User Tag List

First 1234 Last

Results 21 to 30 of 33

  1. #21
    soft and silky sarah's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    MBTI
    isfp
    Posts
    548

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Flak View Post
    TypeLogic Home Page

    Yes, it's been one of the simplest and best since '97 when I started reading about the business.

    Typelogic? That site is so full of contextual examples of behavior. If someone who cares about precision and accuracy wants to write descriptions of each type, then they need to fit everyone of that type, not just a few romantic examples that are dreamed up as being "typical." Don't you think so?

    Looking at the ISFP description, very few people who aren't "wandering star" neo-hippies are going to relate to a portrait that paints all ISFPs as being that way. If people dismiss descriptions because the details don't fit (as people who prefer Sensing generally do), then they not only can't really benefit much from type theory, but they end up confusing other people by talking about their mistyped preferences.

    No offense, seeing as how you like that site, but nobody I know who prefers Sensing fits the descriptions on that website. It's Just Not Helpful.

    Sarah
    ISFP

  2. #22
    On a mission Usehername's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    1
    Posts
    3,823

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sarah View Post
    Typelogic? That site is so full of contextual examples of behavior. If someone who cares about precision and accuracy wants to write descriptions of each type, then they need to fit everyone of that type, not just a few romantic examples that are dreamed up as being "typical." Don't you think so?

    Looking at the ISFP description, very few people who aren't "wandering star" neo-hippies are going to relate to a portrait that paints all ISFPs as being that way. If people dismiss descriptions because the details don't fit (as people who prefer Sensing generally do), then they not only can't really benefit much from type theory, but they end up confusing other people by talking about their mistyped preferences.

    No offense, seeing as how you like that site, but nobody I know who prefers Sensing fits the descriptions on that website. It's Just Not Helpful.

    Sarah
    ISFP
    I read the typelogic description when we did a "Knowing Yourself" week in Africa; I immediately identified with it incredibly deeply.

    After I started researching when I got home, I grew to see it as sketchy--I'm always nervous someone will google this when I talk about my type as an INTJ and think things about me that aren't true. And I too am wary to send any xSxx type to read those descriptions--they really suck. Have you read the ISTJ version?! Gah.
    *You don't have a soul. You are a Soul. You have a body.
    *Faith is the art of holding on to things your reason once accepted, despite your changing moods.
    C.S. Lewis

  3. #23
    soft and silky sarah's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    MBTI
    isfp
    Posts
    548

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Usehername View Post
    I read the typelogic description when we did a "Knowing Yourself" week in Africa; I immediately identified with it incredibly deeply.

    After I started researching when I got home, I grew to see it as sketchy--I'm always nervous someone will google this when I talk about my type as an INTJ and think things about me that aren't true. And I too am wary to send any xSxx type to read those descriptions--they really suck. Have you read the ISTJ version?! Gah.

    Yes, I had the same reaction to reading about my type -- on one level, it felt really good to know that my preferences aren't inherently bad. On another level, it's scary to think that some people get their ideas about what it's like to be your type from descriptions that are imprecise and full of extreme generalizations. Thanks for sharing your reaction. That makes me feel a little better about my own reaction.

    I'd like to assume that the reason the _S_ descriptions are really lacking and misleading is because the author has a limited imagination. Reading over the _N_ descriptions, I can well see how they have appeal for people, but even if you LOVED your type description, I think you'd have to be a pretty one-dimensional person to identify with just those behaviors, and not see yourself as being more well-rounded than that.

    Speaking of which, I find it odd that I've run into people who get very defensive about the _S_ descriptions. They'll try to shoot down anybody who questions the accuracy of these descriptions by claiming they "know people like that," and that anyone who doesn't identify with them must then not prefer Sensing. I've never understood why this is. I mean, I know I have a peference for Sensing. It's pretty obvious. And yet I know I don't fit any of those type decriptions that rely on stereotypes or flowery prose to tell me what it hypothetically should be like to be me. I use intuition to support my preference. That's pretty obvious too. Not many descriptions even acknowledge the role that tertiary or inferior iNtuition plays in the psychological makeup of _S_s.
    I try not to think about it, but sometimes when I'm reminded that these stereotypes exist it feels like a slap in the face.

