User Tag List

First 1234 Last

Results 11 to 20 of 96

  1. #11
    Lex Parsimoniae Xander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    9w8
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    4,463

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Flak View Post
    Yes Xander, we've apparently been thinking along similar lines. If I take your meaning properly.
    Of course you understand properly... the alternative is being a blithering idiot and as you're not a blithering idiot then you must agree with me... it's only logical!


    Isn't it time for a colourful metaphor?

  2. #12
    & Badger, Ratty and Toad Mole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    18,545

    Default

    Surely all this is moot if all qualified psychometricians say MBTI is invalid and unreliable.

    To argue logically from a false premise gives a false conclusion.

    And psychometricians say MBTI is a false premise.

  3. #13
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    MBTI
    type
    Posts
    9,100

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Victor View Post
    To argue logically from a false premise gives a false conclusion.
    It can.

  4. #14
    Lex Parsimoniae Xander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    9w8
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    4,463

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ilah View Post
    Replying to the OP. How much of it is theory and how much is observation?

    Using INTJs as an example:
    If your dominant is Ni and auxillary is Te, your third strongest trait is supposed to be Fi and four should be Se. Why are Fi and Se listed as 3 and 4?

    Is it based on theory? Something like, logically if one of your percieving is introverted the next one should be extrovert for balance. So Ni is backed up by Se, not Si. But that makes me wonder why not Ni, Te, Se, Fi?

    Or is it based on observation. Statistically, did most people that were NiTe have Fi as third and Se as fourth?

    If the order is based on theory, it would seem like a large number or people whose traits don't fall into proper order would question the vallidity of the theory.

    On the other hand if it is just statistics then having many people whose traits fall into order does not invalidate it.

    It doesn't seem to be that the order is just statistics though. There is a pattern to determining traits 3-8 based on the first 2 that is consistent for all the types. That seems to point more to theory than statistics.
    Quite true. However a few things occurr to me.

    The function order is not necessarily 1234 as written. After investigation I can find arguments for either 1234 or 1278 (8 functions with only 4 listed). So you may be steered wrong by that alone.

    Secondly you are dealing with a guidebook in it's infancy to a persons preferences of internal processes. There is no rule or maxim which can be applied universally, only guidance and suggestion. Ergo if you study the theory without reference to external guidance then you are likely to end up making the wrong conclusions or getting tied up in dead ends of thinking.

    That not to say that there aren't dangers in trying to tie up the external world with the theories but hopefully with some time and help the two will begin to look more similar.

    Anyhow at the end of the day I was under the impression that the MBTI was designed to facilitate communication by highlighting differences. For that few people need such levels of internal consistency which many are looking for.

    (Oh and I should just underline that this thread isn't targetting anyone. I aim not to single out people but rather to just air the thinking and see what people make of it...)
    Isn't it time for a colourful metaphor?

  5. #15
    Lex Parsimoniae Xander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    9w8
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    4,463

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Victor View Post
    Surely all this is moot if all qualified psychometricians say MBTI is invalid and unreliable.

    To argue logically from a false premise gives a false conclusion.

    And psychometricians say MBTI is a false premise.
    Qualified in what?

    Who says that their theories are any more valid than the next man's?

    I've never met any so I restrain from making judgements on the idiots!
    ( )
    Isn't it time for a colourful metaphor?

  6. #16
    Lex Parsimoniae Xander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    9w8
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    4,463

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlueWing View Post
    External validity is contingent upon internal consistency. In other words, we do not know if what we observe is sound unless we have thought about it. Thinking about it is necessarily an internal process.
    A logical error?

    A implies B does not imply that B implies A.

    The fact that things which are true to reality make sense to you does not mean that for things to be true they must make sense.

    To make sense of what is reality we apply a mask to it. Not a mask as in a charade but more masking reality with tape so that we may spray the bits we know green and the rest is left to explore... the problem being that we forget that we applied a mask. The green areas are as close as we could get to what we know (ie they're imprecise) and the very masking procedure we used covered some details so they could not be observed whether known or unknown.

    Our system of understanding has no validation. Ergo our understanding of something validates it to no one but ourselves.
    Isn't it time for a colourful metaphor?

  7. #17
    & Badger, Ratty and Toad Mole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    18,545

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Flak View Post
    It can.
    This is quite true. To argue from a false premise can give a false conclusion. And to argue from a false premise can give a correct conclusion.

    But the conclusion in the second case is problematic. For instance the conclusion may have nothing to do with the premise which means it is impossible to generalise this argument.

    Or perhaps the conclusion is empirically correct but we cannot say where it came from.

    But you are quite correct -

    It can.

  8. #18
    & Badger, Ratty and Toad Mole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    18,545

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Xander View Post
    Qualified in what?

    Who says that their theories are any more valid than the next man's?

    I've never met any so I restrain from making judgements on the idiots!
    ( )
    Psychometrics is a branch of Psychology. It measures the psyche and in this case, personality types.

    Psychometrics is empirical - it can be tested - and any particular test can be falsified.

    MBTI has been tested and found to be false.

    And the creators of MBTI, Mrs Briggs and her daughter, did not know how to make a valid and reliable personality test. In fact they copied their test from the book, "Personality Types", by the New Age Guru, Carl Jung.

    If you wish to talk to a qualified psychometrician, you can ring the Psychology Department of your nearest University and ask to speak to a psychometrician.

    Why not?

  9. #19
    Tenured roisterer SolitaryWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 so/sx
    Posts
    3,467

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Xander View Post

    The fact that things which are true to reality make sense to you does not mean that for things to be true they must make sense.

    To make sense of what is reality we apply a mask to it. Not a mask as in a charade but more masking reality with tape so that we may spray the bits we know green and the rest is left to explore... the problem being that we forget that we applied a mask. The green areas are as close as we could get to what we know (ie they're imprecise) and the very masking procedure we used covered some details so they could not be observed whether known or unknown.

    Our system of understanding has no validation. Ergo our understanding of something validates it to no one but ourselves.
    The bottom line is that the reason why you have an idea of an external occurence is because of an internal cognitive perception.

    Quote Originally Posted by Xander View Post
    A logical error?

    A implies B does not imply that B implies A..
    No idea what you are talking about.

    Generally, it should be noted that no system can be positivistic. As this cancels out all thinking altogether. Internal framework is the system in itself, yet the external observations are the additional data we need to collect. Our internal framework is sound if it is logically consistent and founded upon sound premises which hinge on factual information. It is important to continue to observe the external world to make sure that we have the correct factual information to found our premises on.
    "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/

  10. #20
    Senior Member Ilah's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    274

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Victor View Post
    Surely all this is moot if all qualified psychometricians say MBTI is invalid and unreliable.

    To argue logically from a false premise gives a false conclusion.

    And psychometricians say MBTI is a false premise.
    I am curious:

    Is there another personality typing system you think is more valid or do you disagree with personality typing in general? If so what system(s) do you like?

    In other words is it just MBTI you disagree with or the whole idea of classifying people into types?

Similar Threads

  1. Why do people on the right tend to think climate change is fake?
    By asynartetic in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 275
    Last Post: 10-11-2017, 12:06 AM
  2. I think I am starting to give up on humanity; am I on the right now?
    By Blackout in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 55
    Last Post: 08-26-2016, 05:03 AM
  3. [Ni] Do You Think Introverted Intuition Is Focused On The Future
    By highlander in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 41
    Last Post: 08-04-2016, 10:55 AM
  4. Replies: 134
    Last Post: 03-19-2009, 11:05 PM

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