This is not a Typology Forum

[FemMecha]

The study of temperament and personality is overall interesting and useful. I was actually glad when the forum name was changed to Typology Central, because it creates a broader scope. My understanding is that each of the systems I've read about has its limitations, but that doesn't mean there is nothing to be gained. MBTI, Enneagram, or anything else can be a useful starting point to see how others have thought about temperament and ways to distill core attributes and organize them into a system of categorization. I do think there are some categories in these systems that do reflect fundamental aspects of human thought and behavior, but there is probably a great deal more time and investigation needed to have a consistent and valid system. Having a forum where a mix of these can be compared and questioned is the ideal format for looking into this topic.

 

[Glycerine]

The resounding lack of agreement about anything concerning typology sort of kills any chance of discussing it in reason.

Something like a psychological typology, any typology, requires some degree of common understanding and consensus, and that has essentially never existed on this forum.

I think I could sincerely say yes to all of the optons.

I agree. Plus, when people have really narrow views of which functions do what and what each type is or is not capable of, it gets a bit old.

 

[PeaceBaby]

I don't understand this.

If I tell you my age, nationality, gender, sexual orientation, income bracket, occuation etc., none of this will mean I am purely defiend by those things. they simply add a context ot ones understanding of a person.

If this were for example a forum about religion, it would make sense for one to list ones religious orientation as a a type. This wouldn't mean your whole life were reduced to that. If it were a forum about work, it would make sense to list your occupation. Again, this wouldn't mean your whole existence is reduced to that. Likewise any other "special interest".

Or add a context of misunderstanding.

Imagine I tell you I am a web developer (which is true). Thus, you think I must be good with computers, and thus proceed to ask me how to fix a hardware issue. Do you see the potential disconnect? (And this happens to me frequently IRL - the field of computer work is so large, and ordinary folks have little context to that, so they make these mistaken assumptions.)

And this happens here on the forum all the time when one interprets what is read through the lens of their type.

If I was INTJ and said "I am sad" it means something qualitatively different here than when an INFP says it.

Why is that?

I do hear your point. Your type does not define everything about YOU - knowing it (for me) may affect how I interact with you, to the end of increasing our mutual understanding. But on this forum, knowledge of type also becomes an exploitive tool in order to create conflict and diminish respect.

As I already said, I don't wish to be a guinea pig for ridiculous confirmation bias.

 

[tcda]

Or add a context of misunderstanding.

Imagine I tell you I am a web developer (which is true). Thus, you think I must be good with computers, and thus proceed to ask me how to fix a hardware issue. Do you see the potential disconnect? (And this happens to me frequently IRL - the field of computer work is so large, and ordinary folks have little context to that, so they make these mistaken assumptions.)

And this happens here on the forum all the time when one interprets what is read through the lens of their type.

But how will those misunderstandings be overcome but through practical experience? If that heppened, I would then learn that a computer programmer can't necessarilly fix hardware, and both me and the programmer would have benefitted.

As I already said, I don't wish to be a guinea pig for ridiculous confirmation bias

Ok, a question - If you were convinced that an experiment were useful and worked, would you agree to be part of it?

Lots of stereotypes come with INTP but by in many cases not conforming to them while listing my type as INTP I feel that in a miniscule way I potentially help to educate someone against them and encourage them to seek a better udnerstanding of MBTI and functions theory.

Now on a very large scale like this forum I think that does have an effect. It certainly helped me to develop my uderstanding.

So I don't mean to sound harsh against you, it's nothing personal, but I kind of think: Well if you want the benefit of being part of a completely voluntary conline community based on personality theory, you should also accept some responsibility in turn to the collective whole that comes with that with that, and allow yourself to be a bit of a "guinea pig".

 

[Little_Sticks]

The problem is not whether people agree or not or share the same damn beliefs or understanding of various degrees of psychology and typology.

NO

The problem is this

Assertion: I think you're a coward if you don't post a type.
Group 1: I think you're a coward if you do post a type because you need to be confined and restricted in a box. I am unique. I believe this leads to better understanding.
Group 2: Well I think you're a coward if you don't post a type because by posting a type it means I get to show how different I am from the general type and fight for what I believe. I am unique. I believe this leads to better understanding.
Group 3: What the fuck are you all talking about? There isn't enough information for me to decide anything upon. Provide more contextual details and information or shut the fuck up. I am unique. I believe this leads to better understanding.
All Other Groups: I don't know shit or I don't know what anyone is really talking about and I don't care, but I have cute little anecdotes, sayings, and quotes that give the impression that I'm above all this typology biz. I am unique. I believe this leads to better understanding.

Assertion: If you are honest with yourself, you should know your type.
Group 1: I disagree because I believe the test is dishonest. I am unique. I believe this leads to better understanding.
Group 2: I agree because I believe the test is honest. I am unique. I believe this leads to better understanding.
Group 3: What the fuck are you all talking about? There isn't enough information for me to decide anything upon. Provide more contextual details and information or shut the fuck up. I am unique. I believe this leads to better understanding.
All Other Groups: I don't know shit or I don't know what anyone is really talking about and I don't care, but I have cute little anecdotes, sayings, and quotes that give the impression that I'm above all this typology biz. I am unique. I believe this leads to better understanding.