    It seems to me that type descriptions like Typelogic's are "shorthand" -- a way of categorizing extreme examples of contextual behavior and labelling it proof psychological preferences, so that those who enjoy doing so can memorize it and then go on to "instant type" everyone they meet. I hope that's of some use to them, but I'm guessing the people who do that aren't all that interested in putting type theory to practical use. Maybe I'm not very enamored with this because everyone I'm related to, work with and socialize seems to me to be pretty complex, regardless of whether they prefer iNtuition or Sensing.

    Sarah
    ISFP

  4. #24

    Default

    Descriptions wise,
    Excellent
    Best Fit and the other Berens/Nardi sites.
    Good
    Personality Page, I like the personal growth pages.
    Bad
    All the rest are crap. Especially similarminds.

    As far as general MBTI information goes I don't know what is bad. They all seem the same.
    I like the wikipidea MBTI page as an intro.

  5. #25
    Intriguing.... Quinlan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    MBTI
    ISFP
    Enneagram
    9w1
    Socionics
    Booo
    Posts
    3,005

    Default

    I have to agree with everything Sarah has said so far, poor type descriptions made me write off being ISFP almost immediately.

    . I use intuition to support my preference. That's pretty obvious too. Not many descriptions even acknowledge the role that tertiary or inferior iNtuition plays in the psychological makeup of _S_s.
    This is true, we are more comfortable using Ni than a lot of other types, I personally believe that's where a lot of our creativity comes from.

  6. #26

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

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sarah View Post
    Typelogic? ...No offense, seeing as how you like that site, but nobody I know who prefers Sensing fits the descriptions on that website. It's Just Not Helpful.
    A great deal of understanding descriptions, I think, has to do with the author's type. Joe Butt is INTP, so his descriptions make a lot of sense to me. Not to mention I fall on the behavior side of type study.

  8. #28
    meh Salomé's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Posts
    10,540

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sarah View Post
    I nominate the completely idiotic SimilarMinds Personality Type Descriptions .

    Sarah
    ISFP
    hahaha!
    that's so funny:
    INTP:
    "does not think they are weird but others do....does not like happy people, appreciates strangeness....more likely to support marijuana legalization"

    who are these "others" that think I'm weird? I demand to know!
    How does one "appreciate strangeness" exactly? I missed the 101 on that.

    ??? Socionics - The New Psychology ??? is pretty far-fetched too
    Quote Originally Posted by Ivy View Post
    Gosh, the world looks so small from up here on my high horse of menstruation.

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

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Flak View Post
    Umm..."All of 'em, I think." I'm not really kidding around, either. It's all based on what someone perceives as true, and you know how perceptions go.
    Seriously, Userhername, you could just give the URLs to all of Jack Flak's posts and that'd be plenty.
    we fukin won boys

  10. #30
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    MBTI
    type
    Posts
    9,100

    Default

    Would be a "long post."

Similar Threads

  1. [NT] MBTI correlation with LGBTQA+ individuals and coming out
    By Paris34 in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 38
    Last Post: 12-22-2014, 09:13 PM
  2. [E9] Any other Enneagram type Nines out there?
    By Apollanaut in forum Enneatypes
    Replies: 51
    Last Post: 03-11-2009, 09:51 AM
  3. Any more ENFP:s out there?
    By BlownAway in forum Welcomes and Introductions
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 09-26-2008, 01:59 PM
  4. Any humor writers out there?
    By Mr.Miagi in forum Arts & Entertainment
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-08-2008, 09:48 AM
  5. Any MBTI Workshop Leaders Out There?
    By ENFJ in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 06-19-2007, 04:43 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