User Tag List

First 12

Results 11 to 13 of 13

  1. #11
    Senior Member Alea_iacta_est's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Socionics
    ILI
    Posts
    1,838

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by valaki View Post
    No, I didn't have time to figure out which thread you were talking about.

    I disagree that it's easier to figure out someone else's type than your own. You have less information about the other person, you only have indirect information as you can't see into their minds directly (you can attempt this through deep interview but not in superficial communication). All that helps only with easy mistyping of someone else.
    That's what makes it easy. Given too much information, you are overwhelmed by data and can't discern a unified truth from it due to the mountains of it, but given just the perfect amount of information, you can figure out someone's type without the flood of information. It's essentially the same concept that Malcolm Gladwell talked about in his book "Blink", that the less information you have, the faster and more accurate you can act (A favorite story of mine from that book is about a hospital that kept on interviewing people who thought they had had heart attacks to see if they needed extensive care. As it turns out, the interviewing doctors were right only about 50-60% of the time, until one doctor showed up and proposed an algorithm that would allow doctors to screen a person without that much personal information. The doctors of course scoffed, how could a basic algorithm save more lives than they could with their interviews? When the algorithm was implemented, the doctors were right 90-97% of the time).

    I have also begun digging into Model A, and I will see what I can figure out from it as well.

  2. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    MBTI
    SeNi
    Enneagram
    8+7 sx/sp
    Socionics
    SeTi
    Posts
    940

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Alea_iacta_est View Post
    That's what makes it easy. Given too much information, you are overwhelmed by data and can't discern a unified truth from it due to the mountains of it, but given just the perfect amount of information, you can figure out someone's type without the flood of information. It's essentially the same concept that Malcolm Gladwell talked about in his book "Blink", that the less information you have, the faster and more accurate you can act (A favorite story of mine from that book is about a hospital that kept on interviewing people who thought they had had heart attacks to see if they needed extensive care. As it turns out, the interviewing doctors were right only about 50-60% of the time, until one doctor showed up and proposed an algorithm that would allow doctors to screen a person without that much personal information. The doctors of course scoffed, how could a basic algorithm save more lives than they could with their interviews? When the algorithm was implemented, the doctors were right 90-97% of the time).
    The analogy - as analogies usually, IMO - is not good enough. The situation with the doctors is just so completely different from trying to type someone by MBTI. That situation deals with a decision that's a lot more objective, for one. The one relevant part would be getting stuck on ambiguous pieces of data, though, so for that your analogy works.

    I'm not saying that you necessarily need a lot of information to do this task, just that when you have little information, it's more likely that all of it consists of irrelevant data. Or, even if relevant, it can be interpreted in too many ways, too ambiguous. And sure, with a lot of information, you might get stuck on the ambiguous pieces of data. However, more data allows you to see if your original guesses were right or if there's something wrong with the idea.

    Try and see.


    I have also begun digging into Model A, and I will see what I can figure out from it as well.
    Why do you care about digging into a more complex system if you feel too much information is no good? Not just nitpicking, this really just doesn't make sense. Socionics' model is just going to confuse you with this approach.

  3. #13
    Senior Member Alea_iacta_est's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Socionics
    ILI
    Posts
    1,838

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by valaki View Post
    Why do you care about digging into a more complex system if you feel too much information is no good? Not just nitpicking, this really just doesn't make sense. Socionics' model is just going to confuse you with this approach.
    Because I have too little information about the actual system and too much information about myself.

Similar Threads

  1. Just out of Curiosity, Do You Guys Think I Am Correctly Typed?
    By FutureInProgress in forum What's my Type?
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 09-09-2016, 03:17 PM
  2. [MBTItm] NTs, the first word out of your mouth.
    By Natrushka in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 46
    Last Post: 01-03-2015, 06:12 AM
  3. out of curiosity...
    By miss fortune in forum What's my Type?
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: 12-03-2012, 12:00 PM
  4. Out of Africa
    By wildcat in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 95
    Last Post: 12-30-2007, 01:43 PM
  5. So Paris is out of jail...
    By The Ü™ in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 39
    Last Post: 06-12-2007, 03:08 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