• 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.

Is MBTI a valid instrument?

Totenkindly

@.~*virinaĉo*~.@
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
50,192
MBTI Type
BELF
Enneagram
594
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Well, since we don't talk much about MBTI here anymore anyway, what's keeping you here, Ath?

I assume the general discourse and/or the people you care about or like.

As far as "more valid" theories, I wish Gatsby was here, he was very knowledgeable in the theories that had more actual statistical validation. I know the Big Five traits have been tested and verified much more... so that provides a partial cross-link to related MBTI traits. But MBTI is much more of an experiential/theoretical framework, built on an intuitive basis, and thus is not necessarily correct.
 

Athenian200

Protocol Droid
Joined
Jul 1, 2007
Messages
8,828
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
4w5
Well, since we don't talk much about MBTI here anymore anyway, what's keeping you here, Ath?

I assume the general discourse and/or the people you care about or like.

Up to now? The hope of discussing it when the discussions swing back around to it again. I was biding my time, and the inertia/habit of posting here just stuck with me.

Are you saying that you believe caring about the people who post there is a valid reason to stay at a message board? Just curious.
 

Haphazard

Don't Judge Me!
Joined
Apr 14, 2008
Messages
6,704
MBTI Type
ENFJ
The key is not to take it too seriously. Don't try to make MBTI something it's not. (I know this conflicts with many peoples' beliefs).

QUOTED FOR TRUTH.

If you take life too seriously, you'll never get out alive.

MBTI is a pretty theory that can work sometimes but it often just doesn't hold water against things demonstrated through empirical and scientific testing. And even things demonstrated through testing won't hold true for everybody. Through study we find trends, not laws, especially in nonconcrete subjects like human psychology.

It may be pretty new-agey, but calling it a 'religion' is going a bit too far.
 

ThatsWhatHeSaid

Well-known member
Joined
May 11, 2007
Messages
7,263
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w4
MBTI's validity, imo, depends on how you interpret its significance. If you realize that the test is one way, of many, to describe people along certain exclusive dimensions, you're still okay. Once you move beyond that to think that a configuration at one point in time (when you take the test) is constant, you get into trouble. No one is always N, always T, etc. Second, I think the definitions behind each function are pretty nebulous. So, in the end, MBTI is kind of like a grid you superimpose on someone's personality. But it's just one grid of many. Personality psychology and clinical psychology is filled with alternative classification systems (more grids). They're not exclusive of one another and some have better application in certain situations than others.

So my question is... if MBTI is invalid, what do we do? Just leave? Give up? What's left here for us? You seriously make me contemplate whether I have any business staying here because of my own doubts about it...

This place is a community brought together by interest in personality. There's no rule that says you have to believe every little bit to stay here. As I tried to say above, the instrument isn't completely worthless, but it can be abused. At time I think the test is complete crap, but that doesn't mean the friendships aren't real, ya?

Anyway, do you have any ideas about what might be superior to MBTI?

I'm a psych-junkie. I get lots of insight from studying primate behavior (Desmond Morris: The Naked Ape) from Buddhist psychology (Alan Watts: The Wisdom of Insecurity, Chapter 1-5 or so) and from modern psychology (currently reading Masterson: The Search for the Real Self, I think you'd dig it).
 

Nocapszy

no clinkz 'til brooklyn
Joined
Jun 29, 2007
Messages
4,517
MBTI Type
ENTP
QUOTED FOR TRUTH.

If you take life too seriously, you'll never get out alive.

MBTI is a pretty theory that can work sometimes but it often just doesn't hold water against things demonstrated through empirical and scientific testing. And even things demonstrated through testing won't hold true for everybody. Through study we find trends, not laws, especially in nonconcrete subjects like human psychology.

It may be pretty new-agey, but calling it a 'religion' is going a bit too far.

I really hope we're able to make the distinction between Jung's typology and MBTI.

They are not the same.

MBTI's goal is to make what Jung did available to the masses. Or rather I should say, those who employ it's powers use them for this reason. Because most people are stupid, and for the sake of empirical relevancy for those same customers, they had to simplify every last bit of what Jung did.

Additionally, it requires that the subject has studied himself intensely, a feat that's next to impossible given what introspective abilities we have as mammals.

