• 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.

On the thinking behind MBTIc

SolitaryWalker

Tenured roisterer
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
3,504
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
So don't check the system to itself, check it to reality?

It sounds like you agree with me but I'm not quite sure.

Yes the factual information that comprises the axioms for your system must derive from the external world.
 

SolitaryWalker

Tenured roisterer
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
3,504
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
I'm not certain of the types engaged in such conversations where the system comes under fire for it's lack of sticking to expected parameters but your definitions seem sound to me.

I recall a conversation between myself and an INTJ where he was arguing that a system was floored by measuring it's success or failure by internal structure alone where as I noted to him that it did work in practice and therefore had use even if it's internal structure was not ideal. I think it was the 3rd/3.5 ed of D&D level structure which started that argument.

Delphyne had an interesting point. Ni doms tend to see the environment in terms of how it relates to them. For this reason they often confuse their world of imagination with the real world.

Extroverted perception takes the external environment for granted and is concerned with understanding the external reality first and foremost.
 

Athenian200

Protocol Droid
Joined
Jul 1, 2007
Messages
8,828
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
4w5
I was going to start out with "WHAT?" but I then realised that although your point is different to mine it's also very true.

I was thinking more in terms of arguing about how the system's pattern is valid or not measuring it's success or faliure by whether it meets up with what people expect or not without recourse to finding out whether it works in real terms, ie by seeing if it does help people communicate and see how other kinds of thinking works.

OH! Okay, I see. Well, I do see that... measuring it against expectations rather than how it works practically would be an error. MBTI does have it's uses on the macro scale, regardless of whether it can describe any individual perfectly, and this should not be overlooked. :yes:
Your point, if I read it right, is more that people start with a few pointers and then assume that the rest of the pattern fits or persuade people by altering how they read things so that whatever they observe fits. You're quite correct that this is logically wrong.. well unless you include inductive logic.

Yes, that was it.
Personally I'd say that a certain amount of such pattern prediction is necessary as no person ever really matches up to any description perfectly and some margin of contradiction is only to be expected. However the amount of contradiction is a factor and if a person consistently contradicts their type then there is reasonable grounds to doubt that they are that type.

In combination with this I'd also personally say that it is necessary to try to predict the rest of the pattern as a hypothesis to allow us to compare what we expect with what occurs, there by highlighting any areas of divergence.

Well, yes... MBTI couldn't be used any other way. I'm just pointing this out for the sake of saying that people shouldn't jump to conclusions, and then have everyone jump on board and rationalize why this might be true, without actually questioning why it might not be true or reasonably considering any alternative ideas. I've experienced a lot of times when people would do that, and then get dismissive (possibly even angrily accusing me of being closed-minded) when I point out a contradiction and suggest another idea.
 

Xander

Lex Parsimoniae
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
4,463
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
9w8
Yes the factual information that comprises the axioms for your system must derive from the external world.
This I would agree with. The crux of the issue lies more in how far can you progress from these origional axioms without checking for consistancy with the factual information?

Extrapolation leads to compound errors the further you extrapolate without error checking.
 

Xander

Lex Parsimoniae
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
4,463
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
9w8
I'm just pointing this out for the sake of saying that people shouldn't jump to conclusions, and then have everyone jump on board and rationalize why this might be true, without actually questioning why it might not be true or reasonably considering any alternative ideas. I've experienced a lot of times when people would do that, and then get dismissive (possibly even angrily accusing me of being closed-minded) when I point out a contradiction and suggest another idea.
Just add to your signature something like the sentiment I used to have "If I have to say each time that this is my present thinking and not a certainty or a fixed answer, just my current understanding, then each post would be three pages long".

I guess it's just a matter of people getting used to you being more matter of fact than most. They should meet some of the people I hang out with :D
 

Mole

Permabanned
Joined
Mar 20, 2008
Messages
20,284
The MBTI isn't what matters--it's just a tool created to help people gain access to a tool that helps people make constructive use of differences. I use the theory to help people resolve conflicts, heal wounds, and help all children succeed.

But what I wrote about Myers and Briggs is true.

Whether psychometricians believe in the instrument has nothing to do with whether, in the hands of a capable facilitator, one can help people get along.

I think it is to your credit that you use theory to help people resolve conflicts, heal wounds, and help all children to succeed.

And perhaps I am just being pedantic by focusing on the history of MBTi.

However I am aware that theory guides action. For instance I am aware that the theory of Marxism, over 70 years and across the world, led to the death of 100 million of their own people. And I am aware that the Myth of the Noble Savage has led to the continuation of child sexual abuse and the murder of tribal women.

On the other hand I am aware that the political theory of Liberal Democracy has led to the limitation of power and what we call political freedom.

And I am also aware that the modern economic theory of Adam Smith has led to the overcoming of scarcity for the first time in human history.

