• 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.

What type is House?

What type is House?

  • INTP

    Votes: 72 18.0%
  • INTJ

    Votes: 120 30.0%
  • INFP

    Votes: 2 0.5%
  • INFJ

    Votes: 2 0.5%
  • ISTP

    Votes: 4 1.0%
  • ISTJ

    Votes: 4 1.0%
  • ISFP

    Votes: 2 0.5%
  • ISFJ

    Votes: 4 1.0%
  • ESFJ

    Votes: 6 1.5%
  • ESFP

    Votes: 5 1.3%
  • ESTJ

    Votes: 3 0.8%
  • ESTP

    Votes: 1 0.3%
  • ENFJ

    Votes: 1 0.3%
  • ENFP

    Votes: 1 0.3%
  • ENTJ

    Votes: 25 6.3%
  • ENTP

    Votes: 148 37.0%

  • Total voters
    400

Nonpareil

New member
Joined
Jul 20, 2007
Messages
268
MBTI Type
INTJ
A peas offering? Oh... peace... never heard of it, but I'll try anything once.

It's always fun to try new things....it keep things exciting!

Plus, that's the best offer I can offer you right now because I still can't see it your way. But then again, not many people can change my mind on things - I think that's an INTJ trait.
 

ptgatsby

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
4,476
MBTI Type
ISTP
No no, see, the four letters, as pt has stated, are basically just a shortcut to the functions. It's easier to write, ENTP, than to write Ne Ti Fe Si Ni Te Fi Se.

If you're not using all the rules of MBTI, then it's not really MBTI. It might be accurate, but it's not MBTI, it's something else.

Eh, I wouldn't say shortcut - it simply states the instrument results (hence why the E and P are included in "type"). Presuming a functional view on top of that would make MBTI the long way around. MBTI is an instrument (a factor analysis, reliability tested, validated instrument - the attacks on MBTI are all based on the functional theories) that is suppose to determine type by answering preference questions. MBTI is literally the validated approach to determing one's Jungian functions.
 

redacted

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 28, 2007
Messages
4,223
Eh, I wouldn't say shortcut - it simply states the instrument results (hence why the E and P are included in "type"). Presuming a functional view on top of that would make MBTI the long way around. MBTI is an instrument (a factor analysis, reliability tested, validated instrument - the attacks on MBTI are all based on the functional theories) that is suppose to determine type by answering preference questions. MBTI is literally the validated approach to determing one's Jungian functions.

yeah but mbti doesn't include differences between
Ni and Ne
Si and Se
Ti and Te
Fi and Fe

"MBTI is literally the validated approach to determing one's Jungian functions."
where do you get this from?
 

Nocapszy

no clinkz 'til brooklyn
Joined
Jun 29, 2007
Messages
4,517
MBTI Type
ENTP
Eh, I wouldn't say shortcut - it simply states the instrument results (hence why the E and P are included in "type"). Presuming a functional view on top of that would make MBTI the long way around.
I meant that it's faster to write ENTP than to write all 8 functions in the order an ENTP uses them.

If you're familiar with programming, I compare MBTI types to a bitwise function, sort of vaguely.

MBTI is an instrument (a factor analysis, reliability tested, validated instrument - the attacks on MBTI are all based on the functional theories) that is suppose to determine type by answering preference questions. MBTI is literally the validated approach to determing one's Jungian functions.

Well it really depends on which test you're taking. I've never taken the 'real' one. Most online tests are bullshit, but claim to be just as reliable.

If you're going to analyze yourself, then a test is probably the best place to start, or if you need to type people en masse (in the case of an employer) then the test is easier than meeting each person and assessing their personality, but in the end, since one dictates the other, and function is more specific and interchangeable than type (even on a daily basis) I favor the functions.

Also, when the test CAN'T be administered (in the case of house) we have nothing scientific to go on than the functions. Popular experience might help, but it can really only be a stepping stone.
 

Nocapszy

no clinkz 'til brooklyn
Joined
Jun 29, 2007
Messages
4,517
MBTI Type
ENTP
yeah but mbti doesn't include differences between
Ni and Ne
Si and Se
Ti and Te
Fi and Fe

"MBTI is literally the validated approach to determing one's Jungian functions."
where do you get this from?

Right, exactly. In the case of an NFJ (it's the easiest and most likely misconstruction) one might score as highly intuitive on the test, but very low on the J section, because the questions usually are about having a clean desk or being late to appointments.

