# Thread: MBTI - Where Is The Proof?

1. AN important thing about the descriptors of type... is that there will just be a skewed tendancy- it will not be definative, because there is a RANGE of tastes

Hope this makes some sense to you...

Either way think about a brickie... he builds a wall... you don't need to know anything about brick laying to establish if the wall there....

You need to identify critera and meaure the wall to see if it constitues a wall....

2. Originally Posted by VagrantFarce
Well yes, isn't that what the thread is about? "Can this be proven empirically?"
The only way to prove anything that is applicable to the external world is through empiricism. I can sit here and prove to you that 1+1 is 2, but that's only because I've made up that labelling system for 1, +, and 2. I can't use my a priori logical proof for 1+1= 2 for anything substantial until I see with my own eyes that a bead and another bead combine to make bead bead.

We can go about tweaking the MBTI questionnaires and classifications all we want so that paper descriptions of behaviors match up with our categories (a kind of "proof", if you will), but we can't really prove the accuracy of MBTI until we see its backing in the physical world (via studying brain chemistry yadda yadda yadda).

3. MBTI is a descriptor of character, not of their physiology doh

4. Originally Posted by teslashock
The only way to prove anything that is applicable to the external world is through empiricism. I can sit here and prove to you that 1+1 is 2, but that's only because I've made up that labelling system for 1, +, and 2. I can't use my a priori logical proof for 1+1= 2 for anything substantial until I see with my own eyes that a bead and another bead combine to make bead bead.

We can go about tweaking the MBTI questionnaires and classifications all we want so that paper descriptions of behaviors match up with our categories (a kind of "proof", if you will), but we can't really prove the accuracy of MBTI until we see its backing in the physical world (via studying brain chemistry yadda yadda yadda).
...yes, this is a Te stance. What exactly are we disagreeing about?

5. Originally Posted by teslashock
Motion to evict any ENTP club members who are interested in astrology and cast them into the ENFP club.
Oh no you di'int.

6. MBTI has extremely high test-retest consistency... its problem lies in construct validity. How do we know that what we're measuring actually exists or are we merely assigning labels for something else?

Kind of like how we assign names to color... when everything just lies on a radiation spectrum.

MBTI is used in counseling psychology (because people find the concepts useful because people like categorizing things) and not in other psychology (because MBTI is not valid and there already exist a better lexicon-based system, namely FFM).

7. As a "noob" I'm interested in this thread, as it is brings to the surface a question I have about MBTI.

I frequently wonder how granular people think they are going to be able to be when "predicting" how a person thinks/acts based on their type. I see many gross generalizations about specific types in here and that concerns me that some stereotypical behaviors are thought to be present in all people of a certain type, when it is really meant more to indicate a natural tendency.

Life experience still has to play a huge role in a personality. For example, my father was a job-hopper, and the problem that created in our lives influenced me to be very stationary in my work, even past what might normally be comfortable for me. this might lead a person to think this "stability "trait represents a specific type, when it wasn't the natural tendancy at all, but rather an experience that developed the trait.

My concern is that some people might think that this typology gives them the ability to judge a book by it's "cover". The science behind what I have read so far seems solid regarding determining a "type". The application of stereotypes seem to detract from BMTI's value, it seems.

8. Originally Posted by nightning
Kind of like how we assign names to color... when everything just lies on a radiation spectrum.

That analogy makes me giddy with joy.

9. Originally Posted by nightning
MBTI has extremely high test-retest consistency... its problem lies in construct validity. How do we know that what we're measuring actually exists or are we merely assigning labels for something else?

Kind of like how we assign names to color... when everything just lies on a radiation spectrum.

MBTI is used in counseling psychology (because people find the concepts useful because people like categorizing things) and not in other psychology (because MBTI is not valid and there already exist a better lexicon-based system, namely FFM).
++ from me...

MBTI is a descriptor system with limits, like anything else.... But then it's not claiming to me much more than just that... for what its worth it just calls the colour the same most of the time, which means it does work at consitantly naming, it can't paint pictures

AND for what it's worth, there are loads of ways to test it's reliability and consistancy, I just suggested on possible approach..... you put 10 researchers into a room and you will get 10 different wway to do it with different strengths and weakenesses in the approaches... but then all research is flawed

10. Originally Posted by teslashock
The only way to prove anything that is applicable to the external world is through empiricism. I can sit here and prove to you that 1+1 is 2, but that's only because I've made up that labelling system for 1, +, and 2. I can't use my a priori logical proof for 1+1= 2 for anything substantial until I see with my own eyes that a bead and another bead combine to make bead bead.
Actually, all of mathematics is based on the injunction, "Make a distinction".

Even the natural numbers are based on the same injunction.

And how lucky you are that you can read all about it in a lovely book by G. Spencer Brown called, "The Laws of Form".

#### 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