User Tag List

Results 1 to 9 of 9

  1. #1
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/sx
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    11,925

    Default My FFM thought...

    I've been thinking that the Five Factor Model is the root of Intuitive snobbery. If high Openness to Experience is indeed correlated to Intuition, then here is where the bias becomes clear.

    According to original Keirsey statistics 75 percent of the population is E, while 25 percent is I. The same goes for S and N, respectively. There doesn't seem to be a bias toward Introversion because, statistically, it's in the minority, so why wouldn't the same hold true for S and N?

    FFM, on the other hand, seems to glorify Openness as being "cultured," "sophisticated," "intellectual," and "creative." While the MBTI describes S and N as both being healthy lifestyles, the FFM doesn't see it that way. I suppose that when psychoanalysts get their Ph.D's, they automatically assume they are better than everyone, and so they poison MBTI typewatchers with the notion that Intuition is better than Sensation.

    With the way the FFM is designed, the Sensor is equated to being a brute perfectly satisfied living a life of ignorance. Specifically, the FFM seems biased to the ENFJ, since in addition to Openness (N), Extraversion (E), Agreeableness (F), and Conscientiousness (J) are welcomed in open arms, while opposite functions in each dichotomy are seen as under-evolved.

    I feel that the FFM is a product of professional psychiatric practitioners with heads stuck too far up their asses that have decided to create a passive-aggressive method of demonstrating their own superiority. And when it is correlated to the MBTI (which is often overlooked for not having Ph.D credentials, but which was designed with appreciation of all differences in mind), then there does become an ideal type.

    Apparently, these psychoanalysts with their degrees framed on the wall are too brutish and moronic to realize that a truly great mind doesn't need an education to understand the world.

  2. #2
    Senior Member ptgatsby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Posts
    4,474

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Uberfuhrer View Post
    Apparently, these psychoanalysts with their degrees framed on the wall are too brutish and moronic to realize that a truly great mind doesn't need an education to understand the world.
    Do you even know how the FFM was created?

  3. #3
    Protocol Droid Athenian200's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    8,828

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Uberfuhrer View Post
    I've been thinking that the Five Factor Model is the root of Intuitive snobbery. If high Openness to Experience is indeed correlated to Intuition, then here is where the bias becomes clear.
    I don't think that it can be. I have very low Openness, but very high Neuroticism. Also, while there seems to be a general trend towards such a bias, few members have openly stated that they believe themselves superior to Sensors. Why do you believe there is such a bias?

    According to original Keirsey statistics 75 percent of the population is E, while 25 percent is I. The same goes for S and N, respectively. There doesn't seem to be a bias toward Introversion because, statistically, it's in the minority, so why wouldn't the same hold true for S and N?
    There is no reason to believe that the Keirsey statistics were accurate, because I've seen conflicting statistics.

    FFM, on the other hand, seems to glorify Openness as being "cultured," "sophisticated," "intellectual," and "creative." While the MBTI describes S and N as both being healthy lifestyles, the FFM doesn't see it that way. I suppose that when psychoanalysts get their Ph.D's, they automatically assume they are better than everyone, and so they poison MBTI typewatchers with the notion that Intuition is better than Sensation.
    Actually, it defines Openness and noncomformity as one side, and conventionality and down-to-earth as the other. It is only your perspective that makes openness seem the superior philosophy, not the test itself.

    With the way the FFM is designed, the Sensor is equated to being a brute perfectly satisfied living a life of ignorance. Specifically, the FFM seems biased to the ENFJ, since in addition to Openness (N), Extraversion (E), Agreeableness (F), and Conscientiousness (J) are welcomed in open arms, while opposite functions in each dichotomy are seen as under-evolved.
    That is only your interpretation. You are just assuming that higher numbers are assumed better, when in fact a balance is considered better. Where are you getting this information?