So it seems to me that theory can have good and bad effects.

So when I examine MBTI, I see it was copied from Carl Jung who failed his own Analysis with Sigmund Freud and who volunteered to collaborate with the NAZI Party and who abused his female patients. And after WW II, Jung became a New Age guru.

And although Mrs Briggs and her daughter had a college education, they had no qualifications in psychometrics.

So my criticism of MBTI is two fold - first it doesn't work and second it reifies the psyche.

However I do accept you want to help people understand individual differences. And so do I.

Even yours and mine.
 

Jack Flak

Permabanned
Joined
Jul 17, 2008
Messages
9,098
MBTI Type
type
Victor, if you strip the MBTI-derived-type-system down to the functional elements, you don't even need to worry about who developed it. It's simply a system for categorizing people. If you categorize enough people, you can study, then generalize them to whatever degree you want.

When people start to include assessments not based on the original categorization (such as function order), things can very easily go haywire.
 

Xander

Lex Parsimoniae
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
4,463
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
9w8
Victor, if you strip the MBTI-derived-type-system down to the functional elements, you don't even need to worry about who developed it. It's simply a system for categorizing people. If you categorize enough people, you can study, then generalize them to whatever degree you want.

When people start to include assessments not based on the original categorization (such as function order), things can very easily go haywire.
I didn't know that was a later add on... interesting. I'd always wondered why if ESFJ is supposed to be part of INTP that the function order also showed ENTJ/INTJ and ISFP/ESFP too. I mean where the text about this third and fourth element to the INTP psyche?


@Victor,
Who started an idea is irrelevant to whether an idea is good or not. If you don't like Jung, fair enough, but what does that have to do with whether the MBTI is useful or not.

Note I reject the idea of ideas being "valid" or not. Most evaluations as such are mere arrogance.
 

Jack Flak

Permabanned
Joined
Jul 17, 2008
Messages
9,098
MBTI Type
type
I didn't know that was a later add on... interesting. I'd always wondered why if ESFJ is supposed to be part of INTP that the function order also showed ENTJ/INTJ and ISFP/ESFP too. I mean where the text about this third and fourth element to the INTP psyche?
MBTI was supposedly based on Jung's function study. I meant that you don't have to know that, and it might be better if you don't. I think they went way too far with implying (For an INTP) Ti-Ne-Si-Fe based on preferring solitude, imagination, hard-heartedness, and laziness. They're not necessarily tied together. I thought that's what you were getting at earlier.
 

Jack Flak

Permabanned
Joined
Jul 17, 2008
Messages
9,098
MBTI Type
type
This article illustrates the problem quite well, but I wonder if Functional Analysis is worth anything to begin with.

J/P = problem
 

Mole

Permabanned
Joined
Mar 20, 2008
Messages
20,284
@Victor,
Who started an idea is irrelevant to whether an idea is good or not. If you don't like Jung, fair enough, but what does that have to do with whether the MBTI is useful or not.

I know this is a commonly held viewpoint but I can help but feel queasy when I discovered that Martin Heidegger, the founder of Existentialism, was an unrepentant member of the NAZI Party. I felt bound to question Existentialism. Particularly as his follower, Jean-Paul Sartre, was a Stalinist. I think there are just too many bodies to sweep under the carpet.

Perhaps a scientific theory is independent of its author because it is falsifiable, but an unfalsifiable social theory like Jung's seem to carry the smell of the author.
 

Xander

Lex Parsimoniae
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
4,463
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
9w8
MBTI was supposedly based on Jung's function study. I meant that you don't have to know that, and it might be better if you don't. I think they went way too far with implying (For an INTP) Ti-Ne-Si-Fe based on preferring solitude, imagination, hard-heartedness, and laziness. They're not necessarily tied together. I thought that's what you were getting at earlier.
Well yes.. that's taking it an additional step further.

What I meant specifically was people looking into whether the functions should be one way around or another not based on people they know but just simply based on some warped ideal that the pattern will be symetrical or some such nonsense without ever actually looking at the people it describes to see if it is symetrical or not.

I find it irritating that people set out with the idea that a pattern should look like X and then alter every pattern forcibly to match X instead of entertaining the possibility that this pattern is not similar to X or even that the pattern is too complex to map right now so accept the things we can see working and go from there instead of trying to warp their thinking so X is always right.
 

Xander

Lex Parsimoniae
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
4,463
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
9w8
I know this is a commonly held viewpoint but I can help but feel queasy when I discovered that Martin Heidegger, the founder of Existentialism, was an unrepentant member of the NAZI Party. I felt bound to question Existentialism. Particularly as his follower, Jean-Paul Sartre, was a Stalinist. I think there are just too many bodies to sweep under the carpet.

