User Tag List

First 123 Last

Results 11 to 20 of 25

  1. #11
    Administrator highlander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/sp
    Socionics
    ILI Ni
    Posts
    24,812

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by reckful View Post
    Adam Grant's blog post is the kind of poorly-informed, straw-manny MBTI "debunking" that turns up with disappointing regularity, and often in sources that ought to have higher standards.

    A later "debunking" by Joseph Stromberg at the Vox website — which quotes Adam Grant and makes a lot of the same points — is pretty thoroughly rebutted (if I do say so myself) in this post and the post that follows it.

    Anyone interested in the "official response" to Grant from the MBTI folks can find it here — although I'd note that there's actually considerably more foolishness in Grant's post than their response covers. And here's a harsher (and well deserved) smackdown: Why Adam Grant's Critique of the MBTI Is Useless.

    A-a-and as poor as Grant's critique is, that Adam Conover video Hard linked to manages to demonstrate even lower standards.
    Excellent posts and points. I was going to say we should put some of this in the Wiki but it's already there!

    Debunking the MBTI Debunkers - Typology Wiki

    Please provide feedback on my Nohari and Johari Window by clicking here: Nohari/Johari

    Tri-type 639
    Likes SearchingforPeace liked this post

  2. #12
    Administrator highlander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/sp
    Socionics
    ILI Ni
    Posts
    24,812

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by reckful View Post
    Adam Grant's blog post is the kind of poorly-informed, straw-manny MBTI "debunking" that turns up with disappointing regularity, and often in sources that ought to have higher standards.

    A later "debunking" by Joseph Stromberg at the Vox website — which quotes Adam Grant and makes a lot of the same points — is pretty thoroughly rebutted (if I do say so myself) in this post and the post that follows it.

    Anyone interested in the "official response" to Grant from the MBTI folks can find it here — although I'd note that there's actually considerably more foolishness in Grant's post than their response covers. And here's a harsher (and well deserved) smackdown: Why Adam Grant's Critique of the MBTI Is Useless.

    A-a-and as poor as Grant's critique is, that Adam Conover video Hard linked to manages to demonstrate even lower standards.
    What I don't understand is why academia feels that Big 5 is any better. For the result of the instrument to have some value, I need to gain some insights about people and how they think. How does Big 5 help in that way? There seems to be a relative dearth of literature about it compared to MBTI.

    Please provide feedback on my Nohari and Johari Window by clicking here: Nohari/Johari

    Tri-type 639
    Likes SearchingforPeace, Jellyfish1234 liked this post

  3. #13
    phallus impudicus
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    10,169

    Default

    I guess I've been slacking. I'll read through these sometime.
    I still like Enneagram better.

  4. #14
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    3w4 sp/sx
    Socionics
    ILE Ne
    Posts
    227

    Default

    Honestly, you can answer pretty much all these criticisms easily by saying

    - OK, MBTI =/= Jung. It's quite different what the test is really measuring -- it's some hybrid between Jungian ideas and the Big 5, and it's not formatted as a cognitive functions theory inherently -- it's really just a pretty standard 4-dimensional psychometric tool

    - So we shouldn't interpret the dichotomies as dichotomies in the strict sense, but as marking the extremes of a dimension -- that is, something with lots of variation/inbetweens/potential for facets

    Once you make those two clarifications, there doesn't seem to be much of substance left. Actually the test was already constructed properly, just interpreted in a somewhat outdated Jungian fashion.

    There will always be a more philosophical and more scientific side to cognitive science, as far as I can tell; those interested in AI research will realize that in some ways, understanding the brain's neurons just won't help you build a theory of thinking beyond a point, because it's ultimately the patterns/ideas that are important. Here, solid philosophizing can help you.
    So I far from think totally abandoning the Jungian way of thinking is the way to go.

    However, recognizing that the MBTI as an instrument is different from the Jungian school of thought in its focuses helps people who are concerned with the more empirical goals (such as finding if there are consistent replicating dimensions of personality that capture many other facets of personality in an economical way) not feel they were being deceived.

  5. #15

    Default

    • Yeah, he doesn't appear to understand MBTI.
    • I think he's an mistyped NF.
    • He's also selling his own theories so taking down MBTI would open the playing field.


    Adam Grant: Are you a giver or a taker? | TED Talk

  6. #16
    Guardian of Ga'Hoole Julius_Van_Der_Beak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/so
    Socionics
    LII None
    Posts
    16,353

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by highlander View Post
    What I don't understand is why academia feels that Big 5 is any better. For the result of the instrument to have some value, I need to gain some insights about people and how they think. How does Big 5 help in that way? There seems to be a relative dearth of literature about it compared to MBTI.
    Interestingly enough, I went on r/askpsychology, where I constantly see people diss MBTI and say things in favor of the Big 5, and I asked them if they could point me towards any scientific papers that established the validity of Big Five. I explained that open access didn't matter, because I had access to university subscriptions. I got a few upvotes, but very few people responded to me, and the only thing they said was that I should be able to find something if I look hard enough. Very disappointing. I really hoped that, since so many people were convinced this was so much better, they new what the basis for that was.

    I'm really open to changing my mind about this, because I have my own doubts about MBTI, so the lack of anyone coming forward with real scientific literature about this is disappointing.
    A path is made by walking on it.

