• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

The Sleep of Reason

Mole

Permabanned
Joined
Mar 20, 2008
Messages
20,284
The sleep of reason brings forth monsters, click on YouTube

Mbti is based on Carl Jung's, "Psychological Types", and Jung himself says, "'Psychological Types' is based on no empirical evidence".

So mbti is not based on evidence and reason, and it brings forth monsters.

The monsters disguise the pain and humiliation they cause behind fantasy, and the fantasy is of pathological narcissism.

And worse, the pathological narcissism serves business and faith. The two are linked in mbti as a business cult.
 

reckful

New member
Joined
Jul 6, 2013
Messages
656
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5
Mbti is based on Carl Jung's, "Psychological Types", and Jung himself says, "'Psychological Types' is based on no empirical evidence".

Actually, "Jung himself" said (in the Foreword to Psychological Types):

[Psychological Types] is the fruit of nearly twenty years' work in the domain of practical psychology. It grew gradually in my thoughts, taking shape from the countless impressions and experiences of a psychiatrist in the treatment of nervous illnesses, from intercourse with men and women of all social levels, from my personal dealings with friend and foe alike, and, finally, from a critique of my own psychological peculiarity.​

And mystical streak notwithstanding, and although he hardly believed that science had all the answers, Jung believed in applying scientific methods and standards to the field of psychology to the extent possible.

In one of the articles included in the Collected Works edition of Psychological Types, Jung brought up astrology — along with several other "age-old" typologies — solely to dismiss it as unacceptable as a tool for psychological analysis. "As for the astrological type theory," Jung wrote, "to the astonishment of the enlightened it still remains intact today, and is even enjoying a new vogue." By contrast, Jung explained, "our scientific conscience does not permit us to revert to these old, intuitive ways of thinking. We must find our own answer to this problem, an answer which satisfies the needs of science."

So mbti is not based on evidence and reason, and it brings forth monsters.

Years after Psychological Types was published, Isabel Myers devoted a substantial chunk of her life to putting its typological concepts to the test in a way that Jung never had, and in accordance with the psychometric standards applicable to the science of personality.

After a large meta-review of the existing data, supplemented by a large supplemental study, in 2003, Robert Harvey and his co-authors summed up the MBTI's relative standing in the personality type field this way:

In addition to research focused on the application of the MBTI to solve applied assessment problems, a number of studies of its psychometric properties have also been performed (e.g., Harvey & Murry, 1994; Harvey, Murry, & Markham, 1994; Harvey, Murry, & Stamoulis, 1995; Johnson & Saunders, 1990; Sipps, Alexander, & Freidt, 1985; Thompson & Borrello, 1986, 1989; Tischler, 1994; Tzeng, Outcalt, Boyer, Ware, & Landis, 1984). Somewhat surprisingly, given the intensity of criticisms offered by its detractors (e.g., Pittenger, 1993), a review and meta-analysis of a large number of reliability and validity studies (Harvey, 1996) concluded that in terms of these traditional psychometric criteria, the MBTI performed quite well, being clearly on a par with results obtained using more well-accepted personality tests.​

...and they went on to describe the results of their own 11,000-subject study, which they specifically noted were inconsistent with the notion that the MBTI was somehow of "lower psychometric quality" than Big Five (aka FFM) tests. They said:

In sum, although the MBTI is very widely used in organizations, with literally millions of administrations being given annually (e.g., Moore, 1987; Suplee, 1991), the criticisms of it that have been offered by its vocal detractors (e.g., Pittenger, 1993) have led some psychologists to view it as being of lower psychometric quality in comparison to more recent tests based on the FFM (e.g., McCrae & Costa, 1987). In contrast, we find the findings reported above — especially when viewed in the context of previous confirmatory factor analytic research on the MBTI, and meta-analytic reviews of MBTI reliability and validity studies (Harvey, 1996) — to provide a very firm empirical foundation that can be used to justify the use of the MBTI as a personality assessment device in applied organizational settings.​

McCrae and Costa are the leading Big Five psychologists, and authors of the NEO-PI-R, and after reviewing the MBTI's history and status (including performing their own psychometric analysis) back in 1990 — using an earlier version of the MBTI (Form G) than the one being used today — they concluded that the MBTI and the Big Five might each have things to teach the other, approvingly pointed to the MBTI's "extensive empirical literature," and suggested that their fellow Big Five typologists could benefit by reviewing MBTI studies for additional insights into those dimensions of personality, as well as "valuable replications" of Big Five studies.

And for the benefit of anyone who's new to TC, let me note that I've corrected Mole on this issue multiple times (e.g., here), but he keeps coming back with the same nonsense.

