Rebranding the MBTI

[Werebudgie]

Of course that is the whole thing. It's due to cognitive functions. It's like talking to a kindred spirit but with important differences. What's wrong with that?

I don't see anything wrong with that, myself.

People often don't know why they react the way they do to others. The beauty of the interaction on a forum like this is you get to see how people are different than you and if they publish their type you begin to discern patterns. I can think of one person here who tends to bash 6s. It doesn't bother me at all. I enjoy seeing him deal through his frustrations and don't take criticisms of my type seriously enough to be offended by it. It's just a lens.

In contrast, for me: I experience it as watching people run their psychological dysfunctions and related type-related tantrums all over the place under the guise of "discussion" and that isn't interesting to me. For me, that is not a peer-based intelligent respectful dialogue between grown (regardless of age in years) people seeking deeper exploration and understanding and actual learning across complex combinations of similarities and differences. Instead to me it seems more like some weird cyclically ongoing group therapy session in which people continually throw poop at each other to work through their dysfunctions/issues. Maybe some people need or want that kind of thing. Maybe others find it interesting to witness. Me, not so much. (also complete tangent here: [MENTION=360]prplchknz[/MENTION], tagging you in case you would find this poop-throwing metaphor amusing and/or accurate).

Note: And I'm recently seeing quite clearly that it's actually not about whether the focus is on psychological issues and dysfunction itself. I've recently been exploring some non-type-related damage from my own early experiences, and part of the exploration is online in discussion forum contexts. I see from that experience that it is possible for people to thoughtfully explore very difficult, deep-seated, sometimes pretty gothic, and even explosive personal issues and pain without turning the discussions into some sort of faux re-enactment of the worst of their issues in the actual participation/discussion process.

That said, as I've been thinking about this particular discussion thread, I've been wondering if typologycentral relies on what I name as dysfunctional dynamic to provide a sort of heat and energy and interest that it wouldn't otherwise generate or attract.

And/or - maybe this site really is meant to provide a space where participants who as so inclined can just let their psychological damage drive how they participate and communicate with others, as a way to deal with things somehow. That is, maybe it really is meant to be that sort of "go ahead, run that dysfunction without restraint, just go for it" kind of space, a context deliberately created for at least some people to enact and re-enact their psychological dysfunctions by engaging in them in interaction with others, while others watch it all unfold. Maybe you as the owner see real value in providing a space for that kind of dynamic and despite what I think of it all, maybe for some people there is real psychological (therapeutic) value in that approach. And while I myself may be appalled by such interactions and don't see that as a particularly valuable approach given my own focus areas in engaging the type concepts and language, I can see that such a space could be considered valuable outside of whatever makes sense to me. Seriously. If that really is the case, maybe there's a way to make that more explicit for potential new participants somehow, eg in the site documentation/FAQs/etc as things unfold (or maybe it's in there and I just didn't see it, quite possible).

You might think type is more clumsy and overly generalized than I do. My guess is that you see things in a more nuanced way. Maybe that's part of the difference between how INTJs and INFJs tend to think.

Hmmm, I'm not sure about this one way or another (whether it is about INFJ and INTJ cognitive function differences). I do feel like in my experience, there are some relatively nuanced ways to use the conceptual tools of typology. When it comes specifically to attending to nuances, this comment is a recent example of how I myself find it useful to approach type and use the concepts in what I consider to be a nuanced way (in this case for practical real life based self-understanding, though it can also be used for understanding of others). Anyway, not sure where specifically that kind of approach and focus comes from, though. And I'm not sure I get how nuance vs generalization is linked back to this particular discussion.

 

[highlander]

That said, as I've been thinking about this particular discussion thread, I've been wondering if typologycentral relies on what I name as dysfunctional dynamic to provide a sort of heat and energy and interest that it wouldn't otherwise generate or attract.

And/or - maybe this site really is meant to provide a space where participants who as so inclined can just let their psychological damage drive how they participate and communicate with others, as a way to deal with things somehow. That is, maybe it really is meant to be that sort of "go ahead, run that dysfunction without restraint, just go for it" kind of space, a context deliberately created for at least some people to enact and re-enact their psychological dysfunctions by engaging in them in interaction with others, while others watch it all unfold. Maybe you as the owner see real value in providing a space for that kind of dynamic and despite what I think of it all, maybe for some people there is real psychological (therapeutic) value in that approach. And while I myself may be appalled by such interactions and don't see that as a particularly valuable approach given my own focus areas in engaging the type concepts and language, I can see that such a space could be considered valuable outside of whatever makes sense to me. Seriously. If that really is the case, maybe there's a way to make that more explicit for potential new participants somehow, eg in the site documentation/FAQs/etc as things unfold (or maybe it's in there and I just didn't see it, quite possible)

[yway, not sure where specifically that kind of approach and focus comes from, though. And I'm not sure I get how nuance vs generalization is linked back to this particular discussion.

