User Tag List

First 12345 Last

Results 21 to 30 of 85

  1. #21
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dissonance View Post
    Thank you. People just take an interpretation that fits into their framework, except that it isn't their own framework, it's someone else's. They stop thinking for themselves.
    How interesting. Now how do we distinguish from people who are just using confirmation bias versus people who ARE thinking through it but come to the same conclusions as the confirmation bias people?

    What a meta-thread. It practices the same flaw it's bitching about. That's quite an achievement.

    Confirmation bias cannot be overcome. We should stop trying to fight it. The people who think they've won out over it are the worst...
    You just want me to agree, don't you?
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  2. #22
    resonance entropie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    MBTI
    entp
    Enneagram
    783
    Posts
    16,761

    Default

    I am not much of a psychologist and most of the time, it does not intrest me what people like or dislike. Nevertheless I started a very long time ago digging into psychology things. When I came to MBTI, I found it intresting to learn about Intuition and Sensing. The "old hat" that there are Feelers and Thinkers on this world was a clear thing to me, but Intuition and Sensing proved to be a completly new concept to me.

    I dont see MBTI or any other system as a set of rules. As it is defined through my very nature, I make my own rules. I try to keep them in reality as much as I can and from time to time I listen to different views on life by other people and try to gather new information.

    For me MBTI is less a set of rules but a source for information. It will probably be never possible for me to come up with an own stringent theory, because my view on the world is embedded into its very own conceptional framework. But I am not looking for that, I am rather more concerned with the outcome.

    Through the information I gathered through MBTI, I was able to name things in my friends that I have seen before. I myself for example had a hard time in my life to solve the important question to me, if I am more of a rational or a people's person. I choosed, when I was very young to see people as "Blue" or "Red", but I never could make up my mind, what color I was. Eventually I came up with "Green", but this didnt fit into my concept .

    MBTI was somewhat of a relief to me, to find an explanation to things, I sense, but have no clue about what they are. I will never judge a person buy any of the MBTI rules and my behaviour towards people did not change in any way.

    But MBTI gave me a clearer view on things in a topic, I am not very good at. To be honest, I hate psychatrists and psychology and I naturally dislike every person dealing with this topics. But I am still here, doing psychology.

    My advice to dealing with MBTI as a source of new views on things and not as a set of rules, probably will not help you. But then again, I do not think that a human being will ever be able to being filtered 100% through a fitting system and that is because I accept the possibility of free will and the responsibility that bears with it.
    [URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tEBvftJUwDw&t=0s[/URL]

  3. #23
    Senior Member Grayscale's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    MBTI
    istp
    Posts
    1,962

    Default

    this goes for most ostensible labels, really

  4. #24
    Occasional Member Evan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    1
    Posts
    4,223

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Flak View Post
    I admit it. But not the actual ability of thinking, the way the F will disregard thinking.
    Not all Fs. See, one of the problems with the system is this. Say you're an Ni dominant. Well, you could either be an INTJ or an INFJ. But say you're an Ni dominant who uses Thinking more than Feeling AND prefers Ti/Fe to Te/Fi. Is that just not possible? Well, it's not possible in MBTI, but it surely is possible in real life. They call us INFJs, but we're really 'T's by dichotomy.

    Another thing. Say you're an INJ racecar driver. You describe the experience of driving as just being in the moment, feeling and noticing all of the sensory data coming through. You're using Se, yeah? It could even be the state in which you're most comfortable. You could be "better" at using Se than an ESP. But MBTI calls it the inferior function, and when you tell someone that you're an INJ, they assume you are out of touch with Se. If you really wanted, you could take the time explaining that you're an INJ with a highly developed Se; you could come up with some explanation for why you seem not to fit the system without contradicting the rules. But it's as if we're scrambling for reasons that the system works before questioning the system itself.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    How interesting. Now how do we distinguish from people who are just using confirmation bias versus people who ARE thinking through it but come to the same conclusions as the confirmation bias people?
    There's no such thing as someone who isn't using confirmation bias. Any coherent viewpoint we pick -- we're gonna flock to reasons that support it and gloss over reasons that don't.

    I'm doing it right now, and so is everyone else.

