Mbti and Physical Reality

[Mole]

Part of mbti is based on physical reality and that is introversion and extroversion. But don't get too excited for introversion/extroversion fall on the Bell Curve. This means an almost infintesimal number of us are introvert and the same infintesimal number of us are extrovert, so almost all of us are neither introvert nor extovert.

So the the distinction introversion/ extroversion tell us nothing about the psyche of almost all of us. And the rest of mbti lacks any basis in physical reality.

So it is interesting it is impossible to understand the nature of mbti from the inside, and trying to understand mbti from the outside is deeply resisted.

And this is precisely what a cult is: it can't be understood from the inside and outside analysis is deeply resisted.

By the way: Mad Hatter has a sensible view of the Bell Curve extremes of introversion and extroversion.

 

[á´…eparted]

*yawn*. This isn't anything new from you
You've become so broken record like that it's legitimately become boring. Sad too, I was getting used to you not saying anything for a few days.

Ironically, your proposal to not look at this in a binary manner, has actually resulted in exactly that. It's kind of funny, so much of what you do become ironic that I am surprised you haven't begun to rust.

 

[reckful]

Part of mbti is based on physical reality and that is introversion and extroversion. But don't get too excited for introversion/extroversion fall on the Bell Curve. This means an almost infintesimal number of us are introvert and the same infintesimal number of us are extrovert, so almost all of us are neither introvert nor extovert.

So the the distinction introversion/ extroversion tell us nothing about the psyche of almost all of us. And the rest of mbti lacks any basis in physical reality.

All four of the MBTI dimensions (not just E/I) are based on "physical reality" and have been found to pass muster in the validity and reliability departments — including by the leading Big Five psychologists. Identical twins raised in separate households are substantially more likely to have the same preference on all four MBTI dimensions than less genetically-similar pairs.

And assuming E/I exhibits something like a bell-curvish distribution, what that means is that a substantial percentage of introverts are relatively mild introverts and a substantial percentage of extraverts are relatively mild extraverts. If "almost all of us" were "neither introvert nor extrovert," the E/I distribution would basically look like a spike, not a bell curve.

Anyone interested in reading about the validity of the dichotomy-centric side of the MBTI — and about several other issues often raised by people claiming to "debunk" the MBTI — will find a lengthy two-post discussion starting here, and further discussion of the scientific respectability of the MBTI in this post (also linked to in the first linked post).

 

[Mole]

All four of the MBTI dimensions (not just E/I) are based on "physical reality"

The physical reality I refer to is measurable physical reality. For instance, neurology has physically measured effects in the neurons that correspond with introversion and extroversion, but these same neurologists have found no effects in the neurons corresponding to the other three MBTI dimensions.

So we must look elsewhere other than physical reality to understand MBTI.

And looking not from the inside, but from the outside, MBTI looks like a money making cult.

And MBTI is a cult not based on evidence and reason, so we can imagine whatever we like, and it lends itself to exploitation and abuse.

 

[reckful]

The physical reality I refer to is measurable physical reality. For instance, neurology has physically measured effects in the neurons that correspond with introversion and extroversion, but these same neurologists have found no effects in the neurons corresponding to the other three MBTI dimensions.

So we must look elsewhere other than physical reality to understand MBTI.

The "physical reality" that has long been used to establish the validity and reliability of personality typologies — from the MBTI to the Big Five — doesn't typically involve neurological measurements, although those can also provide useful data.

When identical twins raised in separate households prove to be substantially more alike than less-genetically-similar pairs on personality dimensions measured by psychometrically valid indicators, that's physical reality in support of those personality dimensions, whether Mole likes it or not.

 

[great_bay]

I have no idea what people are talking about in this thread.