Anyone who's interested can read quite a lot about the scientific respectability of the MBTI, and how it compares to the Big Five — and about several other issues often raised by people claiming to "debunk" the MBTI — in this TC Wiki article.

If he ever wakes up from his "sleep of reason," maybe Mole will give it a read.
 

Lark

Active member
Joined
Jun 21, 2009
Messages
29,569
The sleep of reason brings forth monsters, click on YouTube

Mbti is based on Carl Jung's, "Psychological Types", and Jung himself says, "'Psychological Types' is based on no empirical evidence".

So mbti is not based on evidence and reason, and it brings forth monsters.

The monsters disguise the pain and humiliation they cause behind fantasy, and the fantasy is of pathological narcissism.

And worse, the pathological narcissism serves business and faith. The two are linked in mbti as a business cult.

Mole, just as a matter of interest, do you know what confirmation bias is and how it operates?

Its just I've noticed a pattern with your posts, certain conclusions that you've reached already repeatedly pop up but with different rationalisations playing the supporting role.

Forming an opinion and then working backwards from there to find some supporting evidence someplace, its not really the way things are supposed to work. Just an observation.
 

Mole

Permabanned
Joined
Mar 20, 2008
Messages
20,284
Actually, "Jung himself" said (in the Foreword to Psychological Types):

[Psychological Types] is the fruit of nearly twenty years' work in the domain of practical psychology. It grew gradually in my thoughts, taking shape from the countless impressions and experiences of a psychiatrist in the treatment of nervous illnesses, from intercourse with men and women of all social levels, from my personal dealings with friend and foe alike, and, finally, from a critique of my own psychological peculiarity.​

And mystical streak notwithstanding, and although he hardly believed that science had all the answers, Jung believed in applying scientific methods and standards to the field of psychology to the extent possible.

In one of the articles included in the Collected Works edition of Psychological Types, Jung brought up astrology — along with several other "age-old" typologies — solely to dismiss it as unacceptable as a tool for psychological analysis. "As for the astrological type theory," Jung wrote, "to the astonishment of the enlightened it still remains intact today, and is even enjoying a new vogue." By contrast, Jung explained, "our scientific conscience does not permit us to revert to these old, intuitive ways of thinking. We must find our own answer to this problem, an answer which satisfies the needs of science."



Years after Psychological Types was published, Isabel Myers devoted a substantial chunk of her life to putting its typological concepts to the test in a way that Jung never had, and in accordance with the psychometric standards applicable to the science of personality.

After a large meta-review of the existing data, supplemented by a large supplemental study, in 2003, Robert Harvey and his co-authors summed up the MBTI's relative standing in the personality type field this way:

In addition to research focused on the application of the MBTI to solve applied assessment problems, a number of studies of its psychometric properties have also been performed (e.g., Harvey & Murry, 1994; Harvey, Murry, & Markham, 1994; Harvey, Murry, & Stamoulis, 1995; Johnson & Saunders, 1990; Sipps, Alexander, & Freidt, 1985; Thompson & Borrello, 1986, 1989; Tischler, 1994; Tzeng, Outcalt, Boyer, Ware, & Landis, 1984). Somewhat surprisingly, given the intensity of criticisms offered by its detractors (e.g., Pittenger, 1993), a review and meta-analysis of a large number of reliability and validity studies (Harvey, 1996) concluded that in terms of these traditional psychometric criteria, the MBTI performed quite well, being clearly on a par with results obtained using more well-accepted personality tests.​

...and they went on to describe the results of their own 11,000-subject study, which they specifically noted were inconsistent with the notion that the MBTI was somehow of "lower psychometric quality" than Big Five (aka FFM) tests. They said:

In sum, although the MBTI is very widely used in organizations, with literally millions of administrations being given annually (e.g., Moore, 1987; Suplee, 1991), the criticisms of it that have been offered by its vocal detractors (e.g., Pittenger, 1993) have led some psychologists to view it as being of lower psychometric quality in comparison to more recent tests based on the FFM (e.g., McCrae & Costa, 1987). In contrast, we find the findings reported above — especially when viewed in the context of previous confirmatory factor analytic research on the MBTI, and meta-analytic reviews of MBTI reliability and validity studies (Harvey, 1996) — to provide a very firm empirical foundation that can be used to justify the use of the MBTI as a personality assessment device in applied organizational settings.​

McCrae and Costa are the leading Big Five psychologists, and authors of the NEO-PI-R, and after reviewing the MBTI's history and status (including performing their own psychometric analysis) back in 1990 — using an earlier version of the MBTI (Form G) than the one being used today — they concluded that the MBTI and the Big Five might each have things to teach the other, approvingly pointed to the MBTI's "extensive empirical literature," and suggested that their fellow Big Five typologists could benefit by reviewing MBTI studies for additional insights into those dimensions of personality, as well as "valuable replications" of Big Five studies.