    -Zhuangzi



  7. #17
    Administrator highlander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/sp
    Socionics
    ILI Ni
    Posts
    24,812

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bechimo View Post
    • Yeah, he doesn't appear to understand MBTI.
    • I think he's an mistyped NF.
    • He's also selling his own theories so taking down MBTI would open the playing field.


    Adam Grant: Are you a giver or a taker? | TED Talk
    Interesting. I'm a taker. I do that. I'm also a giver. Those two aren't connected necessarily. There is no quid pro quo.

    So this guy is basically trying to sell his own crap. He also comes across like a weirdo.

    So yeah let's criticize other people's stuff so I can promote my own stuff. I think it shows a lack of integrity.

    Please provide feedback on my Nohari and Johari Window by clicking here: Nohari/Johari

    Tri-type 639
    Likes SearchingforPeace liked this post

  8. #18
    Administrator highlander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/sp
    Socionics
    ILI Ni
    Posts
    24,812

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Julius_Van_Der_Beak View Post
    Interestingly enough, I went on r/askpsychology, where I constantly see people diss MBTI and say things in favor of the Big 5, and I asked them if they could point me towards any scientific papers that established the validity of Big Five. I explained that open access didn't matter, because I had access to university subscriptions. I got a few upvotes, but very few people responded to me, and the only thing they said was that I should be able to find something if I look hard enough. Very disappointing. I really hoped that, since so many people were convinced this was so much better, they new what the basis for that was.

    I'm really open to changing my mind about this, because I have my own doubts about MBTI, so the lack of anyone coming forward with real scientific literature about this is disappointing.
    I think the whole thing about Big 5 being better is typical academia criticizing things without a real solution. MBTI works. There is a lot of useful information about it. Same thing for enneagram. Big 5 is an outlier - however popular it may be amongst academia. There is little of value that is published about it that I can actually use as a normal everyday person. I can use MBTI and Enneagram. There is a ton of literature that helps me to interpret things and evaluate meaning.

    Please provide feedback on my Nohari and Johari Window by clicking here: Nohari/Johari

    Tri-type 639
    Likes SearchingforPeace liked this post

  9. #19
    breaking out of my cocoon SearchingforPeace's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    MBTI
    ENFJ
    Enneagram
    9w8 sx/so
    Socionics
    EIE None
    Posts
    5,475

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by highlander View Post
    I think the whole thing about Big 5 being better is typical academia criticizing things without a real solution. MBTI works. There is a lot of useful information about it. Same thing for enneagram. Big 5 is an outlier - however popular it may be amongst academia. There is little of value that is published about it that I can actually use as a normal everyday person. I can use MBTI and Enneagram. There is a ton of literature that helps me to interpret things and evaluate meaning.
    Pretty much where I stand. MBTI (especially with JCF, but even without JCF) and enneagram work in the real world. They really help people understand themselves and others. As tools go, they are very practical and useful.

    The Big 5 seems like an academic attempt at relevancy, because the "professionals" didn't come up with those other two.

    The problems with MBTI and enneagram relate to self-awareness. Too many people have a misunderstanding of themselves, due to all the crap people go through during childhood, so they mistype themselves and need assistance to find their types correctly. People create patterns and rules for life and action well before their brains are developed enough to actually understand what is really happening.
    “Orthodoxy means not thinking--not needing to think. Orthodoxy is unconsciousness.”
    ― George Orwell, 1984

    “It is clear that thought is not free if the profession of certain opinions makes it impossible to earn a living. It is clear also that thought is not free if all the arguments on one side of a controversy are perpetually presented as attractively as possible, while the arguments on the other side can only be discovered by diligent search.”

    ― Bertrand Russell, Sceptical Essays
    Likes highlander liked this post

  10. #20
    Administrator highlander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/sp
    Socionics
    ILI Ni
    Posts
    24,812

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SearchingforPeace View Post
    Pretty much where I stand. MBTI (especially with JCF, but even without JCF) and enneagram work in the real world. They really help people understand themselves and others. As tools go, they are very practical and useful.

    The Big 5 seems like an academic attempt at relevancy, because the "professionals" didn't come up with those other two.

    The problems with MBTI and enneagram relate to self-awareness. Too many people have a misunderstanding of themselves, due to all the crap people go through during childhood, so they mistype themselves and need assistance to find their types correctly. People create patterns and rules for life and action well before their brains are developed enough to actually understand what is really happening.
    Hard to say more than I completely agree with you. I really think that this doesn't work for everyone There are many flaws. Still, I think it is a useful construct that provides data points to help in understanding people.

    Please provide feedback on my Nohari and Johari Window by clicking here: Nohari/Johari

    Tri-type 639
    Likes SearchingforPeace liked this post

Similar Threads

  1. Criticisms of MBTI
    By highlander in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 01-03-2013, 05:55 PM
  2. [MBTItm] Life After (Or In Lieu Of) MBTI (Sensing Types Move On After Determing Type)...
    By "?" in forum The SP Arthouse (ESFP, ISFP, ESTP, ISTP)
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 07-05-2008, 08:26 AM
  3. Criticisms of Type-Trait Theories
    By marm in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 02-10-2008, 04:46 AM
  4. Originators of MBTI and Temperaments
    By marm in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 01-27-2008, 02:34 PM
  5. Favorite "Help" Aspect of MBTI?
    By Usehername in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 09-19-2007, 11:18 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO