User Tag List

First 89101112 Last

Results 91 to 100 of 162

  1. #91
    Senior Member tinkerbell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    3,487

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DaPerformer View Post
    As a "noob" I'm interested in this thread, as it is brings to the surface a question I have about MBTI.

    I frequently wonder how granular people think they are going to be able to be when "predicting" how a person thinks/acts based on their type. I see many gross generalizations about specific types in here and that concerns me that some stereotypical behaviors are thought to be present in all people of a certain type, when it is really meant more to indicate a natural tendency.

    Life experience still has to play a huge role in a personality. For example, my father was a job-hopper, and the problem that created in our lives influenced me to be very stationary in my work, even past what might normally be comfortable for me. this might lead a person to think this "stability "trait represents a specific type, when it wasn't the natural tendancy at all, but rather an experience that developed the trait.

    My concern is that some people might think that this typology gives them the ability to judge a book by it's "cover". The science behind what I have read so far seems solid regarding determining a "type". The application of stereotypes seem to detract from BMTI's value, it seems.

    The point is that MBTI is a descriptor, wich has some common behaviours and attitutes overlayed on it. I think the reliablity of prediction is pretty weak in places, but useful in others...

    E types tend to think outloud/get energiesed by conversation.... etc
    When it gets down to specifics and detail I think its pretty poor... and of limited use (but still better than nothing)

    I fully agree with defining a book by its cover etc.. but it can be helpful to have some awareness of likihood, it depnds on how the user uses it

  2. #92
    & Badger, Ratty and Toad Mole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    18,529

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nightning View Post
    MBTI is used in counseling psychology (because people find the concepts useful because people like categorizing things) and not in other psychology (because MBTI is not valid and there already exist a better lexicon-based system, namely FFM).
    We are pattern seeking animals. And we prefer any pattern to no pattern. And for this reason we are subject to self deception and illusion. And this is why we test patterns we perceive against evidence and reason.

    And this is what we learnt in the Enlightenment - to test patterns we perceive against evidence and reason. For instance, this is how we discovered the Earth goes round the Sun, and that our perception that the Sun goes round the Earth is an illusion.

    And when we test MBTI against evidence and reason we find MBTI is based on self deception and illusion.

  3. #93
    Geolectric teslashock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w6
    Posts
    1,690

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by VagrantFarce View Post
    ...yes, this is a Te stance. What exactly are we disagreeing about?
    Oh I guess we aren't disagreeing on anything. I just took your original comment about the limitations of dogmatic Te as a subtle insult to the perspectives that SW and I were arguing (and again, my argument is not that MBTI is useless because it can't be empirically proven; my argument is simply that MBTI cannot be empirically proven).

    Anyway, I think science requires a healthy dose of dogmatic Te. Te is limited but for good reason.

  4. #94
    Senior Member VagrantFarce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    1,557

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by teslashock View Post
    Oh I guess we aren't disagreeing on anything. I just took your original comment about the limitations of dogmatic Te as a subtle insult to the perspectives that SW and I were arguing (and again, my argument is not that MBTI is useless because it can't be empirically proven; my argument is simply that MBTI cannot be empirically proven).
    It was just an impartial observation. I figured the smiley helped to illustrate the non-judgemental stance, but oh wellllllllllllllllllllll

    (note to self - design an improved smiley that helps illustrate a non-judgemental stance)

    Quote Originally Posted by Victor View Post
    We are pattern seeking animals. And we prefer any pattern to no pattern. And for this reason we are subject to self deception and illusion. And this is why we test patterns we perceive against evidence and reason.

    And this is what we learnt in the Enlightenment - to test patterns we perceive against evidence and reason. For instance, this is how we discovered the Earth goes round the Sun, and that our perception that the Sun goes round the Earth is an illusion.

    And when we test MBTI against evidence and reason we find MBTI is based on self deception and illusion.
    Gosh, I just wanna put you in a glass box labelled "INTJ" and keep you forever and ever.
    Hello

  5. #95
    & Badger, Ratty and Toad Mole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    18,529

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by VagrantFarce View Post
    Gosh, I just wanna put you in a glass box labelled "INTJ" and keep you forever and ever.
    I would prefer you related to me as a person than a type.

  6. #96
    Geolectric teslashock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w6
    Posts
    1,690

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by VagrantFarce View Post
    It was just an impartial observation. I figured the smiley helped to illustrate the non-judgemental stance, but oh wellllllllllllllllllllll

    (note to self - design an improved smiley that helps illustrate a non-judgemental stance)
    It's cool; my comments come off the same way some times. Miscommunications over the internet are all too common, so don't mind my slight sensitivity.

  7. #97
    brat Mitzy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    687

    Default

    a scary person
    She talks pretty but says mean things

  8. #98
    Geolectric teslashock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w6
    Posts
    1,690

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Victor View Post
    I would prefer you related to me as a person than a type.
    Yes because didn't you know that MBTI types = robots?

  9. #99
    Senior Member VagrantFarce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    1,557

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Victor View Post
    I would prefer you related to me as a person than a type.
    But you're soooooo INTJ! "At the heart of it people prefer any pattern to no pattern" is totally a Dominant-Ni stance! And "We must test these patterns against evidence and reason" is sooo an Auxillary-Te stance! And then you get all defensive with your Tertiary-Fi! WEEEEEEE

    If it isn't clear, this is sort of a half-troll / half-sincere friendly poke at the ribs
    Hello

  10. #100
    Senior Member sofmarhof's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    327

    Default

    MBTI may not often be used in scientific experiments, but the Big 5 Personality Factors, which are basically the same thing plus another dichotomy, are. There's nothing unscientific about saying someone is a T, because you are essentially saying that a thinker is a thinker. MBTI becomes unscientific where we start saying that an INTP is something more than I+N+T+P.

    We should come up with a list of falsifiable hypotheses about MBTI that could be tested.

    However I regard MBTI more than anything else as a language for describing behavior. So whether it's correct is not the question, but whether it's useful, which I find it is. Nobody would argue that French is true or not true.

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 01-05-2017, 08:06 AM
  2. Where is the communication style test thread about MBTI types?
    By Jayce in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 10-07-2016, 10:15 AM
  3. Which MBTI type is the most confusing one?
    By iHeartCats in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 12-23-2014, 11:53 AM
  4. Where is the burden of proof in a misunderstanding?
    By Anew Leaf in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 35
    Last Post: 07-20-2012, 08:14 PM
  5. Where is the "watcher"?
    By sculpting in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 07-22-2010, 01:31 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