[INTJ] Man explaining 'The Mastermind' profile.

[Jeffster]

This type of blogs merely reinforce the dangers of folk typology by convincing people that they have a wide range of outstanding qualities without questioning whether they truly do. Such an outcome is particularly harmful to young people who'll be placed in danger of developing presumptuous and absurd views of themselves and other people.

OH NOOOOES TEH FOLKS TIPEOLOGIEEES IZ GONNA KILL US ALLLLLLLLLL!!

 

[Jaguar]

This type of blogs merely reinforce the dangers of folk typology by convincing people that they have a wide range of outstanding qualities without questioning whether they truly do.

You're one of the worst offenders, buddy boy.
Go read your posts in the graveyard. They're an outrage.
It's like reading a KKK member rant about white supremacy only you rant against everything from SJs to Fe, to INFPs.
Your posts are a bunch of biased bullshit.

Such an outcome is particularly harmful to young people who'll be placed in danger of developing presumptuous and absurd views of themselves and other people.

And you contributed to harming young people with your hateful posts.
Go read your own diatribes.

You have no business telling anyone what to do.
The hypocrisy in your posts is simply vomitus.

 

[SolitaryWalker]

You're one of the worst offenders, buddy boy.
Go read your posts in the graveyard. They're an outrage.
It's like reading a KKK member rant about white supremacy only you rant against everything from SJs to Fe, to INFPs.
Your posts are a bunch of biased bullshit.



And you contributed to harming young people with your hateful posts.
Go read your own diatribes.

You have no business telling anyone what to do.
The hypocrisy in your posts is simply vomitus.

All of those posts were very old and not representative of my current views, furthermore, they support my point rather than undermine it. Such literature illustrates the disastrous consequences of folk typological influences in a distinct and a concrete manner. I think that is a compelling reason to shun video blogs similar to the one posted in the OP. Furthermore, even if I am guilty of hypocrisy, my point remains is as plausible as it would have been had I not been a hypocrite: folk typology is a menace that should be decried rather than embraced as a congenial community acivity.

On a more theoretical note, my diatribes are only as plausible as Keirsey's panegyric type profiles, one of which was read by the blogger in the video of the OP. Both describe vague personality qualities and arbitrarily attribute them to large groups of people. The fact that the exact same point can be accounted for in a benign and a derisive fashion attests to the conceptual vacuity of folk typology.

 

[Jaguar]

All of those posts were very old and not representative of my current views,

Then have Ivy remove every single one of them, if that's true.
If you don't want the minds of young people screwed with, then man up and take responsibility for the role you played in making it happen.
Otherwise, everything you say is just trumped up bullshit.

Claiming you don't think like that anymore, because the view is old, is as amusing as a pedophile claiming he doesn't think about little kids anymore because the view is "old."

furthermore, they support my point rather than undermine it. Such literature illustrates the disastrous consequences of folk typological influences in a distinct and a concrete manner.

There are young kids in this forum who have access to all of your old posts on a daily basis.
You know they're nothing but immature, off-the-wall, rants.
They serve no purpose other than throwing gasoline on the fire of ignorance.

I think that is a compelling reason to shun video blogs similar to the one posted in the OP.

Typing people with videos is preposterous and demonstrates ignorance of Jungian psychology.
Jung said it could take him years to type a person, using analysis, and here we are with jokers thinking they know people in minutes, by watching a mere video.

That's why I was amused when an alleged INFJ in this forum considered themselves to be a "critical thinker."
Critical thinkers don't post videos of people and then make a litany of claims with no evidence that what they are claiming is even true.
In the business world, idiots like that will end up in court being sued for defamation of character.
But then they're too stupid to realize it.

Furthermore, even if I am guilty of hypocrisy, my point remains is as plausible as it would have been had I not been a hypocrite: folk typology is a menace that should be decried rather than embraced as a congenial community acivity.

You are undermining your message by calling it "folk typology."
That doesn't mean I won't agree with you.
Having said that, change your choice of words in order to reach the largest number of people.
"Folk typology," won't cut it.