Well honestly, I think you may be a little biased by a couple of our members that I believe had bad endings to relationships with INFJs. They were deeply hurt. They have vented a little here. We all understand. It's ok. I only get uncomfortable when people who have been hurt start abusing or preying on others. As soon as I find out something is going on there that is imprudent, we take action up and including to removing them.

I feel that INFJs often see the 16 types as rough instruments that are lacking in precision. More than any other, they feel these types provide a set of data points. Others will perceive them differently - more finite and concrete. They are a set of data points upon which conclusions are formed - not perceptions. There is a difference.

 

[Coriolis]

So my discussion question here is: What can the general public -- i.e. those of us not part of the official MBTI establishment -- do? Is there anything that can be done? Clearly we are the weaker side, even though we predominate the Internet. Is there any chance that, at some point in the future, other authors on the subject can take control of this narrative and help the world see the MBTI for what it's REALLY good at?

I'm not sure what you mean here by "rebranding". I agree with your OP, but what you are describing sounds more like simply removing misconceptions about MBTI and pointing people back to its original purpose. Put another way, its using the tool for the right job.

Despite whatever misinformation about MBTI is out there, there is also plenty of accurate and honest information. Meaning: anyone interested in using MBTI for self-reflection and as an aid (not crystal ball) to decision-making can readily access all the information necessary to do so. All members of the general public can do is to use it constructively for themselves. After all, each person is probably in it for him/herself, not to crusade against misconceptions on the internet or elsewhere. As with anything, though, every person using the tool the right way becomes an example to others. On this forum, we can therefore have a critical mass of members of the public taking interest in MBTI and other personality systems in an intellectually honest and constructive way.

 

[Mole]

Found yet another article today about how the MBTI is "worthless" because it doesn't do what it "claims" to do -- namely pick the perfect job, spouse, and life for your type. Seems like at least one article like this comes out per year. I would attribute this entirely to the branding of the official MBTI: it's marketed as this, officially, and the MBTI people make boatloads of money off of training sessions and certificates every year.

Problem is, even though that's how it's marketed, and that's part of why it was created in the first place... that's not what it's good for. The MBTI is best for general introspection: how you relate to yourself, how you relate to others, what you can do to live with yourself and the people around you better than you currently do. At its best, when you're an enthusiast -- like many on this forum -- it becomes a language with which you can discuss the social and internal realm and come to better and deeper understandings about how you and others operate.

That's the practical application that keeps me interested. Me, an ESTJ, one of the types that typically does not stay interested. But it took a LOT of digging to make me interested in the first place. If it was marketed to me exclusively as a workplace tool, and I'd taken it at face value, I would have abandoned it a long time ago. I probably would view it as derisively as many of my friends and family, and many people in the media -- most recently, Ezra Klein (ENTJ), whose anti-MBTI article inspired me to write this.

So my discussion question here is: What can the general public -- i.e. those of us not part of the official MBTI establishment -- do? Is there anything that can be done? Clearly we are the weaker side, even though we predominate the Internet. Is there any chance that, at some point in the future, other authors on the subject can take control of this narrative and help the world see the MBTI for what it's REALLY good at?

It's like asking, what is astrology really good at? Well, astrology is our earliest religion, and all the other religions follow after astrology. For instance, astrology has twelve signs of the zodiac and christianity has twelve apostles, and so on.

And the techniques used by astrologers are the same techniques used by subsequent religions. For instance, astrologers, induce a trance where our critical mind is put to sleep for a while so we can be susceptible to the suggestions of the astrologer, and christianity tells us we cannot enter the kingdom of heaven unless we become as little children, that is, we put aside our critical mind, like children, and leave our selves open to believing suggestions put to us by christian authority figures.

And so mbti follows on from astrology in putting our prefrontal cortex asleep for a while so we are open to suggestions about our personality.

Putting our prefrontal cortex asleep for a while is relaxing and conserves mental energy.

 

[á´…eparted]

It's like asking, what is astrology really good at? Well, astrology is our earliest religion, and all the other religions follow after astrology. For instance, astrology has twelve signs of the zodiac and christianity has twelve apostles, and so on.

And the techniques used by astrologers are the same techniques used by subsequent religions. For instance, astrologers, induce a trance where our critical mind is put to sleep for a while so we can be susceptible to the suggestions of the astrologer, and christianity tells us we cannot enter the kingdom of heaven unless we become as little children, that is, we put aside our critical mind, like children, and leave our selves open to believing suggestions put to us by christian authority figures.

And so mbti follows on from astrology in putting our prefrontal cortex asleep for a while so we are open to suggestions about our personality.

Putting our prefrontal cortex asleep for a while is relaxing and conserves mental energy.

Do you have anything new to add? Because I just hear the broken record of "MBTI is bad and you're all wrong and horrible" yet again in a subtly insulting manner.