    I feel that the FFM is a product of professional psychiatric practitioners with heads stuck too far up their asses that have decided to create a passive-aggressive method of demonstrating their own superiority. And when it is correlated to the MBTI (which is often overlooked for not having Ph.D credentials, but which was designed with appreciation of all differences in mind), then there does become an ideal type.
    It sounds as if you have a personal bias against this particular system, for one thing. Secondly, what is it about the system that makes you feel that there is an ideal type within it? You haven't explained your reasoning at all, you're just offering conjecture. You might have a point, but you haven't given us anything to make your argument believable.
    Apparently, these psychoanalysts with their degrees framed on the wall are too brutish and moronic to realize that a truly great mind doesn't need an education to understand the world.
    I would say that this bias has actually been well-proven to exist, and I agree with you that it exists. I also agree that many people with college educations are quite unintelligent, and vice-versa. It's just a social stigma that gets attached to a title presumed to represent intelligence.

    However, the idea that they are brutish and moronic is an opinion and a perspective, and cannot be validated by any rational means.

    (Sorry, I was in a really critical mood today.)

  4. #4
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/sx
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    11,925

    Default

    Let me first state that I never said that I was superior to Sensors.

    As I surf descriptions of the FFM dichotomies, I see that it refers to Low Openness as being "common" and "ordinary" or at least creates that vibe, where High Openness is viewed as "sophisticated." Now I highly doubt that anyone would want to be considered "ordinary."

    Also, the FFM is structured in terms of high and low. In the Openness dichotomy, Sensing is Low, Intuitive is High. Now I don't know about you, but this really is painting a picture in my mind.

    The MBTI structures the dichotomies so that both ends are viewed in good light, more in terms of left and right, and so neither sides seem like a bad thing (unless you consider people on the left to be children of the Devil, as they probably would've thought during Medieval times).

    But when the FFM is mapped into our heads, and then we see that it is said to be correlated to the MBTI, which then provides the superiority streak.

    Interestingly, though, Neuroticism is the FFM trait that isn't viewed in good light if it's High.

    Anyway, where I was getting at, in order to be Intuitive, do you have to be "cultured" and "sophisticated" and have a broad range of interests? Because I don't know about you, but I tend to put the "cult" back in "culture."

    EDIT: I like the MBTI's way of measuring because its bias in each dichotomy is ultimately in the middle. The bar starts in the middle and works its way out to either left or right, and only looks at the negative of both sides as merely a possibility. The FFM will say a few redeeming things about the Low sides, but since they're viewed as Low, it seems to think they are the more flawed.

    EDIT 2: I'm also wondering if High Neuroticism can alter your S/N preference on the MBTI. Just a notion I had. I'll work on it later...
    Last edited by The Ü™; 08-12-2007 at 10:14 AM.

  5. #5
    Senior Member ptgatsby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Posts
    4,474

    Default

    Aie. I'll have to ask again - do you know how the FFM was created? Have you looked into why these factors were created? Have you looked into how the correlate to MBTI... have you worked out why they have varying degrees of correlation?

    I'll leave it with this. FFM is, compared to MBTI, a highly objective model that has no descriptors beyond the original creation of the model, something that was done empirically, unlike MBTI. So are the correlations. No fancy doctor type dreamed up these descriptions. No one like Jung decided to create the descriptors.

    I have no problem with the claims that FFM isn't helpful towards understanding oneself, no problem with the argument over cognitive and behaviour, no problem with any of the other things FFM doesn't do well. But this is something that should be levelled at MBTI over FFM - although I think neither is really justified.

    (edit: And as for your complaints on all that stuff on N/Openness. Just remember how much stronger MBTI correlates N to being intelligent, creative and having a vivid imagination. FFM is normally distributed and it's correlations aren't even remotely as "biased" from that distribution as MBTI is.)

  6. #6
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/sx
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    11,925

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ptgatsby View Post
    Aie. I'll have to ask again - do you know how the FFM was created? Have you looked into why these factors were created? Have you looked into how the correlate to MBTI... have you worked out why they have varying degrees of correlation?