Ni working with Fe (the NFJ functions) most definitely do not drive one to clean up their desk without being told, or to be on time for appointments, unless it's for a date or to meet a friend. They're pretty reliable in that shit.

So the NFJ, might score as an NFP, which would imply Ne and Fi, even though it's incorrect measurement.

What they ought to do, is describe the functions, but put them in context, or ask type specific questions. It would be more reliable that way.

You can talk all you want about its 'approved legitimacy' or reliability or whatever. In my experience, the tests don't hold much water. Seriously... it marked me as a damn ISTP. I don't know if I've ever Se'd. I probably have.
 

ptgatsby

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
4,476
MBTI Type
ISTP
Well it really depends on which test you're taking. I've never taken the 'real' one. Most online tests are bullshit, but claim to be just as reliable.

For sure, the online ones are a joke... reliable needs to be a rather specific test which they certainly haven't done.

Also, when the test CAN'T be administered (in the case of house) we have nothing scientific to go on than the functions. Popular experience might help, but it can really only be a stepping stone.

Well, I would say quite the opposite - you can take the test "on house's behalf", basing it on behaviour... but you can't assume functions in a person that doesn't exist... but in respect to scientific measurements - functions are the only part of the process that can't be measured scientifically. Well, up until we start picking apart brains to validate types (or doing scans similar to the ones done for Risk/T/Agreeableness, Extroversion and neuroticism). You can validate the typing process scientifically, however, which is what MBTI is, at its core.
 

redacted

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 28, 2007
Messages
4,223
For sure, the online ones are a joke... reliable needs to be a rather specific test which they certainly haven't done.



Well, I would say quite the opposite - you can take the test "on house's behalf", basing it on behaviour... but you can't assume functions in a person that doesn't exist... but in respect to scientific measurements - functions are the only part of the process that can't be measured scientifically. Well, up until we start picking apart brains to validate types (or doing scans similar to the ones done for Risk/T/Agreeableness, Extroversion and neuroticism). You can validate the typing process scientifically, however, which is what MBTI is, at its core.

if you took the test as you think house would answer the questions, you'd probably get INTJ. but he uses Ne/Ti as a dominant function pair (he always writes on blackboards/bounces ideas off people, etc.

this is why the mbti test aren't very accurate...they can't see the difference between extroverted and introverted functions.
 

redacted

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 28, 2007
Messages
4,223
Ni working with Fe (the NFJ functions) most definitely do not drive one to clean up their desk without being told, or to be on time for appointments, unless it's for a date or to meet a friend. They're pretty reliable in that shit.

pta, this is why i mistyped myself until i learned about how the functions actually work. i always test as P.
 

Nocapszy

no clinkz 'til brooklyn
Joined
Jun 29, 2007
Messages
4,517
MBTI Type
ENTP
For sure, the online ones are a joke... reliable needs to be a rather specific test which they certainly haven't done.



Well, I would say quite the opposite - you can take the test "on house's behalf", basing it on behaviour... but you can't assume functions in a person that doesn't exist... but in respect to scientific measurements - functions are the only part of the process that can't be measured scientifically. Well, up until we start picking apart brains to validate types (or doing scans similar to the ones done for Risk/T/Agreeableness, Extroversion and neuroticism). You can validate the typing process scientifically, however, which is what MBTI is, at its core.

I really don't think you can. Those dichotomies mean different things for every single type. You can get close, but still screw it up even if only by a hair. Like I've said, if you know what to look for in identifying the functions, you can't go wrong. Unless you're going for a holistic analysis, the type code is at best questionable, even if it gets it right 90% of the time.
 

ptgatsby

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
4,476
MBTI Type
ISTP
where do you get this from?

*scratches head*

That's what it is. Briggs read about Jungian views, talked to him and wanted to create a test for it. Jung said "that's not how I work", and so Briggs created a inventory for it. They tested, worked on it, etc... Eventually it drew upon the scientific method and they created step II - factor analysis, sub traits, reliability studies.

The instrument itself was designed to find a way to type individuals. The progress of the instrument has been from Jungs approach to a scientific approach.

(Maybe the word "validated" is throwing up the wrong message here. When I say valid, I'm using the clinical definition - that it actually reflects something meaningful - functions if you wish, but behaviour or underlying facets of personality if not. Of course, there are those that argue about the validity of a lot of instruments, and I would be among them, but as far as it goes, MBTI isn't a lightweight in this area.)
 

ptgatsby

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
4,476
MBTI Type
ISTP
this is why the mbti test aren't very accurate...they can't see the difference between extroverted and introverted functions.

