How much is the support of MBTI in this forum being explained by..

[Ghost of the dead horse]

..newcomers, and
..how much by people who've actually tried to use it? .. and..
..how much by people who have read theories about it.. and..
..how much by people who've tried to counteract those theories?

 

[Fluffywolf]

Impossible to answer that statistically. But like all forums about subjects outside common knowledge, it is always safe to assume that not everything being said is entirely, or at all, accurate. And it usually takes a while to find the users that really seem to know what they're talking about. But that said, even newcomers (or maybe especially newcomers) can draw the most interesting conclusions and start very interesting discussions.

So I ask you, what is the point of this thread, in your opinion?

 

[Impact Calculus]

Most people who've read about the long list of assumptions made from jung's work would consider the majority the theory to be self-serving bunk.

 

[Cellmold]

Most people who've read about the long list of assumptions made from jung's work would consider the majority the theory to be self-serving bunk.

Which particular theory? MBTI?

Yeah I could see that. Jung's work as described in Psychological Types is fairly open to interpretation in some areas.

 

[Impact Calculus]

Which particular theory? MBTI?

Yeah I could see that. Jung's work as described in Psychological Types is fairly open to interpretation in some areas.

Well yeah, this universal phenomenon, that has a seemingly infinite influence on personality, ends up influencing a context that is subject to plenty of other factors. The problem lies in the fact that we cannot see these deep fixations directly. We have to learn to identify exactly what is considered the product of this behavior, and what isn't.

Even the very raw nature of how these functions appear on the surface could only be considered tendencies to jung.

The differentiation (heh) only becomes more muddled when we start to cross apply Ti to dry logic, Fe to surfaced emotions, and Si to details.

 

[Cellmold]

Well yeah, this universal phenomenon, that has a seemingly infinite influence on personality, ends up influencing a context that is subject to plenty of other factors. The problem lies in the fact that we cannot see these deep fixations directly. We have to learn to identify exactly what is considered the product of this behavior, and what isn't.

Even the very raw nature of how these functions appear on the surface could only be considered tendencies to jung.

The differentiation (heh) only becomes more muddled when we start to cross apply Ti to dry logic, Fe to surfaced emotions, and Si to details.

Yeah that has always been the challenge. Afterall when the evidence is heuristic it's hard to find accurate quantifiers and relationships.

I suppose ole Dario Nardi's neuroscience has produced some interesting results, but if anyone wanted to be sure about it they ought to spend a lot of time testing and trying so as to produce repeatable patterns of cognition and behaviour to link together. Which of course is empericism, which is what a great deal of the world requires for acceptance of something.

 

[Impact Calculus]

Yeah that has always been the challenge. Afterall when the evidence is heuristic it's hard to find accurate quantifiers and relationships.

I suppose ole Dario Nardi's neuroscience has produced some interesting results, but if anyone wanted to be sure about it they ought to spend a lot of time testing and trying so as to produce repeatable patterns of cognition and behaviour to link together. Which of course is empericism, which is what a great deal of the world requires for acceptance of something.

Yeah. Although, I'm interested in the consistency found in each type more than anything. I mean, if we can establish what is always true vs. what is almost always true vs what is more often than not true, then this theory would then be pushed to its limit.

Of course, then there would likely be further insight to potentially develop new models and other expansions.

Empirical data would be useful, but the MBT instrument, itself, is generally what receives the spotlight. Unfortunately the instrument lacks validity, consistency and accuracy.