and more close reading of Carl Jung. It seems that all Jungian typology tests on the Internet is trying to resemble MBTI, I think it would be interesting to see tests which tries more to be faithful to Jung rather than Myers-Briggs.

Here is a blog post I wrote on this topic:
http://recollectingphilosophy.wordpress.com/2013/05/10/mbtiers-jungians-and-scientists/

 

[skylights]

What can be done by type professionals? - She mentions the following, "How do we retain the value of our education and experience? Most of us haveinvested time and money to acquire our certifications. These credentials were the destination, but during our journey we grasped the value of ‘gifts differing’.Now that value is being trampled by boorish dilettantes who perceive us as price-gouging ‘middle men’ raking in profits andpreying on their vulnerability. How do we refute that image."

I think the answer hinges on two major issues: the lack of quality information, and the lack of consistent, uniform, and publically-trusted professional regulation.

You can't blame people for being independent and self-sufficient - healthy qualities - nor for being skeptical about a field that is not as popularly familiar or consistently regulated (compare professionals in medicine, law, or education). I've had questionable experiences with personality professionals, and while I recognize a handful of trustworthy experts, unlike with doctors, attorneys, or teachers, who are fairly well-regulated and licensed, I don't have any real faith that the next average professional typologist will be competent. As for the dilettantes - there are always going to be the extremists and the hobbyists, and there is always going to be bad advice for sale. The important thing is being able to differentiate between them.

Related to that, I think this situation is more the result of not enough quality information out there, not too much. Were there more serious talk about typology, and more solid analysis floating around, people would have a better idea of what a quality test is, and why they could benefit from paying for a professional to help them. It's a complicated dance between profession and business that practitioners tread, and there has to be some balance between the two. As professionals, they are best-equipped to understand what would benefit people the most, but as businessmen, they must serve the market demand. I can understand the frustration of the professional who wants to render the best service, but only information can begin to address that. Again, compare medicine, law, or education. There is a huge amount of unrestricted medical, legal, and educational knowledge, yet we turn to professionals because we realize the extent of our lack of knowledge in the discipline. But we cannot realize this if we do not understand the discipline, and we cannot understand the discipline without quality information.

So on my part, I think that professionals would benefit from:

• Putting more free quality information out there
• Encouraging personal study and community discussion, as well as taking part in or, best, leading that discussion (eg journals)
• Offering advanced services and longer, more specialized testing for charge
• Creating more professional standards and regulation of practitioners

Highlander, you have asked for no personal attacks on the article's author, so I am going to try to phrase this in a way that is not a personal attack, because it is in not meant as one, but is related to what I have said above. The way she presents her information is not always very well indicative of professionalism, and that is part of the problem in being able to distinguish between the professional and the recreational, and between the trustworthy and the unfounded. It is also alienating to hear negativity from a professional about public interest in the field. It is ideally the professional's role to guide public interest.

 

[highlander]

I do not believe that those MBTI-tests you pay for is much superior to tests on the Internet. Things don't always turn better when money is involved. Quite often the contrary I'd say.

Have you taken a Step II?

I think it's worth to notice that the MBTI business (CPP) has a very bad reputation among professional psychologists. They mostly seem to think of it as scam.

Isn't that true of the whole type thing though? (enneagram, mbti, etc.)

I would like to see a new, better, typing community, but I don't really think this will be accomplished by more people taking paid MBTI-tests. What is need is rather more critical thinking and more close reading of Carl Jung. It seems that all Jungian typology tests on the Internet is trying to resemble MBTI, I think it would be interesting to see tests which tries more to be faithful to Jung rather than Myers-Briggs.

I think there is too much focus on the instrument itself and not enough on practical application.

 

[highlander]

Here is a blog post I wrote on this topic:
http://recollectingphilosophy.wordpress.com/2013/05/10/mbtiers-jungians-and-scientists/

This is an excellent article. I think of MBTI as an evolution/extension of the theory in an effort to make it more useable and consumable. I think as time progresses, the divide between the MBTI and Jungian communities is narrowing because the MBTI practitioners are going back to Jung and away from the trait based superficial aspects.

I looked at "The Cult of Personality Testing" at the library a week ago at the library and skimmed through it. Then I thought better of it and didn't check it out.

One minor point. You state that, "According to Jung, if the first function (dominant) is introverted then the fourth (inferior) function is extraverted, but he doesn’t explicitly say anything about direction of second and third function, Myers-Briggs however adds that the third function is in line with first function and the second function is opposite of the first function. "

Actually, while it seems commonly accepted that the tertiary is in the same direction of the dominant, the MBTI manual actually leaves this point open, indicating there is some disagreement on it. I can speak for myself as Fe being a foreign way of thinking but I'm only one person.

You write like an INTJ .

 

[Cellmold]

[MENTION=8936]highlander[/MENTION]

Point 1 goes without saying.

Point 2 is an interesting one. I would say that more or less differs based on the individual. For example I dislike the idea of paying for something of this nature, not because the information is free, but because my perspective is that if it is as important to our growth as some would imply, then it is too important for the use of wealth.

