User Tag List

First 123412 Last

Results 11 to 20 of 162

  1. #11
    & Badger, Ratty and Toad Mole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    18,524

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nozflubber View Post
    Mercury and Poseidon are neither valid nor reliable(anything but), but i can still incite them in my communication to others.
    Not so long ago we worshipped Mercury and Poseidon as Gods.

    But today no one believes in Mercury or Poseidon, and no one worships them.

    Just as no one today believes in astrology or alchemy, for astrology has been replaced by astronomy and alchemy by chemistry.

    Both Mercury and Poseidon, and both astrology and alchemy came to us prior to the Enlightenment and MBTI comes from the same stable.

  2. #12
    DoubleplusUngoodNonperson
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    Hype
    Posts
    2,078

    Default

    True. Yet I don't have to believe in INTPs in order to use the type description to explain myself to another person familiar with what that means. It's not about belief , worship or even valid statistics, its about communication. And communication based upon a smoke and mirror system such as MBTI is better than nothing.

  3. #13
    Minister of Propagandhi ajblaise's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    7,917

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Victor View Post
    Unfortunately, the inconvenient truth is that every Psychology Department on any reputable University regards MBTI as having the same truth value as astrology.

    And as you know every Astronomy Department in any University regards astrology as having no truth value whatsoever.
    Concerning universities which study MBTI seriously; you are talking about the Psychology Department of places like Stanford, Texas A&M University, Oxford, Oregon State University, Rutgers. Everywhere.

    And this can all be verified with a few simple Google Scholar searches.

    In fact, there are whole academic journals dedicated to psychometrics, which is what MBTI falls under, like the journal of Educational and Psychological Measurement and Journal of Psychological Type. This is empirical evaluation.

    Are you actually against psychometrics all together?

  4. #14
    & Badger, Ratty and Toad Mole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    18,524

    Default

    MBTI is a cult because it is clung to despite evidence and reason.

  5. #15
    Senior Member tinkerbell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    3,487

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by highlander29 View Post
    I hear time after time that MBTI is only a set of logical groupings, it's not scientifically proven, you can't use it to dogmatically, etc. I then hear you need to consider the nuances of how the functions may be ordered, how strong they are etc.

    My question is this - and I speak from the standpoint with no experience in research - why can't it be proven? At least in some form, fashion, or respect. Has nobody ever tried? Are there difficulties in running surveys or experiments to determine accuracy of the profiles? Do the studies show flaws and that it doesn't work (that we don't hear about)? There seems to be a large body of information out there, but always "no proof". Is there anything in the field of psychology that can be proven?

    If there is no proof that it works, and people don't believe in it, then why are we all here?
    MBTI is a segmentation - ie cuts the population up - ie classify people.

    Because it's self measured people change their minds about how they deal with stuff from one day to another... hence it is less stable because of that. Self categorisation requires a person to understand dynamics of themselves that they may not really be tuned into... I know a screamingly ESTJ who doens't know if he is a J type... they guys writes war and peace instructions for travel (and we are talking short hop not major travel)..... he is just feels less constrained than the premis of Jness... (but he is SO J...)

    Also I think a fair few scales are a bit wooly in terms of being truely discrinimating.... therefore you end up with a fair proportion around the boundaries of categories....

    Personally speaking, I don't think the categorisation is tight enough... ie there are TOO many people wiggling around the edges...

    The bit about it can't be tested/evaluated it total rubbish, it can be evaluated quantitatively, however it will shot the device is way far from perfect.

    BUT a segmentation doens't need to be PERFECT to be useful..... Does it make sense, can you use it... if it works 80% of the time - it is better than a poke in the eye with a rusty nail... it is helpful...

    Not everying needs to be evidenced....

  6. #16
    Minister of Propagandhi ajblaise's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    7,917

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Victor View Post
    MBTI is a cult because it is clung to despite evidence and reason.
    ... except all the evidence and reason I just referenced, which can all be verified. Directly contradicting your claims.

    Victor, one who closes their eyes and covers their ears, doesn't see the light.

  7. #17
    & Badger, Ratty and Toad Mole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    18,524

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tinkerbell View Post
    MBTI is a segmentation - ie cuts the population up - ie classify people.

    Because it's self measured people change their minds about how they deal with stuff from one day to another... hence it is less stable because of that. Self categorisation requires a person to understand dynamics of themselves that they may not really be tuned into... I know a screamingly ESTJ who doens't know if he is a J type... they guys writes war and peace instructions for travel (and we are talking short hop not major travel)..... he is just feels less constrained than the premis of Jness... (but he is SO J...)

    Also I think a fair few scales are a bit wooly in terms of being truely discrinimating.... therefore you end up with a fair proportion around the boundaries of categories....

    Personally speaking, I don't think the categorisation is tight enough... ie there are TOO many people wiggling around the edges...

    The bit about it can't be tested/evaluated it total rubbish, it can be evaluated quantitatively, however it will shot the device is way far from perfect.

    BUT a segmentation doens't need to be PERFECT to be useful..... Does it make sense, can you use it... if it works 80% of the time - it is better than a poke in the eye with a rusty nail... it is helpful...

    Not everying needs to be evidenced....
    As lovely a person as you are, Tinker, I understand you are a self confessed astrologer and so, inadvertently, bring MBTI into well deserved disrepute.

  8. #18
    Freshman Member simulatedworld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w6 sx/so
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    5,554

    Default

    It can't be proven because there's no way to test it empirically.

    The test only gives you a rough idea, but it runs into confirmation bias problems because it depends on self-report...so it only tells you how you see yourself, not how you actually are. And nobody else can take the test for you because, obviously, that can only tell you how someone else sees you.

    Besides that, though, what is there to test? All it's really saying is, "People who think and behave this way, we're going to label xxxx, but people who think and behave that way, we'll call yyyy instead."

    You just take the set of all possible human thoughts/opinions/behaviors and then categorize them arbitrarily. The idea that human thoughts/opinions/behaviors can be categorized is self-evident, but how we should categorize them is totally up to personal opinion and the way you conceptualize differences between people.

    If we were going to prove any of this, it would require research into brain chemistry and the connections between different areas of the brain and their influence on behaviors and opinions. As far as I know, nobody has ever done any such research connecting Jung's cognitive functions to real neurochemistry.

    How else might we go about "proving" typological categories? There's not even a falsifiable claim being made.
    If you could be anything you want, I bet you'd be disappointed--am I right?

  9. #19
    Senior Member tinkerbell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    3,487

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Victor View Post
    As lovely a person as you are, Tinker, I understand you are a self confessed astrologer and so, inadvertently, bring MBTI into well deserved disrepute.
    I'm a professional researcher of good standing and have a first class honors degree -

    ...........but I do understand that you tend to spout opinions without evidence at all, so far be it from me to remove you from your little fantasies...

  10. #20
    Senior Member tinkerbell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    3,487

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by simulatedworld View Post
    It can't be proven because there's no way to test it empirically.

    .
    That's not actually true......very little of this stuff can't be researched in a robust manner, however it would be very time consuming and expensive....

    the research design would be a hgue sample size who are taking an MBTI test preiodically over a time span... this would provide definative meaurment and give and understanidn og the % of migration and relaibility.

    From one data set you can also understand the likely reliability within that particualr sample....

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