    I'll leave it with this. FFM is, compared to MBTI, a highly objective model that has no descriptors beyond the original creation of the model, something that was done empirically, unlike MBTI. So are the correlations. No fancy doctor type dreamed up these descriptions. No one like Jung decided to create the descriptors.

    I have no problem with the claims that FFM isn't helpful towards understanding oneself, no problem with the argument over cognitive and behaviour, no problem with any of the other things FFM doesn't do well. But this is something that should be levelled at MBTI over FFM - although I think neither is really justified.
    I'll let you on in a little secret. I don't know how it was created, but even if I did, my skeptical nature leads me to doubt everything, so don't call me an ignoramus. I guess my High Neuroticism leads me to have issues, and I will admit that.

    I do see correlation between Openness and N. I realize that Openness measures things like interest in abstract ideas and indulgence in fancy, both of which are N traits. I can even see how being in touch with emotions is an N trait, because it's a reflection on something abstract.

    It also measures Adventurousness and willingness to try new foods and things like that, which is more of a P trait, I think. And Openness sort of measures compassion, which is more F. So I guess what you're saying is that the correlation with FFM is not directly toward N, but just mostly? I guess I can live with that.

    Because Conscientiousness (mainly P and J) does seem to have a minor correlation to S, too, because it measures attention to detail.

    I've thought about it a little more. The way I'm seeing it now is that the whole FFM measures positive traits of all the types and that Openness just is more geared to S versus N more than anything else?

    And what I'm also seeing is that High Neuroticism seems to indirectly connect to the more negative aspects of N and F. Because creative people, in general, seem to be bipolar and moody -- sometimes I think think inner anger is what gives birth to creativity and invention, because as they say, invention springs from stress.

    EDIT: And I also think people less intellectually gifted can also have a vivid imagination. Or maybe it's because of less intellectual giftedness one can have a vivid imagination.

  7. #7
    Senior Member ptgatsby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Posts
    4,474

    Default

    I'll let you on in a little secret. I don't know how it was created, but even if I did, my skeptical nature leads me to doubt everything, so don't call me an ignoramus. I guess my High Neuroticism leads me to have issues, and I will admit that.
    That's something I did not say. And I have no problem with the correlations you describe - the difference is that FFM, by design, can tell you exactly how correlated it is. You don't need to guess. Likewise, if you want to support the concept that it causes a form of snobish behaviour, you will have to understand how it was created, since to me, it is exactly the opposite;

    FFM was created by handing a large group of people over 2000 descriptive words/phrases. After this, they did factor analysis to determine the main bunching of traits (which traits bunch together). There were more than 5 main bunches, yes, but there were also 5 clear bunchings that could be determined. In each of these 5 bunching, there were 3-8 traits that formed the bunches and therefore were considered associated through correlation, although only 3-6 are generally used at this point. Regardless, those traits were identified and the NEO (and others) were created to test these five traits and their sub-traits.

    The test itself is used by having someone describe themselves according to these sub-traits, which are bunched together into the main categories for research ease, along with having the same person take another test - like an IQ test, job performance surveys, relationship satisfaction, etc. It is also measured against demographics, like age, sex and so forth.

    The test does not place you in a pool, like O+, what it does is compare you to the rest of the respondents. For example, if you say that one is 4% E, it means that 96% of the population would answer higher than you on that measurement. Also, unlike the MBTI, there is no attempt to categorize people, hence the only thing that is being measured is the actual results, grouped together in a numerical format in order to find a way to associate traits with other testable results.

    Feel free to contrast this with Jung, the foundation of MBTI, who eyeballed people and decided that there were 3 main traits, or how Myers and co created the J/P divide to come up with four. Also contrast that with how MBTI has guides on how to understand oneself and so forth, something the FFM does not do - it is not a descriptive or holistic theory.

    To say that FFM is a creation of intellectuals to judge people, or somehow imposed itself on MBTI, does not follow the methodology used. If anything, it is the opposite.

