MBTI - Where Is The Proof?

[simulatedworld]

Do you talk like that in real life? Must be tough keeping it up all day.

BUT LOOK AT THE CUTE KITTY!!!

 

[Quinlan]

Ths is very nice. But since the Enlightenment we have known that we are all subject to self deception and illusion. That is why we do double blind experiments - so that we will avoid self deception and illusion.

And the problem is that MBTI plays on our self deception and illusion.

So MBTI is a popular confidence trick like astrology.

The very point of the test and the conceptual framework around it is to help show us and advertise our biases. When I say "I am ISFP" I'm really saying "I have a conscious bias towards ISFP".

I may have consciously deluded and deceived myself and therefore I actually unconsciously prefer ENTJ but MBTI doesn't claim to test our unconscious preferences.

 

[Kalach]

According to Wikipedia, the Enlightenment developed more or less simultaneously in Germany, France, Great Britain, the Netherlands, Italy, Spain, and Portugal.

That's damn suspicious right there.

 

[Mole]

Reasonable, peaceful and aristocratic

According to Wikipedia, the Enlightenment developed more or less simultaneously in Germany, France, Great Britain, the Netherlands, Italy, Spain, and Portugal.

That's damn suspicious right there.

Yes, The Enlightenment (1688-1788) was the Age of Reason.

And is most interesting from Australia's point of view. For one hundred years of The Enlightenment preceded the 1788 settlement of Australia.

And the Enlightenment was one hundred years of peace under the Aristocratic Ascendency.

And so Australia was imbued with all the values of Reason, Peace and Aristocracy.

These values have characterised us for 222 years and characterise us today.

So you can say our character, and you might say my character, is reasonable, peaceful and aristocratic.

 

[Mole]

MBTI is Pre-Enlightenment

According to Wikipedia, the Enlightenment developed more or less simultaneously in Germany, France, Great Britain, the Netherlands, Italy, Spain, and Portugal.

That's damn suspicious right there.

The problem is that MBTI took us back prior to The Enlightenment.

In other words, MBTI thinking is pre-Enlightenment thinking.

This is understandable for MBTI is a USA cult and the USA was founded pre-Enlightenment. And so the USA contains a very strong strand of pre-Enlightenment thinking.

Also Carl Jung himself was a pre-Enlightenment thinker whose book on which MBTI is based contains no empirical evidence nor is subject to reason.

And we only have to look at this site to see that MBTI is resolutely resistant to reason and evidence.

David Hume, a Scotsman of The Enlightenment, would have a field day with MBTI.

So when we use MBTI, we go back in time to a time of belief, to a time of superstition, where reason was regarded with suspicion.

 

[Qre:us]

We are pattern seeking animals. And we prefer any pattern to no pattern. And for this reason we are subject to self deception and illusion. And this is why we test patterns we perceive against evidence and reason.

And this is what we learnt in the Enlightenment - to test patterns we perceive against evidence and reason. For instance, this is how we discovered the Earth goes round the Sun, and that our perception that the Sun goes round the Earth is an illusion.

And when we test MBTI against evidence and reason we find MBTI is based on self deception and illusion.

Ah, yes, MBTI tells us we are exactly one thing because it captures a pattern rising out of our self-deceived preferences. This is counter to evidence and reason.

So, I agree, we must uphold evidence and reason.

I shall not fall victim to grouping according to pattern, but, seek to validate a claim using evidence and reason.

My first attempt:

Yes, The Enlightenment (1688-1788) was the Age of Reason.

And is most interesting from Australia's point of view. For The Enlightenment preceded the settlement of Australia in 1788.

And the Enlightenment was one hundred years of peace under the Aristocratic Ascendency.

And so Australia was imbued with all the values of Reason, Peace and Aristocracy.

These values have characterised us for 212 years and characterise us today.

So you can say our character, and you might say my character, is reasonable, peaceful and aristocratic.

Or.....I might not, you know, say that your character is reasonable, peaceful and aristrocratic, just because Australia as a whole has been characterized with values of Reason, Peace and Aristocracy.

I do not want to fall victim to ascribing a general pattern to an individual, barring the blatant evidence and reason that tells me this is a self-delusional stance.

So, Victor, I might not, and do not say such things about your character being reasonable, peaceful and aristocratic, just because you are Australian.

Afterall,

I would prefer you related to me as a person than a type.

 

[Mole]

Ah, yes, MBTI tells us we are exactly one thing because it captures a pattern rising out of our self-deceived preferences. This is counter to evidence and reason.

So, I agree, we must uphold evidence and reason.

I shall not fall victim to grouping according to pattern, but, seek to validate a claim using evidence and reason.

My first attempt:

Or.....I might not, you know, say that your character is reasonable, peaceful and aristrocratic, just because Australia as a whole has been characterized with values of Reason, Peace and Aristocracy.

I do not want to fall victim to ascribing a general pattern to an individual, barring the blatant evidence and reason that tells me this is a self-delusional stance.

So, Victor, I might, and do not say such things about your character, just because you are Australain.