Point 3 I also agree with, but this is not a new point nor a surprising one, as it goes on at all levels and in all subjects. In other words obvious point is obvious. There is no real safeguard for this, beyond getting people to understand that trying to hold a position of equal intelligence and understanding of a subject when as an individual you do not possess that same level of consideration or understanding, means that you should step aside.
I say this as one who is often found wanting in both those areas.

Point 4. This is a question that should be superseded by a more important one: Is there sufficient evidence for this theory to be taken seriously enough in the first place and with any sort of accuracy?

It is fine to mention the struggles that a type professional has in an online world of easy information access and even easier opinions formed around them, but it has to be understood that people would respect something of this nature more if it had more of a grounding in factual evidence, beyond just heuristics. In terms of evidence I would say it only ranks somewhat higher on the scale than things like the healing power of crystals or homeopathy.

Not everything can be understood in a factual manner or in one of concrete reality of course, but unfortunately for 'type professionals' that is the wall they will have to come up against time and again.

 

[say yes]

This is an excellent article. I think of MBTI as an evolution/extension of the theory in an effort to make it more useable and consumable. I think as time progresses, the divide between the MBTI and Jungian communities is narrowing because the MBTI practitioners are going back to Jung and away from the trait based superficial aspects.

I looked at "The Cult of Personality Testing" at the library a week ago at the library and skimmed through it. Then I thought better of it and didn't check it out.

One minor point. You state that, "According to Jung, if the first function (dominant) is introverted then the fourth (inferior) function is extraverted, but he doesn’t explicitly say anything about direction of second and third function, Myers-Briggs however adds that the third function is in line with first function and the second function is opposite of the first function. "

Actually, while it seems commonly accepted that the tertiary is in the same direction of the dominant, the MBTI manual actually leaves this point open, indicating there is some disagreement on it. I can speak for myself as Fe being a foreign way of thinking but I'm only one person.

You write like an INTJ .

Thanks!

What you say about MBTI practitioners getting closer to Jung I didn't know of, but you may well be right, and I think it's good. To be honest I know very little about the professional use of MBTI. You asked if I had taken "Step II", but I didn't even know what it was...

Thanks for the note about tertiary function. Concerning the auxiliary function, I think it's interesting to notice what Jung says about this. In the text Psychological Types he speaks of the auxiliary function not as a separate function on its own but rather as something that serves the dominant function. For example he mentions "speculative intellect" (intuition that serves thinking), "practical intellect" (sensation that serves thinking), "philosophic intuition" and "artistic intuition". In this sense it may not useful to speak of the auxiliary function as either introverted or extraverted.

 

[highlander]

Thanks!

What you say about MBTI practitioners getting closer to Jung I didn't know of, but you may well be right, and I think it's good. To be honest I know very little about the professional use of MBTI. You asked if I had taken "Step II", but I didn't even know what it was...

Here is a snapshot of the graphics from my Step II results. It may give you some idea.

http://www.typologycentral.com/forums/album.php?albumid=1072&attachmentid=4969

http://www.typologycentral.com/forums/album.php?albumid=1072&attachmentid=4968

http://www.typologycentral.com/forums/album.php?albumid=1072&attachmentid=4967

http://www.typologycentral.com/forums/album.php?albumid=1072&attachmentid=4966

http://www.typologycentral.com/forums/album.php?albumid=1072&attachmentid=4971

http://www.typologycentral.com/forums/album.php?albumid=1072&attachmentid=4970

 

[sculpting]

I suspect it muct be very frustrating to pay for a certification and then have it (and your career opportunity) devalued by prolific free information, correct or not.

However whenever anyone talks about the "right" source of information I immediately become suspicious, as I would rather see all ideas presented and let folks evaluate on thier own judgement. "Protecting" people from the "wrong" information feels really weird to me and bad.

However, having gone through MBTI certification, I find much online information, even in this forum, to be more thought provoking and even visionary, than what the standard MBTI text teaches, as it incorporates elements of jungian theory, which MBTI ignores for the most part. I adore the work down by Nardi actually showing the functions.

Because MBTI is used a couple of million types a year, they cannot change rapidly or evolve, without potentially changing the test, and thus placing at risk the historical precedence they have established by 30 years worth of tests being taken and used as a standard for personality assessment. They spend a great deal of time compiling data, albeit with very large error bars, but have sort of trapped themselves into a box by thier own success.

The Step II is interesting as it tries to account for errors in the standard test without really changing it too much.

In reality MBTI needs to change the model to account for evolution of MBTI type throughout adulthood, emergence of the tert/inf functions in middle age, and ideally incorporate elements of the ennegram instinctual variants, as those explain why within one type, you will still see drastically different manifestations of that type.

The only way I can get folks to accept thier MBTI Step II results is to talk about emergence of the tert function due to life experiences or maturaty and how that will result in the results they see in the test.

When testing adults, about 75% of folks test towards thier tert/inf functions, but when asked about their "true" type as part of the consult, will tend to gravitate back to their actual type, but feel unsatisfied until you explain the tert/inf function to them.