On a more theoretical note, my diatribes are only as plausible as Keirsey's panegyric type profiles, one of which was read by the blogger in the video of the OP. Both describe vague personality qualities and arbitrarily attribute them to large groups of people. The fact that the exact same point can be accounted for in a benign and a derisive fashion attests to the conceptual vacuity of folk typology.

Two wrongs don't make a right.
You can either be part of the problem or part of the solution.

Attributing vague personality qualities to large groups of people is what transpires in this forum, every single day.
It's not going to change.

Once a train of collective thought is moving at full speed it doesn't just slam on the brakes for truth, even if it's standing on the tracks - shouting.

 

[SolitaryWalker]

Then have Ivy remove every single one of them, if that's true. .

I have just sent a formal request for removal of my old posts.

If you don't want the minds of young people screwed with, then man up and take responsibility for the role you played in making it happen. .

I am doing the best I can right now.

Claiming you don't think like that anymore, because the view is old, is as amusing as a pedophile claiming he doesn't think about little kids anymore because the view is "old.".

You're making an error in reasoning. Its much easier for a person to change his views on an academic topic than to change his attitudes of grave sexual perversion. Many change their political, religious and academic attitudes multiple times throughout their lives, yet significantly fewer criminals become reformed. In other words, I'd be skeptical if somebody told me they are no longer a pedophile, but much less so if somebody told me they're no longer a Christian, Marxist, Bushist, Keirseyan and so on. These examples include ideolgoies that their adherents had deep emotional investments in and at times were willing to die for their beliefs. Most MBTI aficionados are typically much less committed to the system than Marxist or Christians are to theirs. MBTI is more reminiscent of an academic notion rather than a full-fledged ideology that fully guides the lives of people. If many commonly abandon full-fledged ideologies, we shouldn't be surprised to see people renounce their beliefs in MBTI.

There are young kids in this forum who have access to all of your old posts on a daily basis.
You know they're nothing but immature, off-the-wall, rants.
They serve no purpose other than throwing gasoline on the fire of ignorance..".

I can't disagree with you on that and that's why I discouraged you from citing links to my old posts.

Typing people with videos is preposterous and demonstrates ignorance of Jungian psychology.
Jung said it could take him years to type a person, using analysis, and here we are with jokers thinking they know people in minutes, by watching a mere video. ..".

Yes, type is a solidified unconscious cognitive tendency. It is a very elusive and an abstract concept. The scarcity of empirical evidence for this phenomenon and the fact that its masked by non-typological personality qualities makes properly typing people very difficult. The least one can do is ensure that the behaviors a person expresses are a result of his natural habits of thought rather than circumstancially inspired behaviors. Accomplishing this feat requires a much more careful evaluation of a person's reasoning proclivities than any five minute video can allow one to conduct.

That's why I was amused when an alleged INFJ in this forum considered themselves to be a "critical thinker."
Critical thinkers don't post videos of people and then make a litany of claims with no evidence that what they are claiming is even true...".

The charm of 'folk typology' is in its ability to give people an opportunity to feel good about themselves without accomplishing anything.

In the business world, idiots like that will end up in court being sued for defamation of character.
But then they're too stupid to realize it. ...".

Would you explain that a bit more? I imagine somebody could get sued for using typology to slander people, yet I can't imagine getting anybody getting sued for believing that they are a 'rational mastermind' because they scored 'INTJ' on their MBTI test.

You are undermining your message by calling it "folk typology."
That doesn't mean I won't agree with you.
Having said that, change your choice of words in order to reach the largest number of people.
"Folk typology," won't cut it....".

I agree, folk typology is a demeaning term and people will have a knee-jerk reaction to dismiss my message before even think about whether it has merit or not. The good thing about the term however, is that it grasps the concept succinctly and at the same time ridicules the disreputable practices denoted by the term. Can you suggest a replacement term that serves the same purpose but is less demeaning to others? Keirseyan fallacy is the closest match I could think of, but the trouble is, most 'MBTI folks' don't think Keirsey's work is founded on a fallacy, they regard him as a noble author just like the many other spiritual teachers who passed off hocus-pocus as immortal wisdom.

