cameo
New member
- Joined
- May 20, 2015
- Messages
- 36
- MBTI Type
- ISTJ
I don't consider Michael Pierce a good MBTI source.
That's totally fair. I'm not that familiar with the guy in general, I just think that those two specific articles defined the differences between INTJ and ISTJ in such a way that helped me figure it out. Of course, it wasn't that I read those two things in isolation in deciding, so it's not that I think he's the be-all, end-all of typology sources or anything. It's just that there are so many other sources where the descriptions only serve to confuse me in identifying my own type because they essentially make INTJs sound like smarter and "better" than ISTJs. Obviously I know that it's not true that one is "better" than the other or that INTJs are always smarter than ISTJs, or whatever. It's just irritating to find so many descriptions that are just reiterations of that sort of thing, and he doesn't do that here.
I believe Isabel Myers would have said that, in choosing which explorer was best suited to which of those two tasks, the S/N (first) and T/F (secondarily) preferences were the most significant ones, and that an ST was best suited for exclusively focusing on "just the facts" and the NF was best suited to be the recorder of subjective emotional/aesthetic/philosophical impressions — and that that two-explorers example was a very poor one to choose as an illustration of "extraversion" vs. "introversion."
This example is quite convincing, of course, and I completely agree with this; I know some of his descriptions that I linked to earlier have bits of this type of weird analysis in them and I wouldn't embrace all of it as being right. Something I have seen of this that I find at least really unusual (if not totally incorrect) is this article about Se and Si (although I'm not sure if this is exactly what you are talking about).