MBTI has an inherent bias....

[danseen]

http://www.16personalities.com/intps-at-work

http://www.16personalities.com/esfps-at-work

More caveats to my type than ESFPs lol..

Then I see a lot of similarities between us, so maybe I'm designed to be happy working with, even dating and marrying an ESFP woman.

Seems in the workplace we have similar tendencies, and I am an "ideas and innovation" guy at work.

 

[danseen]

http://www.16personalities.com/intps-at-work

http://www.16personalities.com/esfps-at-work

INTPs have more caveats attached lol..

But then we and ESFPs have common ground at work, so maybe I might work with or date/marry an ESFP woman.

 

[HongDou]

http://www.16personalities.com/intps-at-work

http://www.16personalities.com/esfps-at-work

More caveats to my type than ESFPs lol..

Not really. Whether you determine if something is a flaw or not is subjective - I actually found more under ESFP subordinates that I would consider flaws than I did under INTP subordinates from the links you provided.

The funny thing is I don't think a lot of psychologists are really that into MBTI, and a lot of the authors who write type descriptions found on the internet - besides the major big names in personality - are just laypeople interested in the subject.

It really just depends on the author as to what type gets panned. Keirsey gives the short end of the stick to S types in general.

But "psychology" is just a field of study... it is just a term referring to a particular set of information - in this case information pertaining to the mind - and the group of people who engage that type of information. By definition, there is nothing inherently benevolent or malevolent about it. By definition, too, there is nothing inherently fraudulent about it.

Whereas the people who study and practice it may be any of those things.

Yeah, this. You can't disprove the act of studying something. Also even if you thought that MBTI itself was a fraud, that doesn't give you enough reason to suggest that EVERYTHING in psychology (which is what I'm assuming you're trying to say since you said earlier that psychology is a fraud) is false. Especially since most psychologists really don't even hold MBTI in that high of a regard. I mean, there are plenty of other components in psychology that are backed up by research too. Stuff coming to mind is Erikson's Stages of Psychosocial Development, Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs, and...you know...basically any psychological disorder.

 

[danseen]

Explain your subjective insight then.

I think based on past actions, psychology is a fraud.

 

[Concur_Withall]

I agree, psychology is a total freud.

MBTI doesn't -have- bias, MBTI -is- bias.

I currently have a bias towards Se too, after spending too much time around psychologists. Just be in the moment for this is the only moment there is! All truth is relative, so find your own!

I think psychology patients tend to be ESTPs and ESFPs anyway, mostly in therapy for drug abuse and other extreme pleasure seeking. There are some ISTJs and ISFJs too who are just way too bogged down by past occurrences and have trouble moving on.

Your father was domineering
Your mother was too nurturing
Then you smoked some drugs
And now you're crazy.

 

[skylights]

Explain your subjective insight then.

I think based on past actions, psychology is a fraud.

I feel like that would hold true for all branches of science, though. Consider all of the awful practices medicine has included in the past... use of mercury... use of radium pellets... lobotomies... bloodletting... plague doctors masks... Medical practitioners probably do some harmful things now that we just don't realize are harmful because our technology and knowledge aren't advanced enough to show us otherwise. I feel like psychology is basically the same. Science might be on the cutting edge of its time, but unfortunately it's still bound by human error.

 

[danseen]

No, psychology is evil.

 

[Oaky]

No, psychology is evil.

Your psychology worries me.