Two wrongs don't make a right.
You can either be part of the problem or part of the solution.....".

You're right.

Two Attributing vague personality qualities to large groups of people is what transpires in this forum, every single day.
It's not going to change.

The dilemma is in the same social category as racism or sexism. Its an instance of people attempting to pride themselves on virtues that they don't have and as means to the end of cementing their prejudices, they falsely ascribe derisive personality qualities to other people. We may not be able to eradicate the problem completely, however, we could take measures to diminish its negative consequences. The fact that most of our members are young means that we'd have an easier time accomplishing this feat than we would had they been older and more rigid in their views.

Once a train of collective thought is moving at full speed it doesn't just slam on the brakes for truth, even if it's standing on the tracks - shouting.

I agree that the change must be slow and gradual.

 

[Timeless]

Both of you jokers look like you're at a meeting with the mob, planning a hit.
Hey, where the hell is Jimmy Hoffa buried?

Probably under an ISTP house!

 

[Jeffster]

The charm of 'folk typology' is in its ability to give people an opportunity to feel good about themselves without accomplishing anything.

Seems like feeling good about yourself is a pretty good accomplishment.

What does the superior NON-folk typology accomplish?

 

[Jaguar]

I have just sent a formal request for removal of my old posts.
I am doing the best I can right now.

Fair enough, and I thank you.

You're making an error in reasoning. Its much easier for a person to change his views on an academic topic than to change his attitudes of grave sexual perversion.

You swim along on the surface, and I scuba dive.
That means you took my pedophile example too much at face value.
You also saw your diatribes as "academic views" that can be changed, where I saw a clear undertone of unconscious hatred.
There's nothing "academic" about unconscious hatred. Nor is it something that is easily changed.
Do I expect you to admit it? Not really.

I'm not the only person in this forum to get that same vibe off your old posts.
However, since you have requested the posts be removed then I see no point in beating this to death.
Something worthwhile will have been accomplished when the posts are put to sleep.

The scarcity of empirical evidence for this phenomenon and the fact that its masked by non-typological personality qualities makes properly typing people very difficult.

Agreed.

The least one can do is ensure that the behaviors a person expresses are a result of his natural habits of thought rather than circumstancially inspired behaviors.

That's food for an entire thread.

Accomplishing this feat requires a much more careful evaluation of a person's reasoning proclivities than any five minute video can allow one to conduct.

We both know that, but it won't stop. I also happen to think it's a result of age.
One would certainly hope a mature, educated, adult would refrain from such nonsense.

The charm of 'folk typology' is in its ability to give people an opportunity to feel good about themselves without accomplishing anything.

Yes, kind of like being called INTP.

Would you explain that a bit more? I imagine somebody could get sued for using typology to slander people, yet I can't imagine getting anybody getting sued for believing that they are a 'rational mastermind' because they scored 'INTJ' on their MBTI test.

I was making a connection between how people use type to defame others, and defaming others-in general-in the real world.
If a person would defame others on the basis of 4 letters, I can only imagine what they say about people in general.
If those same people behaved like that in the business world, they would end up in court. (Typology or no typology.)

Can you suggest a replacement term that serves the same purpose but is less demeaning to others?

Use the words: MBTI BULLSHIT. Walk on the "wild" side once in awhile. You might like it.

We may not be able to eradicate the problem completely, however, we could take measures to diminish its negative consequences. The fact that most of our members are young means that we'd have an easier time accomplishing this feat than we would had they been older and more rigid in their views.

Of course we can attempt to diminish the negative consequences, but I will defer to the speeding train metaphor once more.
Also, I think you have failed to take into consideration the power of 20-something egos.
Or haven't you noticed that to many in this forum all that matters is "winning," rather than gaining knowledge and wisdom?
When it becomes more important to someone that an "argument" be framed a certain way,
rather than gaining substantive knowledge, it becomes obvious what someone's true intent is for being here.

It sure as hell isn't to learn.