Using MBTI as a way... FFUUUUUU

[Jaguar]

I hate people who just go around quoting the book and not thinking for themselves.

There's a lot of that going on in this forum.

Finally, I fell over backwards in a chair screaming "Nooo!!" when someone asked me if I wanted to pet a snake... and in another case, when a bunch of people were playing with a snake the teacher had out, I was shivering in the corner with everyone laughing at me until they were done.

There's something really wrong with that story.
Didn't the teacher help you, or tell the kids to stop laughing at you?

So yeah... I'd kind of prefer not to be judged by what I do unconsciously. Because it's pretty embarrassing in my case. It's not like I haven't TRIED to stop, but those impulses are really, really strong.

I hate to break it to you, but it is the real you after all.
I have shocked myself with my responses at times.
But then I can be, well, shocking!
It's a part of who I am.

We can't really say: "Oh don't judge me on what I can't control."
Of course we can judge. It's who the person really is.

Take alcohol for example.
It makes people lose control of their "guard."
What they are trying to hide or protect.

Ever seen a mean drunk?
I have.
It's amazing shit.
Maybe people should take the MBTI, drunk.

 

[Athenian200]

There's a lot of that going on in this forum.

Yeah, and it's really annoying, too. It's always frustrating when some people are so quick to shut me down when I try to suggest something that goes outside of, say, Keirsey's framework. For instance, if I compare/contrast an NTJ and an NFJ and come up with insights that make sense to the person I'm talking to, sometimes people will go "Oh, you can't do that! One's an NF and another's an NT! They have completely different motivations!" And then if I suggest that while that's true, they're both NJs and still tend to operate similarly on some level, they say, "Oh, but Keirsey's experience didn't construe that one as valid."

It's especially frustrating, because it seems that if you can talk about SJs and SPs, you should be able to talk about NPs and NJs. It doesn't make sense to say otherwise, but that's exactly what some people try to do.

What's especially interesting, is this... I've noticed that NTJs usually say they don't relate well to NTPs, but NTPs usually go out of their way to affirm that they relate well to NTJs. Same thing happens with NFPs and NFJs, though it's to a much lesser extent.

There's something really wrong with that story.
Didn't the teacher help you, or tell the kids to stop laughing at you?

Heck, no. I think the teacher actually rolled his eyes at me, possibly even made a sarcastic comment. I sure wish he had, though.

I even had another teacher in Chemistry who stressed me out to the point of crying on the first day by unexpectedly giving us a 10-minute timed Math test and shouting at the whole class (he was an ex-marine) while giving it, and actually encouraged the other kids to mock me. Needless to say, I dropped that course the same day and took Aquatic Science, because I couldn't handle it.

I hate to break it to you, but it is the real you after all.
I have shocked myself with my responses at times.
But then I can be, well, shocking!
It's a part of who I am.

We can't really say: "Oh don't judge me on what I can't control."
Of course we can judge. It's who the person really is.

Take alcohol for example.
It makes people lose control of their "guard."
What they are trying to hide or protect.

Ever seen a mean drunk?
I have.
It's amazing shit.
Maybe people should take the MBTI, drunk.

Yeah, maybe it is... but the question is, if I have things I can't control that make me look bad, does that mean I'm a bad person and there's nothing I can do about it?

Yeah, and perhaps they should take it drunk. Preferably if they're asked the questions in an indirect, off-hand manner rather than being knowingly tested. I've always thought the test would produce more accurate results if the people didn't know they were being tested.

 

[Mole]

I personally don't get all the hate against theories not based on empiricism.

It's interesting, France and the United States are both revolutionary states. And while one is based on belief, the other is based on reason.

It seems that belief and reason are two different sides of the same revolutionary coin.

In contrast Oz has never had a revolution, neither bourgeois nor proletarian, and is empirical.

Oz was founded during the Scottish and English Enlightenment when the world moved from the dichotomy between belief and reason to empiricism.

And so the United States washed up on the beach of belief, France on the beach of reason, while we sunbake on the empirical beach.

 

[Jaguar]

For instance, if I compare/contrast an NTJ and an NFJ and come up with insights that make sense to the person I'm talking to, sometimes people will go "Oh, you can't do that! One's an NF and another's an NT! They have completely different motivations!" And then if I suggest that while that's true, they're both NJs and still tend to operate similarly on some level, they say, "Oh, but Keirsey's experience didn't construe that one as valid."

This is what is wrong with society.
We live with people who are followers of thought, rather than pioneers of thought.
Decide which one you prefer to be.

What's especially interesting, is this... I've noticed that NTJs usually say they don't relate well to NTPs, but NTPs usually go out of their way to affirm that they relate well to NTJs.

I don't have a problem with those who claim to be INTP.
Not unless they are 15 and immature.

I think I will refrain from commenting on ENTPs.
WW3 might break out.

Yeah, maybe it is... but the question is, if I have things I can't control that make me look bad, does that mean I'm a bad person and there's nothing I can do about it?

Of course not. You are too hard on yourself.
Besides, what makes a person "bad" is up for debate.

I've always thought the test would produce more accurate results if the people didn't know they were being tested.

Agreed.

 

[Mole]

I agree with Victor to a certain extent. Like most other religions, (I'm going with the metaphor here for the sake of it) you can approach it many ways.

You can look at Jesus' teachings and apply them to your life based on what you recognize as good, you can blindly follow the Bible (all the while trying to look past the possible contradictions ), you can use it to improve yourself, you can use it to tell others what to do....etc etc

Jesus said, "Take no thought for the morrow".

But if you had five children and a wife to support, this would be irresponsible.

But if you wait until your children are independent and with your wife's permission, you can put on a monk's robes and wander the highways and byways to your heart's content.

In fact I understand this is the tradition of buddhism.

 

[Thalassa]

The way I see it, it is a good tool for attempting to understand why other people do what they do. It gives a person the ability to understand that others don't see things the way that we do, and it's not because they're "stupid" or "crazy" or "wrong."

However, using MBTI as an excuse for bad behavior defeats the whole purpose. So does taking irrational pride in one's type and claiming that a certain type is superior to others.

It's good when used moderately, but I think it can go way too far. I wouldn't call it a cult, though.

 

[Thalassa]

If only more people knew and understood the truth that MBTI provides. Discovering your type is liberating. No longer distracted by pursuits that are not befitting one's type but rather becoming empowered to focus on areas which your type is suited for.

You know, I kind of agree with this. There's truth in it.

I don't think that MBTI is the be-all and end-all for discovering "who you are" though.

 

[Snow Turtle]

It's interesting, France and the United States are both revolutionary states. And while one is based on belief, the other is based on reason.

It seems that belief and reason are two different sides of the same revolutionary coin.

In contrast Oz has never had a revolution, neither bourgeois nor proletarian, and is empirical.

Oz was founded during the Scottish and English Enlightenment when the world moved from the dichotomy between belief and reason to empiricism.

And so the United States washed up on the beach of belief, France on the beach of reason, while we sunbake on the empirical beach.

There's honestly nothing that great about empiricism, well there is but at the same time it refutes things that are clearly there.

Dreams are a prime example of this. There is something more, and the same goes for theories that attempt to capture behaviour. Empiricism would attempt to refute many psychological disorders as not really existing, which in some cases may be true but still!

 

[Wonkavision]

Wonka, that song is NOT by Men At Work!

Really?

Well, it's not my fault, that's what Google told me.

Here's the link, just so you don't think I hallucinated it:

men at work i got to keep on movin lyrics - Google Search