... I don't understand. MBTI claims they do. Why do you say they do not?
 

redacted

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 28, 2007
Messages
4,223
I really don't think you can. Those dichotomies mean different things for every single type. You can get close, but still screw it up even if only by a hair. Like I've said, if you know what to look for in identifying the functions, you can't go wrong. Unless you're going for a holistic analysis, the type code is at best questionable, even if it gets it right 90% of the time.

yeah. although i honestly don't think the tests get it right even 50% of the time.

i probably mistyped most people when all i knew about was mbti. the functions explain so much more.
 

ptgatsby

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
4,476
MBTI Type
ISTP
I really don't think you can. Those dichotomies mean different things for every single type. You can get close, but still screw it up even if only by a hair. Like I've said, if you know what to look for in identifying the functions, you can't go wrong. Unless you're going for a holistic analysis, the type code is at best questionable, even if it gets it right 90% of the time.

See, you can claim that you can type people perfect using functions... but that is what MBTI does. All you are saying is "I do it better than a validated instrument", to which I say - no, you really don't.
 

Nocapszy

no clinkz 'til brooklyn
Joined
Jun 29, 2007
Messages
4,517
MBTI Type
ENTP
*scratches head*

That's what it is. Briggs read about Jungian views, talked to him and wanted to create a test for it. Jung said "that's not how I work", and so Briggs created a inventory for it. They tested, worked on it, etc... Eventually it drew upon the scientific method and they created step II - factor analysis, sub traits, reliability studies.

The instrument itself was designed to find a way to type individuals. The progress of the instrument has been from Jungs approach to a scientific approach.

(Maybe the word "validated" is throwing up the wrong message here. When I say valid, I'm using the clinical definition - that it actually reflects something meaningful - functions if you wish, but behaviour or underlying facets of personality if not. Of course, there are those that argue about the validity of a lot of instruments, and I would be among them, but as far as it goes, MBTI isn't a lightweight in this area.)

I see your position now. Well, I suppose I saw it before, but just disagreed. It makes a little more sense now that you say you use discretion in WHICH test works.

I still say they should ask type specific questions instead of going by the dichotomies.
 

redacted

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 28, 2007
Messages
4,223
... I don't understand. MBTI claims they do. Why do you say they do not?

okay let me think of an example question:

you adhere to social norms while interacting with people:
1) most of the time
2) not really

an mbti test would score you as an F if you answered 1.

but Fi does not care about social norms, only Fe does.

so an INFP or something would say 2 and get scored as a T
 

Nocapszy

no clinkz 'til brooklyn
Joined
Jun 29, 2007
Messages
4,517
MBTI Type
ENTP
See, you can claim that you can type people perfect using functions... but that is what MBTI does. All you are saying is "I do it better than a validated instrument", to which I say - no, you really don't.

Er... did I say that I personally can?

I can answer that for you. No I didn't. I said that if SOMEONE knows what to look for in behavior, then they can. I don't care if it's a validated instrument. Whoever validated it went by statistics I presume, and possibly the most important sentence ever uttered in the name of science is "CORRELATION IS NOT CAUSATION."

Just because it gets it right a lot of the time, doesn't mean that a person can't do better.
 

redacted

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 28, 2007
Messages
4,223
the only way to make a good test is to test for each function separately in the first round, and then use those results to ask more complex questions about function interactions
 

Nocapszy

no clinkz 'til brooklyn
Joined
Jun 29, 2007
Messages
4,517
MBTI Type
ENTP
okay let me think of an example question:

you adhere to social norms while interacting with people:
1) most of the time
2) not really

an mbti test would score you as an F if you answered 1.

but Fi does not care about social norms, only Fe does.

so an INFP or something would say 2 and get scored as a T

Perhaps not the best possible example, but it serves to illustrate the point.

He's right.
 

redacted

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 28, 2007
Messages
4,223
Perhaps not the best possible example, but it serves to illustrate the point.

He's right.

heh yeah not an amazing example but i was under time pressure. i hate it when i spend a couple of minutes on a reply and the conversation has already moved on :)
 

INTJMom

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 28, 2007
Messages
5,413
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w4
You know what I think?
I think the writer of the script comes here and gets ideas on how he can mess with our heads. :)
 
Top