User Tag List

First 45678 Last

Results 51 to 60 of 72

  1. #51
    Senior Member KDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    8,263

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Victor View Post
    And so when we create types, types create us.
    Thing is though, Myers created a personality system based on the idea of preferences. She wasn't trying to label people too strongly (nor was Jung). She spoke about the same abuses of it as you did.. that her own system could be taken too far.

    I think if one uses it as intended, it's more of a springboard for someone to talk about their specific personality traits, and how "Type" might play out in their own way. Not something that negates their individuality. When it's abused, we discard the specific, and rely on stereotypes and generalizations, and assume what someone is by paragraph-long descriptions you can find on Google. That's not necessarily MBTI's fault. That's just being retarded. If someone inclined to this took a step back for a second, they'd realize just how retarded.

  2. #52
    & Badger, Ratty and Toad Mole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    18,524
    Quote Originally Posted by KDude View Post
    Thing is though, Myers created a personality system based on the idea of preferences. She wasn't trying to label people too strongly (nor was Jung). She spoke about the same abuses of it as you did.. that her own system could be taken too far.

    I think if one uses it as intended, it's more of a springboard for someone to talk about their specific personality traits, and how "Type" might play out in their own way. Not something that negates their individuality. When it's abused, we discard the specific, and rely on stereotypes and generalizations, and assume what someone is by paragraph-long descriptions you can find on Google. That's not necessarily MBTI's fault. That's just being retarded. If someone inclined to this took a step back for a second, they'd realize just how retarded.
    The difference between MBTI and psychometrics is the same as the difference between astrology and astronomy.

  3. #53
    Senior Member KDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    8,263

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Victor View Post
    The difference between MBTI and psychometrics is the same as the difference between astrology and astronomy.
    I'm not sure about that. Astrology is founded on an ancient phenomological perspective of the stars (i.e. earth centered), which renders it questionable compared to what we've learned from astronomy. There's a lot of burden on astrology to prove it's worth. It's become strictly a matter of faith for it's believers these days.

    While MBTI is touching on a relative unknown. It doesn't have to prove anything more than some other point of view. The Jury is out if there is or isn't any basis to Jungian functions. There might come a day when Neurology supercedes it, but I'm not sure we're there yet.

  4. #54
    & Badger, Ratty and Toad Mole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    18,524
    Quote Originally Posted by KDude View Post
    I'm not sure about that. Astrology is founded on an ancient phenomological perspective of the stars (i.e. earth centered), which renders it questionable compared to what we've learned from astronomy. There's a lot of burden on astrology to prove it's worth. It's become strictly a matter of faith for it's believers these days.

    While MBTI is touching on a relative unknown. It doesn't have to prove anything more than some other point of view. The Jury is out if there is or isn't any basis to Jungian functions. There might come a day when Neurology supercedes it, but I'm not sure we're there yet.
    Jungian functions are, in Jung's own words, not based on any empirical evidence.

    And in seventy years not one random double blind experiment has been done with MBTI.

  5. #55
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    4,226

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ygolo View Post
    So I am wondering. How quick are you to dehumanize people who:

    1) disagree with you?
    2) rub you the wrong way?
    3) inconvenience you?
    4) make it hard for you to get your job done?

    By dehumanize, I mean, to, in your own mind, strip them of their human status. Thinking of them as "animals", "monsters", "menace", or really any label that would justify, in your mind, violating one of their human rights.
    Never, because only humans do these things. Disagreeing, rubbing people the wrong way, inconveniencing others and making life hard for other people are things that humans do best.

  6. #56
    & Badger, Ratty and Toad Mole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    18,524

    The Mirror and the Other

    The real problem is dehumanising ourselves.

    We are prepared to dehumanise ourselves to belong. We are prepared to dehumanise ourselves for love. And we are prepared to dehumanise ourselves to survive.

    And before long being dehumanised becomes normal, it becomes accepted and it becomes taken for granted.

    And when we take ourselves for granted, we become invisible to ourselves. So in order to see ourselves, we turn the other into a mirror. And what do we see? We see someone who is dehumanised, and don't recognise that it is ourselves.

    And so we become like Narcissus who fell in love with a beatiful youth in a pond, not realising he had fallen in love with his own reflection.

    And ecstasy is the only way out from our narcissistic trance. For ecstasy is stepping outside the taken for granted.

  7. #57
    Senior Member ICUP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/sp
    Posts
    1,793

    Default

    I don't understand how using tools in order to become more aware of myself could be dehumanizing. mbti increases awareness of the self. If I read it, and it seems true to me upon testing, why shouldn't I use it in order to improve my life? It doesn't have to be a science to be a useful description. It's to me, a manual describing personalities, and the descriptions seem to many times, be useful to me and fit the bill. They are practical, realistic, and helpful to me. In fact, without mbti and enneagrams, my relationship may've been over a long time ago, to tell the truth.
    ISTP 6w5 sx/sp
    6-8-4/6-9-4 Tritype

  8. #58
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    MBTI
    heha
    Enneagram
    9w8 sp
    Posts
    15

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ICUP View Post
    I don't understand how using tools in order to become more aware of myself could be dehumanizing. mbti increases awareness of the self. If I read it, and it seems true to me upon testing, why shouldn't I use it? It doesn't have to be a science to be a useful description.
    Well, what if the mbti isn't the truest way to really look at ourselves? i mean its applying a functional nature to our personalities.. turning humans into little function machines could be seen as dehumanizing...

  9. #59
    Senior Member ICUP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/sp
    Posts
    1,793

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by oneirocriticism View Post
    Well, what if the mbti isn't the truest way to really look at ourselves? i mean its applying a functional nature to our personalities.. turning humans into little function machines could be seen as dehumanizing...
    I don't think any description has the power to dehumanize anyone. A person only has the power to dehumanize themselves, in this situation.

    "Dehumanization is to make somebody less human by taking away his or her individuality, the creative and interesting aspects of his or her personality, or his or her compassion and sensitivity towards others."
    de·hu·man·ize
    verb (used with object), -ized, -iz·ing.
    to deprive of human qualities or attributes; divest of individuality: Conformity dehumanized him.


    No matter how many descriptions I read and how much mbti I learn, I don't see how the descriptions themselves have the power to take away my individuality, or the creative or interesting aspects of my personality, or my compassion and sensitivity towards others. I'm not following the descriptions as if they are gods who are leading me to transform my life into what the description is telling me I am. This would be like saying I am going to go out and buy an auto repair manual because mbti says I am a mechanic. Not gonna happen. I think in some cases mbti can help you find yourself, but it can only define what you want it to define. You are in charge of mbti; it is not in charge of you. I don't think mbti applies any nature to our personalities. Our personalities are what they are. A description is not an application.

    That said, I do use the descriptions in order to create understanding of myself and others, and to improve my life. Regardless of how much I choose to apply the ideas in order to understand another, it doesn't change the person. If I read a description and someone takes from it, and somehow improves their life with the information offered, good on them. But either way, it's up to them to decide, and I don't find it dehumanizing to use the information to create positive change and growth in one's life and relationships. I also don't think mbti is or should be seen as the end-all be-all description of a human being. It only describes one's personality, it's limited, and obviously an individual cannot be captured by a description. Human beings are not little function machines. There is only so far mbti can go to describe a personality and an individual, and no description or application thereof can turn anyone into a function machine or a robot, or render them mechanical or routine, unless they are under the control and power of another or they decide to. As far as those who choose to use the information to view others as function machines, I suppose they could be guilty as charged of viewing others only from that perspective, but it fails to change the other into a robot or to make them less human. I suppose one would have to ask them personally if that's the way they see human beings, from only that perspective, in order to clarify. People will manifest themselves in the ways they see fit regardless of how I view them, and I have not the power to dehumanize another, truly, from a physical standpoint, as in, physically and psychologically carrying out the deed. I think some people can use the information in order to stereotype, especially when beginning the study of mbti. As time goes on, it seems that all of the stereotypes one by one are thrown to pasture. Stereotypes seem to be used at first in order to learn and observe and understand, but as one sees more examples of people who don't fit the descriptions in some way, and sees how the instinctual variants, tritypes, and enneagrams blend together with mbti, the stereotypes crumble and the individual takes shape, but with a greater awareness. Of course, as I said, no description can ever truly capture a human being. In other words, no matter how I describe a person by function and type, they still possess their own personal blend of individuality, creativity, compassion, and sensitivity and I ackowledge the fact. No matter how I describe a person by function and type, people are chaotic, random, and individual, and these things cannot be measured.

    I think there are obviously many ways to look at ourselves. If one finds mbti helpful, more power to them. If one wants to see themselves from a different viewpoint other than the practical, realistic ones offered by mbti, good for them as well.
    Last edited by ICUP; 12-04-2011 at 11:04 AM.
    ISTP 6w5 sx/sp
    6-8-4/6-9-4 Tritype

  10. #60
    & Badger, Ratty and Toad Mole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    18,524
    Quote Originally Posted by ICUP View Post
    I don't understand how using tools in order to become more aware of myself could be dehumanizing. mbti increases awareness of the self. If I read it, and it seems true to me upon testing, why shouldn't I use it in order to improve my life? It doesn't have to be a science to be a useful description. It's to me, a manual describing personalities, and the descriptions seem to many times, be useful to me and fit the bill. They are practical, realistic, and helpful to me. In fact, without mbti and enneagrams, my relationship may've been over a long time ago, to tell the truth.
    Some claim their relationship was saved by homeopathy; and some say their relationship was saved by astrology; and some even claim their relationship was saved by phrenology; and some claim their relationship was saved by MBTI.

    Success has many fathers and failure is an orphan.

Similar Threads

  1. Is it creepy to like the way other people smell?
    By kyuuei in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 62
    Last Post: 10-07-2017, 08:10 PM
  2. How do you process the advice others give you?
    By TenebrousReflection in forum General Psychology
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 11-02-2011, 03:27 PM
  3. Long - the quotes of lovable larrikin, Nobel physicist Richard Feynman
    By InsatiableCuriosity in forum Science, Technology, and Future Tech
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 08-02-2010, 11:18 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