This sums up quite nicely what the system Jung designed is capable of said:
Even though it doesn't bother us to talk about types of roses or pine trees or human blood, there is something in the very idea of typing people that makes us feel uneasy. Types threaten us from two directions. First, we are afraid that they will pigeonhole us, deny our uniqueness, and replace it with a superficial label. Secondly, we feel they are somehow undemocratic and could lead to prejudice and repression.

Typology is the study of human differences. C.G. Jung's psychological types are not based on set descriptions that real people must be fit into, but on basic elements which, when combined together, can be used to describe the differences among people. A type is a group of characteristics that stands midway between the universal traits common to us all and those which are uniquely our own. For example, we all have eyes. Yet our own eyes are unlike anyone else's. But between these two poles there are groupings of blue-eyed people, brown-eyed people, etc. Types are a bridge between the universal and the particular. Every typology can be abused in order to deny the universal or the unique in man, but a good typology is a powerful aid to a deeper understanding of who we are.

One last thing -- I don't blame Meyers and Briggs for the regrettable reception their test ended up with. It's not their fault so few noticed that the I in MBTI stands for INDICATOR.
 

Haphazard

Don't Judge Me!
Joined
Apr 14, 2008
Messages
6,704
MBTI Type
ENFJ
I really hope we're able to make the distinction between Jung's typology and MBTI.

They are not the same.

MBTI's goal is to make what Jung did available to the masses. Or rather I should say, those who employ it's powers use them for this reason. Because most people are stupid, and for the sake of empirical relevancy for those same customers, they had to simplify every last bit of what Jung did.

Additionally, it requires that the subject has studied himself intensely, a feat that's next to impossible given what introspective abilities we have as mammals.

Oh, yes, of course.

But the point is that anything like this in psychology, these theories, are just that, theories. As theories, they shouldn't be applied in ways that they were not meant to be. That was just my point. It's really not exclusive to any theory in particular, even in any subject.

(And wasn't the OP talking about MBTI in particular in the first place?)
 

Nocapszy

no clinkz 'til brooklyn
Joined
Jun 29, 2007
Messages
4,517
MBTI Type
ENTP
You could say that each function is a theory in itself. Jung designed a system that would cover every way we can take in information, and every way we can deal with it. Mathematically he covered every base. The only one I'll say that doesn't NECESSARILY apply for is Thinking and Feeling. I imagine there's another way to sort information than just personal decisions vs. logical decisions.

As far as intuition and sensing goes... information is either concrete or abstract. There's not really any middle ground. Same with introverted and extraverted.

The problems don't come from improper or inappropriate application, but in having too narrow an idea of the functions' capabilities, and how they interact with one another. Both of these two problems are usually rooted in assuming that the superficial RESULTS of the functions, are the functions themselves, rather than figuring out what the mind is 'doing' and understanding that what we see is only the manifestation of what's happening in the brain. It's likely that no two people express their function combinations the same way.

On top of all that I'd wager at least 50% of anything any person does can be traced back to more than just one function. It's highly complicated, but all the bases are covered.

And yes, the OP was talking about MBTI specifically, but a lot of people don't really know the difference between the two, and I'll take any venue to explain their differences.
 

Hotherym

New member
Joined
Dec 7, 2007
Messages
83
MBTI Type
INFU
I have never fully understood why anyone would take the MBTI as law, rather than a loose, fun guideline for finding out about themselves and how they interact with others and their environment. It's not neuroscience, nor has it ever claimed to be.

Nevertheless, I see many people taking it very seriously, applying it methodically and obsessively, and seemingly advocating it as factual. Why? When I first learned about it, I thought it was tons of fun and useful, and certainly a good tool to get to know people and connect to others such as myself.

The problem is, if you're seeking ultimate truths or digging for scientific theories, I think it's fairly obvious that MBTI isn't going to hold up under a lot of pressure. Hell, best I can tell, it was never supposed to. As I said, it's not neuroscience -- it's four letters that stand for the behavioural functions you use regularly.
It would be interesting to see how they correlate with actual brain functions, however. If there's anything that's been done on that, I'd love to see.