And for the benefit of anyone who's new to TC, let me note that I've corrected Mole on this issue multiple times (e.g., here), but he keeps coming back with the same nonsense.

Anyone who's interested can read quite a lot about the scientific respectability of the MBTI, and how it compares to the Big Five — and about several other issues often raised by people claiming to "debunk" the MBTI — in this TC Wiki article.

If he ever wakes up from his "sleep of reason," maybe Mole will give it a read.

Why would anyone defend Carl Jung who failed his psychoanalysis with Sigmund Freud because he could not face his father fixation in therapy, and because Jung was psychotic?

Jung went on to transfer his father fixation on Freud to a father fixation on the Fuhrer, and during WW II followed the orders of the Fuhrer's second in command, Reichmarshal Herman Goering.

Jung and his new friends drove his enemy, Freud, out of his home and out of his country, and murdered Freud's extended family in the concentration camps.

Jung felt free to sexually abuse his female patents.

And Jung's private diary was hidden in a locked safe for 70 years because it showed Jung was psychotic.

The defence of Jung is obsessive compulsive and serves the interests of the business cult called mbti.
 

Lark

Active member
Joined
Jun 21, 2009
Messages
29,569
Why would anyone defend Carl Jung who failed his psychoanalysis with Sigmund Freud because he could not face his father fixation in therapy, and because Jung was psychotic?

Jung went on to transfer his father fixation on Freud to a father fixation on the Fuhrer, and during WW II followed the orders of the Fuhrer's second in command, Reichmarshal Herman Goering.

Jung and his new friends drove his enemy, Freud, out of his home and out of his country, and murdered Freud's extended family in the concentration camps.

Jung felt free to sexually abuse his female patents.

And Jung's private diary was hidden in a locked safe for 70 years because it showed Jung was psychotic.

The defence of Jung is obsessive compulsive and serves the interests of the business cult called mbti.

Yeah, you've still not bothered to fact check any of that Mole because its not true.

I'm still not sure how someone "fails" psychoanalysis, its like saying someone failed their GP appointment or consult, it does not work in that fashion but rather reflects a strange view of authority that would have been popular with Freud, his supporters and in the very early days of the medical profession at that.
 

reckful

New member
Joined
Jul 6, 2013
Messages
656
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5
Why would anyone defend Carl Jung who failed his psychoanalysis with Sigmund Freud because he could not face his father fixation in therapy, and because Jung was psychotic?

Jung went on to transfer his father fixation on Freud to a father fixation on the Fuhrer, and during WW II followed the orders of the Fuhrer's second in command, Reichmarshal Herman Goering.

Jung and his new friends drove his enemy, Freud, out of his home and out of his country, and murdered Freud's extended family in the concentration camps.

Jung felt free to sexually abuse his female patents.

And Jung's private diary was hidden in a locked safe for 70 years because it showed Jung was psychotic.

The defence of Jung is obsessive compulsive and serves the interests of the business cult called mbti.

To whom it may concern:

Mole has been making these same allegations about Jung's cooperation with the Nazis (among other issues) for a long time, and I've called him out — and pointed him to sources that correct him — more than once. (More in this post, this post, and the posts they link to.)
 

Mole

Permabanned
Joined
Mar 20, 2008
Messages
20,284
To whom it may concern:

Mole has been making these same allegations about Jung's cooperation with the Nazis (among other issues) for a long time, and I've called him out — and pointed him to sources that correct him — more than once. (More in this post, this post, and the posts they link to.)

Sigmund Freud sought to turn misery into common unhappiness, while Carl Jung promises happiness.

This is a no brainer for a business cult like mbti, in a country Constitutionally committed to the pursuit of happiness.

So mbti has chosen Jung and disses Freud. It's good for the bottom line, and completely amoral.
 

Lark

Active member
Joined
Jun 21, 2009
Messages
29,569
Sigmund Freud sought to turn misery into common unhappiness, while Carl Jung promises happiness.

This is a no brainer for a business cult like mbti, in a country Constitutionally committed to the pursuit of happiness.

So mbti has chosen Jung and disses Freud. It's good for the bottom line, and completely amoral.

You know that Freud invented the first typology dont you?

Anal, Oral-Passive, Oral-Aggressive, Genital?

No? It can be a mistake to forn your opinions on something after reading a single book.
 
Top