    What a meta-thread. It practices the same flaw it's bitching about. That's quite an achievement.
    That's kind of a pointless qualm. It's like if I said: "Philosophically, it's impossible to know the Truth as we don't have access to objective information". You'd say I'd be making a claim that I assume is objective about how no claims could be objective. So should I just not open my mouth?

    Quote Originally Posted by Grayscale View Post
    this goes for most ostensible labels, really
    True. So we should all think of this as a potentially erroneous labeling system. We need to question it's validity like we would anything else.

    In case all y'all haven't noticed: I'm trying to convince myself as much as (if not more than) all of you.

  5. #25
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    MBTI
    type
    Posts
    9,100

    Default

    You lost me at INJ race car driver. 100% seriously.

  6. #26
    Occasional Member Evan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    1
    Posts
    4,223

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Flak View Post
    You lost me at INJ race car driver. 100% seriously.
    I don't know whether or not to take that seriously. Seriously.


  7. #27
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    MBTI
    type
    Posts
    9,100

    Default

    When I say seriously: Seriously. When I don't, roll one six-sided die. If the result is "6": Seriously.

  8. #28
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dissonance View Post
    Not all Fs. See, one of the problems with the system is this. Say you're an Ni dominant. Well, you could either be an INTJ or an INFJ. But say you're an Ni dominant who uses Thinking more than Feeling AND prefers Ti/Fe to Te/Fi. Is that just not possible? Well, it's not possible in MBTI, but it surely is possible in real life. They call us INFJs, but we're really 'T's by dichotomy.
    I don't know. Aren't there similar situations where generalizations are still useful? (Such as distinguishing between "white" people and "black" ones or other cultures, in order to determine probabilities of particular genetic differences?)

    For, for example, just because some white people can still get sickle-cell anemia doesn't mean the generalizations (that the disease is more common in black populations) are useless or ill-founded.

    People are complex entities. Usually to deal with the complexities, we can make general categories, then deal with deviations. MBTI does the same thing.

    I guess your argument is, are the categories truly representative, or are the differentiations actually more of the standard and the MBTI theory itself the artifice.


    Another thing. Say you're an INJ racecar driver. You describe the experience of driving as just being in the moment, feeling and noticing all of the sensory data coming through. You're using Se, yeah? It could even be the state in which you're most comfortable. You could be "better" at using Se than an ESP. But MBTI calls it the inferior function, and when you tell someone that you're an INJ, they assume you are out of touch with Se.
    Not if they know you.
    It's merely a baseline.

    It says, if you prefer Se so strongly, chances are you're not INJ. Strong Se usually doesn't show up until later in life if it's your inferior. If it shows up early or preexisting your Ni+Je combo, you're probably not INJ!

    So yes, now, if you look at an ADULT, you can't entirely predict what their functions will be... due to the natural differentiation that occurs in life experience. But I bet if you look at the child, you will see a strong primary and type is more clear.

    If you really wanted, you could take the time explaining that you're an INJ with a highly developed Se; you could come up with some explanation for why you seem not to fit the system without contradicting the rules. But it's as if we're scrambling for reasons that the system works before questioning the system itself.
    Maybe that's because of where you're entering the system. Like I said, if you try to analyze ADULTS directly, you're going to run across those problems.

    It's one reason why I gave up arguing people's types. Like you insinuated, there are too many variables to know for sure if someone is a deviation from the assumed type or actually another type altogether. The only way to figure it out is a holistic approach that takes everything into account and also looks at growth over time. Which is a rather lengthy process.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    How interesting. Now how do we distinguish from people who are just using confirmation bias versus people who ARE thinking through it but come to the same conclusions as the confirmation bias people?
    There's no such thing as someone who isn't using confirmation bias. Any coherent viewpoint we pick -- we're gonna flock to reasons that support it and gloss over reasons that don't.

    I'm doing it right now, and so is everyone else.
    Yes.

    So obviously we're discussing confirmation bias that goes beyond the "reasonable" inherent confirmation bias in any discussion, aren't we?

    Just like we commonly discuss illogical/misperceptions that are unreasonable, even though we all know that no one has true knowledge of anything and so ANY piece of knowledge is perhaps unreasonable at the base level?

    eeep.