Perhaps a scientific theory is independent of its author because it is falsifiable, but an unfalsifiable social theory like Jung's seem to carry the smell of the author.
Oh don't get me wrong, understanding who wrote the theory and their aims for it are essential to understand the theory... I just advocate not throwing the baby out with the bath water.
 

Jack Flak

Permabanned
Joined
Jul 17, 2008
Messages
9,098
MBTI Type
type
Well yes.. that's taking it an additional step further.

What I meant specifically was people looking into whether the functions should be one way around or another not based on people they know but just simply based on some warped ideal that the pattern will be symetrical or some such nonsense without ever actually looking at the people it describes to see if it is symetrical or not.

I find it irritating that people set out with the idea that a pattern should look like X and then alter every pattern forcibly to match X instead of entertaining the possibility that this pattern is not similar to X or even that the pattern is too complex to map right now so accept the things we can see working and go from there instead of trying to warp their thinking so X is always right.
OK, I didn't misunderstand. That's exactly what I'm saying. The only results that don't seem drawn from a hat in this arena of thought are the ones based on repeated and careful observations of people. Keirsey does this well, and the Socionics researchers do it well with regard to relationships.

But again, Functions are so all over the place on everyone, and so hard to define through observation (self or external), that I don't trust them at all. The whole study reeks of hokum.
 

Mole

Permabanned
Joined
Mar 20, 2008
Messages
20,284
...but what does that have to do with whether the MBTI is useful or not.

Look, I agree with you that MBTI can be useful and I am sure it is used in good faith here.

But at bottom I don't want to be seen as useful - I don't want to be used - I want to be valued for my own sake, as I am sure you do too.

So in a similar way MBTI can have an extrinsic use but I can't help asking, what is its intrinsic value?

What are the deeper values that MBTI teaches?

It seems to me it teaches blind faith and reification.

This may not matter on a day-to-day basis when used in good faith, but almost all members of cults act in good faith such as the cult of Bhagwan Ragneesh's Orange cult and Jim Jones' cult.

This is the odd thing about cults - they attract intelligent, well intentioned members - the best and the brightest - until it is time to pass the Cool-Aid.
 

Xander

Lex Parsimoniae
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
4,463
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
9w8
This article illustrates the problem quite well, but I wonder if Functional Analysis is worth anything to begin with.

J/P = problem
I think that article shows the problem quite well.

J's are rational are they? What about ENFJs? Rational? I think not. certainly not when the bit is between their teeth. Yet they have Fe as their first function and are Js. They meet the criteria as set down by the pattern gurus and yet it doesn't work.

Part of this is due to perspective, from a certain point of view ENFJs are completely rational... just not to outside observers...(ie everyone else).

Part of it is due to human beings not conforming to patterns very well. Yes you can say that EJs are this and NTs are that but it's all generalisations. ENFJs are ENFJs, the pattern of the letters is irrelevant. An apple is not similar to metal not because it's spelt differently, that's just the GUI, they ARE different.

People spend far too much time shouting at computers for not doing what they meant to ask it to do but lack the understanding to phrase it properly and also shouting at the MBTI because it doesn't match up to their concept of what a pattern should be.

Now I've said all that I'm unsure of how to read your post... did you mean this article is indicative of the problem with people or the system?
 

Mole

Permabanned
Joined
Mar 20, 2008
Messages
20,284
Oh don't get me wrong, understanding who wrote the theory and their aims for it are essential to understand the theory... I just advocate not throwing the baby out with the bath water.

So the interesting question is, how can we save the baby?
 

Jack Flak

Permabanned
Joined
Jul 17, 2008
Messages
9,098
MBTI Type
type
So in a similar way MBTI can have an extrinsic use but I can't help asking, what is its intrinsic value?

What are the deeper values that MBTI teaches?

It seems to me it teaches blind faith and reification.
None.
None.
It's just a framework; It does nothing.
 

Jack Flak

Permabanned
Joined
Jul 17, 2008
Messages
9,098
MBTI Type
type
I think that article shows the problem quite well.

Now I've said all that I'm unsure of how to read your post... did you mean this article is indicative of the problem with people or the system?
It shows the problem with screwed up functions in MBTI, among other things.

I think the practical solution until there's a better alternative is to ignore functions entirely, and just use the Keirsey method of grouping by temperament. If you categorize people into groups, any groups, and find commonality among those within each group, you have yourself a system. Functions are extraneous and problematic.
 

Mole

Permabanned
Joined
Mar 20, 2008
Messages
20,284
None.
None.
It's just a framework; It does nothing.

Poetry does nothing - we write it for its own sake.

But MBTI was written by Mrs Briggs and her daughter specifically to fit British women into the war fighting machine.

And MBTI today is used to fit us for jobs in corporations.
 
Top