Afterall,

Of course you may well be right Q.

For after 4,000 posts surely you are good judge of my character.

So perhaps I should follow your lead and say I aspire to the Australian values of reason, peace and aristocracy.

And leave it to you to judge how well I embody them.

 

[Kalach]

Yes, The Enlightenment (1688-1788) was the Age of Reason.

Call an Age of Reason a spade, a European cult is what it was. Freemasons, every last one of them.

And is most interesting from Australia's point of view. For one hundred years of The Enlightenment preceded the 1788 settlement of Australia.

And the Enlightenment was one hundred years of peace under the Aristocratic Ascendency.

And so Australia was imbued with all the values of Reason, Peace and Aristocracy.

Man, nothing will ever be sacred again.

 

[Mole]

Man, nothing will ever be sacred again.

And that was the point of The Enlightenment.

 

[Qre:us]

And that was the point of The Enlightenment.

And, so died the mystic as it killed enlightenment.

 

[Mole]

And, so died the mystic as it killed enlightenment.

And of course there is mysticism based on belief, and mysticism based on reason. And surprisingly they are not so dissimilar.

 

[Qre:us]

And of course there is mysticism based on belief, and mysticism based on reason. And surprisingly they are not so dissimilar.

MBTI? Religion? Religion of MBTI?

 

[LEGERdeMAIN]

MBTI : Clavicula Salomonis

 

[Mole]

Do you [Wildcat] talk like that in real life? Must be tough keeping it up all day.

Wildcat has discovered his own voice.

And his voice is distinctive and lucid and recognised by all as Wildcat's.

So I am surprised you would snipe at such an achievement. I would have thought you would like to emulate it.

 

[VagrantFarce]

Wildcat has discovered his own voice.

And his voice is distinctive and lucid and recognised by all as Wildcat's.

So I am surprised you would snipe at such an achievement. I would have thought you would like to emulate it.

careful, your fi is leaking

 

[Prototype]

I hear time after time that MBTI is only a set of logical groupings, it's not scientifically proven, you can't use it to dogmatically, etc. I then hear you need to consider the nuances of how the functions may be ordered, how strong they are etc.

My question is this - and I speak from the standpoint with no experience in research - why can't it be proven? At least in some form, fashion, or respect. Has nobody ever tried? Are there difficulties in running surveys or experiments to determine accuracy of the profiles? Do the studies show flaws and that it doesn't work (that we don't hear about)? There seems to be a large body of information out there, but always "no proof". Is there anything in the field of psychology that can be proven?

If there is no proof that it works, and people don't believe in it, then why are we all here?

Curious about psychological profilers?... >>>Dr_Haight@yahoo.com<<<... Don't forget to ask which agency he is doing the profiling for!

 

[Mole]

If there is no proof that it works, and people don't believe in it, then why are we all here?

It can't be proven that Zeus and Poseidon exist, anymore than fairies can be proven to exist, and even a teapot orbiting the Sun lacks proof.

So you can see it is not prudent to believe anything without proof or evidence.

And MBTI was based on the book, "Personality Types". And even the author of this book says that it is not based on evidence.

Therefore it is not prudent to believe in or practise MBTI.

Alchemy is not based on evidence and astrology is not based on evidence, just as MBTI is not based on evidence.

However we do have freedom of religion so we are free to believe anything we like.

And we are free to believe anything without evidence. So we might choose to believe in Zeus or Poseidon, fairies, the orbiting teapot, alchemy, astrology or even MBTI - bless our cotton white socks.

 

[VagrantFarce]

victor, do you take pride in taking responsibility and being in charge?

 

[Metamorphosis]

I hear time after time that MBTI is only a set of logical groupings, it's not scientifically proven, you can't use it to dogmatically, etc. I then hear you need to consider the nuances of how the functions may be ordered, how strong they are etc.

My question is this - and I speak from the standpoint with no experience in research - why can't it be proven? At least in some form, fashion, or respect. Has nobody ever tried? Are there difficulties in running surveys or experiments to determine accuracy of the profiles? Do the studies show flaws and that it doesn't work (that we don't hear about)? There seems to be a large body of information out there, but always "no proof". Is there anything in the field of psychology that can be proven?

If there is no proof that it works, and people don't believe in it, then why are we all here?

Psychologists are the witch doctors of science. They know what makes sense and what doesn't and not why.

 

[Kalach]

It can't be proven that Zeus and Poseidon exist, anymore than fairies can be proven to exist, and even a teapot orbiting the Sun lacks proof.

So you can see it is not prudent to believe anything without proof or evidence.

Proof? You can't handle the proof.

Wouldn't it be a total kick in the nuts if it turned out the believers believed for a reason.

And yet, all believers do have some reason for believing.

And you're willing to assert all available reasons to be corrupt?

Apparently yes. In which case, for shame! Whatever it is your offering as a positive alternative does not need to prove itself by denying all else.


Unless you're in the business of refusing to identify with descriptions. Which is to say, glorifying the mystique of mystery and the value of unknowing.

So, what's the positive part of that again?