    That's kind of a pointless qualm. It's like if I said: "Philosophically, it's impossible to know the Truth as we don't have access to objective information". You'd say I'd be making a claim that I assume is objective about how no claims could be objective. So should I just not open my mouth?
    See above.

    I think it's clear I was distinguishing between the common "inherent" minor bias existing in everything and directly focusing on the extremity of your claim.

    In case all y'all haven't noticed: I'm trying to convince myself as much (if not more) than all of you.
    Oh. that is undoubtedly because you are an INFJ with a Ti obsession. *snort*

    or something.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Flak View Post
    When I say seriously: Seriously. When I don't, roll one six-sided die. If the result is "6": Seriously.
    I like the ten-siders better.
    Seriously.
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  9. #29
    no clinkz 'til brooklyn Nocapszy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    4,516

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dissonance View Post
    It is useful in a macro sense, but applying it to individuals almost guarantees misapplication (unless you are extraordinarily careful, but then you're narrowing your scope so much that you end up not saying much).



    I completely disagree. Staying on the level of dichotomies makes misapplication even more likely. Thinking versus Feeling? What a joke. You end up putting things against each other that aren't actually in opposition.
    See note at rivalry.
    Its not a contrast noobs.

    Listen to dissonance.

  10. #30
    Occasional Member Evan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    1
    Posts
    4,223

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    I don't know. Aren't there similar situations where generalizations are still useful? (Such as distinguishing between "white" people and "black" ones or other cultures, in order to determine probabilities of particular genetic differences?)

    For, for example, just because some white people can still get sickle-cell anemia doesn't mean the generalizations (that the disease is more common in black populations) are useless or ill-founded.

    People are complex entities. Usually to deal with the complexities, we can make general categories, then deal with deviations. MBTI does the same thing.
    I agree with what you're saying. Generalities are useful when you're talking about general people. But when you go to the individual level, you're not talking about averages or norms or whatever. I'm saying, MBTI doesn't really DO anything on the individual level. It takes almost as much work to apply it and account for all inconsistencies as it does to just throw out the framework and build from the ground up.

    I guess your argument is, are the categories truly representative, or are the differentiations actually more of the standard and the MBTI theory itself the artifice.
    Yeah. I'm pretty much arguing the latter.

    Not if they know you.
    It's merely a baseline.
    See above (lol).

    It says, if you prefer Se so strongly, chances are you're not INJ. Strong Se usually doesn't show up until later in life if it's your inferior. If it shows up early or preexisting your Ni+Je combo, you're probably not INJ!

    So yes, now, if you look at an ADULT, you can't entirely predict what their functions will be... due to the natural differentiation that occurs in life experience. But I bet if you look at the child, you will see a strong primary and type is more clear.

    Maybe that's because of where you're entering the system. Like I said, if you try to analyze ADULTS directly, you're going to run across those problems.

    It's one reason why I gave up arguing people's types. Like you insinuated, there are too many variables to know for sure if someone is a deviation from the assumed type or actually another type altogether. The only way to figure it out is a holistic approach that takes everything into account and also looks at growth over time. Which is a rather lengthy process.
    I don't think we disagree at all.

    So obviously we're discussing confirmation bias that goes beyond the "reasonable" inherent confirmation bias in any discussion, aren't we?
    Sure, and I'm saying, on a general level (because applying this to individuals would be losing information, lol, everything fits into this theme), people that use MBTI tend to go beyond "reasonable" inherent confirmation bias.

    Oh. that is undoubtedly because you are an INFJ with a Ti obsession. *snort*
    Undoubtedly

    I like the ten-siders better.
    Seriously.
    What does that mean?

Similar Threads

  1. The Decade is almost over
    By Atomic Fiend in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: 10-12-2017, 10:54 PM
  2. Why MBTI is Death for Society
    By Ginkgo in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 147
    Last Post: 06-05-2014, 06:02 AM
  3. Why MBTI is Anti Australian
    By Mole in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: 07-19-2010, 08:02 PM
  4. Replies: 19
    Last Post: 03-06-2009, 08:42 PM
  5. what MBTI is the desktop
    By entropie in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 10-05-2008, 04:07 AM

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