I have more to say, but no time. I'd love to see where this thread goes. What I will say is that Victor's original posts were pretty out-there themselves, filled with logical fallacies, and did seem troll like (and not in the fun way, either :(). At least it fired up a good argument.
 

sriv

New member
Joined
Apr 19, 2008
Messages
418
MBTI Type
JIxT
Everything has self fulfilling purposes.

Exactly. MBTI is self-fulfilling to some, and not to others. However, MBTI may be more self-fulfilling to more people than would humping a fire hydrant.
 

nightning

ish red no longer *sad*
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
3,741
MBTI Type
INfj
In science/psychology... we say there are two types of validity. Face/content validity and criterion validity.

Measurement Validity Types

Basically MBTI has one but not the other type of validity.

In terms of content validity... That the scale is measuring traits that actually exists in people... MBTI fails badly. It's like a self-fulfilling hypothesis. There has been no prove that these 16 types do exist... this remains true despite numerous experimental studies conducted by the scientific community. In this process, what they noticed was a different pattern appearing. That people's personalities can be broadly categorized into 5 different traits and that these traits are normally distributed across the population (which completely goes against the idea of having 16 distinct types). This system developed by McCrae et al is the five factor model: Big Five personality traits - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

What the test instrument for MBTI have is the other type, criterion validity... or more specifically test, re-test reliability. After so many version of MBTI... consistency between testing of the official test is up to some impressive 80+%. However this means nothing if what's being measured is incorrect.

It's like throwing darts... it doesn't matter whether you get all of them at the same spot... if they don't land on target, you get no points.

</ of rambling>

So why am I here? While I believe types are artificially imposed, the system does provide a structural framework as a way of looking at the vastly complex behavioral responses and interactions in people.

Theory's wrong... but it's still nonetheless useful.
 

Mole

Permabanned
Joined
Mar 20, 2008
Messages
20,284
Now is the time to come to the aid of the party

.
So my question is... if MBTI is invalid, what do we do? Just leave? Give up? What's left here for us? You seriously make me contemplate whether I have any business staying here because of my own doubts about it...

Anyway, do you have any ideas about what might be superior to MBTI?

This is a truely excellent question.

And the answer lies in enchantment and disenchantment.

For instance when we fall in love it takes us over and we think it will last forever. But in real life, we fall in love for a time then we fall out of love - first we are enchanted then, after a while, we become disenchanted.

At the point of disenchantment we quite often make the mistake of blaming the other person - we say, they are not what we thought they were - or we can start to see their faults. But in fact the other person hasn't changed - they are still the same whole person. Tne only thing that has changed is that we have changed our minds.

And this is what learning is. It is simply changing our mind.

It is not putting something into our mind, it is becoming familiar and comfortable with the process of changing our mind.

The corollary is that we start to see that we are not our mind - if we can change our mind and the world doesn't end, we see we are separate from our mind and indeed even our personality.

In other words we become delightfully free of our minds.

We are not losing our minds, we are coming into their full possession.

Another way to look at it is in order of learning. So keeping one idea in your mind is the first order. Keeping two ideas in your mind at the same time is the second order and keeping three ideas in your mind at the same time is the third order and so on.

But the big step is from keeping one idea in mind to keeping two ideas in mind, 'cause once you learn two there is no reason not to have three or even four.

However in taking this big step from one to two, we find we are quite naturally disorientated. We don't know what to do - which idea should we folllow?

But after a while we learn that, "not knowing what to do", is as sign learning it taking place.

So first we are enchanted with MBTI then we become disenchanted with MBTI, but this is not the time to reject MBTI. Now is the time to keep the enchantment and the disenchantment in your mind at the same time.

In that way we are learning and indeed we are transcending, but not rejecting, MBTI.