    I do see correlation between Openness and N. I realize that Openness measures things like interest in abstract ideas and indulgence in fancy, both of which are N traits. I can even see how being in touch with emotions is an N trait, because it's a reflection on something abstract.
    It is highly correlated. (0.5 to 0.75) (25% to 55% predictive)

    It also measures Adventurousness and willingness to try new foods and things like that, which is more of a P trait, I think. And Openness sort of measures compassion, which is more F. So I guess what you're saying is that the correlation with FFM is not directly toward N, but just mostly? I guess I can live with that.
    It is lightly correlated with P. (0.2 to 0.4) (4% to 16% predictive)

    Because Conscientiousness (mainly P and J) does seem to have a minor correlation to S, too, because it measures attention to detail.
    It is very weakly correlated (<0.1 to 0.2) (up to 4% predictive)

    I've thought about it a little more. The way I'm seeing it now is that the whole FFM measures positive traits of all the types and that Openness just is more geared to S versus N more than anything else?
    It measures the traits it determined through factor analysis to be correlated and dominant .

    And what I'm also seeing is that High Neuroticism seems to indirectly connect to the more negative aspects of N and F. Because creative people, in general, seem to be bipolar and moody -- sometimes I think think inner anger is what gives birth to creativity and invention, because as they say, invention springs from stress.
    Neuroticism is not significantly correlated to anything within MBTI (<0.1 to <0.2) (less than 4% predictive across the board). Neuroticism is not known to be correlated to creativity, although creativity has not be defined in an empirical manner as far as I know.

    EDIT: And I also think people less intellectually gifted can also have a vivid imagination. Or maybe it's because of less intellectual giftedness one can have a vivid imagination.
    IQ (gF) tests abstract thinking, N asks about abstract thinking, Openness indirectly asks about abstract thinking. N/O+ are correlated to higher IQ, with N being extremely more dominant in high-IQ due to the particular questions being asked in regards to abstract thinking.

    To put this in perspective, being O+ is less than 10% predictive for IQ. N, however, is vastly more predictive, although it does vary, but has been measured as high as 50% predictive. The reason isn't that complicated - to be N, you would have to be O-75% and above (distribution only), of which you need to score high on the abstract component, which MBTI tests more directly.

    So unlike MBTI, it is difficult to claim that being O+ will be significantly predictive of higher IQ, while claiming to be an N would be statistically likely that you would be more intelligent. The gap in O+ is also less significant, while Ns are likely to be in excess of 10 IQ points higher (ranging from 91-109 compared to 120, on average). Statistically higher by a large amount, it is difficult for MBTI to hide this, which is where the snob factor comes in. I don't see how it could be associated to FFM.

  8. #8
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/sx
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    11,925

    Default

    I would've assumed that high IQ correlated more to Introverted Thinking (IxTP), since Thinking is about logical analysis and figuring out what comes next in the pattern -- something that the ISTP is good at, as well. Introverted Thinking seems to be the function of mathematical abilities, regardless of S or N. (I personally suck at math.)

    I made mention here by giving an example of how a Sensor may have the edge on the IQ question. And it's been proven that an IQ test doesn't measure creativity, also in the N realm.

    Certain IQ tests test common knowledge, as well, which is more an S thing (and the source of cultural bias).

  9. #9
    Senior Member ptgatsby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Posts
    4,474

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Uberfuhrer View Post
    Certain IQ tests test common knowledge, as well, which is more an S thing (and the source of cultural bias).
    There is no significant gap between gF and gC (gF being fluid and is the reasoning part of the test, gC being the crystalized part and is the "common knowledge" part), in terms of being related to N. I can't remember if there is a difference between openness in terms of g weighting.

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 8
    Last Post: 06-03-2009, 06:11 AM
  2. Thoughts after my first year of college
    By sofmarhof in forum Academics and Careers
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 05-14-2009, 09:55 AM
  3. My thoughts on the I phone
    By Opivy1980 in forum Science, Technology, and Future Tech
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: 07-09-2007, 06:38 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