Ths is very nice. But since the Enlightenment we have known that we are all subject to self deception and illusion. That is why we do double blind experiments - so that we will avoid self deception and illusion.
And the problem is that MBTI plays on our self deception and illusion.
So MBTI is a popular confidence trick like astrology.
The very point of the test and the conceptual framework around it is to help show us and advertise our biases. When I say "I am ISFP" I'm really saying "I have a conscious bias towards ISFP".
I may have consciously deluded and deceived myself and therefore I actually unconsciously prefer ENTJ but MBTI doesn't claim to test our unconscious preferences.
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.
Ah, yes, MBTI tells us we are exactly one thing because it captures a pattern rising out of our self-deceived preferences. This is counter to evidence and reason.
So, I agree, we must uphold evidence and reason.
I shall not fall victim to grouping according to pattern, but, seek to validate a claim using evidence and reason.
My first attempt:
Originally Posted by Victor
Yes, The Enlightenment (1688-1788) was the Age of Reason.
And is most interesting from Australia's point of view. For The Enlightenment preceded the settlement of Australia in 1788.
And the Enlightenment was one hundred years of peace under the Aristocratic Ascendency.
And so Australia was imbued with all the values of Reason, Peace and Aristocracy.
These values have characterised us for 212 years and characterise us today.
So you can say our character, and you might say my character, is reasonable, peaceful and aristocratic.
Or.....I might not, you know, say that your character is reasonable, peaceful and aristrocratic, just because Australia as a whole has been characterized with values of Reason, Peace and Aristocracy.
I do not want to fall victim to ascribing a general pattern to an individual, barring the blatant evidence and reason that tells me this is a self-delusional stance.
So, Victor, I might not, and do not say such things about your character being reasonable, peaceful and aristocratic, just because you are Australian.
Originally Posted by Victor
I would prefer you related to me as a person than a type.