Victor.
 

redacted

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 28, 2007
Messages
4,223
i think nocap was kinda saying this, but i think about it this way:

if you take all possible behaviors and cognitive processes and draw lines between them -- make 8 distinct categories, i don't see any problem. since all 8 cover everything a human can do, all of human action can be described by a combination of those 8. it's also true that certain ones work together better than others, and that it varies from person to person which functions they prefer. MBTI type is merely an indication of which functions you prefer to use -- that doesn't even mean you use them 50% of the time.

and that's the thing: it's hard to use type as any kind of a predictive tool since everyone uses functions outside of their primary two. two people of the same type can have drastically different distributions of functions. so, if used correctly, MBTI is not about putting people into 16 boxes. it's just about describing what you see in terms of a well defined framework. without the framework, it'd be harder to communicate about such things.

btw, you are TOTALLY an extroverted thinker :)

edit: people seem to think that two functions working together can accomplish a full analysis. this is completely untrue. every analysis requires sensing, intuiting, feeling, and thinking. sensing for sensory input, intuiting for connecting the data to concepts that make sense, thinking to label and conclude things about the data, and feeling to motivate everything else.
 

nightning

ish red no longer *sad*
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
3,741
MBTI Type
INfj
if you take all possible behaviors and cognitive processes and draw lines between them -- make 8 distinct categories, i don't see any problem. since all 8 cover everything a human can do, all of human action can be described by a combination of those 8. it's also true that certain ones work together better than others, and that it varies from person to person which functions they prefer. MBTI type is merely an indication of which functions you prefer to use -- that doesn't even mean you use them 50% of the time.

and that's the thing: it's hard to use type as any kind of a predictive tool since everyone uses functions outside of their primary two. two people of the same type can have drastically different distributions of functions. so, if used correctly, MBTI is not about putting people into 16 boxes. it's just about describing what you see in terms of a well defined framework. without the framework, it'd be harder to communicate about such things.

btw, you are TOTALLY an extroverted thinker :)

edit: people seem to think that two functions working together can accomplish a full analysis. this is completely untrue. every analysis requires sensing, intuiting, feeling, and thinking. sensing for sensory input, intuiting for connecting the data to concepts that make sense, thinking to label and conclude things about the data, and feeling to motivate everything else.

By assuming 8 distinct categories exists... you are creating boxes.

MBTI, cognitive functions... the whole framework is just a theory. It's less well defined as you imagined. Even if you can mix and match any combination of these 8 things, I truly doubt you can replicate human personality.

Darn it! I just saw a greenish yellow bird! It left before I can identify it
Golden head black cap, brownie green wings... thanks birdy
I want my camera! Dang it! Flew away before I got my camera... :cry:
 

Mole

Permabanned
Joined
Mar 20, 2008
Messages
20,284
btw, you are TOTALLY an extroverted thinker :)

Who me?

I am a TOTALLY extroverted thinker?

Hey, I think I kinda like that.

However I do know that I am highly suggestible, so if you suggest to me that I am a TOTALLY extroverted thinker, I become one, at least for a while.

And I have only you to thank.

Victor.
 

redacted

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 28, 2007
Messages
4,223
By assuming 8 distinct categories exists... you are creating boxes.

MBTI, cognitive functions... the whole framework is just a theory. It's less well defined as you imagined. Even if you can mix and match any combination of these 8 things, I truly doubt you can replicate human personality.

Darn it! I just saw a greenish yellow bird! It left before I can identify it
Golden head black cap, brownie green wings... thanks birdy
I want my camera! Dang it! Flew away before I got my camera... :cry:

i don't really understand. there are only certain things that humans are capable of doing, yes? let's call those things x. well, take x, divide it into some arbitrary number (in this case, 8), and label the categories. obviously, if you add up the categories, you get back to x. so the categories cover all of x.

i'm not saying we have the computing capacity to entirely quantify a set of actions as an interaction between the functions. but that doesn't matter. all actions are a combination of the functions. period. because that's how the functions are defined.

our measuring ability is really what's at fault. the system is fine.

Who me?

I am a TOTALLY extroverted thinker?

Hey, I think I kinda like that.

However I do know that I am highly suggestible, so if you suggest to me that I am a TOTALLY extroverted thinker, I become one, at least for a while.

And I have only you to thank.

Victor.

heh, all i mean is you seem to prefer 'thinking' according to external standard (something you can see or measure).
 

nightning

ish red no longer *sad*
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
3,741
MBTI Type
INfj
How it is a theory? Theories are falsifiable. How can you falsify this stuff? You can't.
Let's not be too nit picky about definitions. If you want to use "theory" in the strict scientific sense of the word, then no part of MBTI is acceptable since none of it can be falsify. And with that, there's no point to this discussion. MBTI is merely pop-culture garbage.

You know that he means "theory" as the layperson's term for a system of ideas...

i don't really understand. there are only certain things that humans are capable of doing, yes? let's call those things x. well, take x, divide it into some arbitrary number (in this case, 8), and label the categories. obviously, if you add up the categories, you get back to x. so the categories cover all of x.

i'm not saying we have the computing capacity to entirely quantify a set of actions as an interaction between the functions. but that doesn't matter. all actions are a combination of the functions. period. because that's how the functions are defined.

our measuring ability is really what's at fault. the system is fine.
I disagree, the system is flawed. You admitted that we're arbitrary dividing up personality into 8 parts. There is no justifiable rational behind why these 8 categories should exist. Without that, MBTI is just a house made of cards...

Even if they truly exist, there's no way we can prove that they completely make up our personality. Actually, if we do field observations on people, we can see that they couldn't possibly be the only thing in human personality...

That bird is such a tease... fluttering around right outside my window. :dry:
 

Domino

ENFJ In Chains
Joined
Nov 5, 2007
Messages
11,429
MBTI Type
eNFJ
Enneagram
4w3
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
In fact MBTI is used here simply to reinforce narcissism.


And very poor hygiene!

(Watch your step - big steaming piles of B.S. too.)
 

redacted

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 28, 2007
Messages
4,223
I disagree, the system is flawed. You admitted that we're arbitrary dividing up personality into 8 parts. There is no justifiable rational behind why these 8 categories should exist. Without that, MBTI is just a house made of cards...

what do you mean "should exist"? there's no objective reason we should break down wavelengths of light into colors. there's no objective reason we should categorize people by their age. there's no objective reason we should categorize animals by whether or not they can mate with one another...

how far do you want to take that line of reasoning?

i'm not saying the 8 parts are each arbitrary. i'm saying the number 8 is arbitrary.

Even if they truly exist, there's no way we can prove that they completely make up our personality.

first of all... "truly exist"...what does that mean? numbers don't "truly exist". sounds don't "truly exist". with that rationale, no concepts truly exist.

let me break down my argument.
premise: human beings are limited.
therefore: human beings have a finite set of actions and cognitive processes possible. let's call that set x.

so, if we take set x and divide it into distinct subsets that added together, contain all of x, we can use the subsets to represent anything in x.
therefore: if we divide set x into 8 distinct subsets that add together to include all of x, we can use those subsets to represent anything in x.

if you disagree, please point out a premise you disagree with or a logical flaw.

Actually, if we do field observations on people, we can see that they couldn't possibly be the only thing in human personality...

please elaborate on this point. it seems quite unsubstantiated.

i don't see why people are so inclined to think that human action is somehow uncategorizable. if you think about it, we're all just specific groupings of subatomic particles. those subatomic particles respond to their surroundings according to natural laws. it's not like this rule doesn't apply to humans for some reason. no atom can just say, "hey, i'm not gonna follow the laws of physics right now!". we're really not that complicated at a basic level.
 

Nocapszy

no clinkz 'til brooklyn
Joined
Jun 29, 2007
Messages
4,517
MBTI Type
ENTP
How it is a theory? Theories are falsifiable. How can you falsify this stuff? You can't.

You're right. Thank you for correcting me.

It's fact. Even better.

In the same direction the problem with those who cling to the notion that MBTI is only a theory, is that they don't realize that it's simply a description of what's already been happening.

The functions themselves are literally undeniable. I don't agree that as ENTP I have to use Ne Ti followed by Fe and Si.

I do however see that, in order to make sense of the world around you (object information Ne, or Se) You have to use introverted judgement, as extroverted judgement can only organize the objects themselves, not the subjectively interpreted qualities.

On the other side, Extroverted judgement favors work with introverted perception, because judgement strives to enforce, or reinforce the subjective perceived ideal. Vision of self and surroundings... Using the object information has little value when we're trying to impose an ideal on the world.

But even so, it's POSSIBLE for a Te type to use Se, just as much as it's possible for an Fe type to use Te. Ni types can use Ti. I've seen it.

The boxes we're talking about.... function analysis it's nothing more than understanding a dictionary. You can't say the word "as" is only a theory.
 
Top