The problem is this

WE'RE OUR OWN WORST ENEMY

 

[Reflection]

Assertion: If you are honest with yourself, you should know your type.
Group 1: I disagree because I believe the test is dishonest. I am unique. I believe this leads to better understanding.
Group 2: I agree because I believe the test is honest. I am unique. I believe this leads to better understanding.
Group 3: What the fuck are you all talking about? There isn't enough information for me to decide anything upon. Provide more contextual details and information or shut the fuck up. I am unique. I believe this leads to better understanding.
All Other Groups: I don't know shit or I don't know what anyone is really talking about and I don't care, but I have cute little anecdotes, sayings, and quotes that give the impression that I'm above all this typology biz. I am unique. I believe this leads to better understanding.

Is there no: "I know myself best, so I don't feel threatened if other people interpret me differently, because they'll never really know me?"

On a side note, as a new member, I'm just reading older topics and trying to get a sense for things.

 

[Mole]

Let the Guinea Pigs Beware.

Well if you want the benefit of being part of a completely voluntary conline community based on personality theory, you should also accept some responsibility in turn to the collective whole that comes with that with that, and allow yourself to be a bit of a "guinea pig".

The problem is that we are not based on personality theory, we are based on MBTI.

For instance, a group of Australian psychologists has recently published a book on personality theory. And although it is exhaustive, it contains no mention of MBTI. And this is because MBTI is not a personality theory.

So if MBTI is not a personality theory, what is it?

MBTI is a confidence trick like astrology. And MBTI is a powerful and popular American cult, not unlike Scientology.

So caveat emptor - let the guinea pigs beware.

 

[Mole]

The study of temperament and personality is overall interesting and useful. I was actually glad when the forum name was changed to Typology Central, because it creates a broader scope.

So am I. I'm glad too that the name was changed from MBTI Central to Typology Central.

However it is interesting to note that typology includes the typology of personality, but also includes the typology of music, the typology of literature, the typology of atomic particles, and the typology of galaxies. In fact 'typology' is a generic word that can be applied to many studies.

So we now have a very broad field in which to play. As indeed we are a very broad church. And we are fortunate to be well run and tolerant.

 

[Mole]

Little Boxes

Rather than see the 4 letters and thus cram what an individual says into that preconceived notion of the box, should one not read what someone says and use that info to EXPAND the very box itself?

I think, generally speaking, people reduce the boxes to seem much smaller than they actually are.

For, "We all live in boxes made of ticky-tacky and we all look just the same", click on -

YouTube - Malvina Reynolds - Little Boxes (Full Studio Version)

 

[entropie]

Typology is like a drug: it gives a kick for some time, but in the end you recognize it doesnt give the answers you were searching for all along.

Only the hippies then stay in Wonderland.

 

[Poki]

Typology is like a drug: it gives a kick for some time, but in the end you recognize it doesnt give the answers you were searching for all along.

Square pegs dont fit in round holes(as long as everything is normalized by width and height). *ponders* But a round peg does fit in a square hole

 

[entropie]

Square pegs dont fit in round holes(as long as everything is normalized by width and height). *ponders* But a round peg does fit in a square hole

Ya and imagine not everything was normalized, we couldnt even tell a peg from a hole

 

[Litvyak]

Typology is like a drug: it gives a kick for some time, but in the end you recognize it doesnt give the answers you were searching for all along.

Depends on the questions you've raised.
Your expectations were most propably too high from the beginning.

 

[tcda]

Typology is like a drug: it gives a kick for some time, but in the end you recognize it doesnt give the answers you were searching for all along.

Only the hippies then stay in Wonderland.

Depends what you were looking for from it.

I never thought it explained any "big questions", but I think a.) it works well enough in practice to be worth giving qualified credibility to and 2.)there are some thinkers in MBTI with a good method who could be reconciled and united with other scientific fields ("natural" and social, though the division is kind of arbitrary - what is Advanced Physics for example?) - though of course there is a long way to go and MBTI first needs to prove itself scientificially for that to be possible (which I believe could happen).

So just because it doesn't give all the answers, doesn't mean it should be discarded entirely as both a tool and as a perspective IMO.

 

[Poki]

Ya and imagine not everything were normalized, we couldnt even tell a peg from a hole

Lol

 

[entropie]

It doesnt really have to do with my expectations if a thing is working or not

 

[entropie]

The most classical example of why mbti is fail, is that it holds up values in persons that are maybe values in a certain cultural circle of people, which inhabitants are not intrested in soccer. But it completly misses out on other values those I am familiar to.

So if you start believing in it, you automatically start identifieing with a set of values which you are supposed to have by your local society. This tho can heavily hinder you in any kind of development of becoming an independent thinker.

Of course one can say: you mustnt believe in everything mbti says, but this kind of thought is rather egoistical. Cause maybe I am warded against bad ideas, other weaker souls tho, may be not. And this kind of thought is kinda daring, cause who is independendent enough to think of his own, while at the same time seeking a reflection about himself.

 

[entropie]

In my personal opinion the best mbti would be communication, in which you seek reflection, which is a thing everyone needs from the people surrounding you.

So the real fail isnt mbti, its human communication

 

[Mole]

MBTI first needs to prove itself scientifically

In seventy years not one double blind test has been done on MBTI.

This is because MBTI is not a scientific theory. At very best it is pseudo science - the kind of science you are having when you are not having any science.

No, MBTI is a confidence trick and a popular and powerful American cult.

 

[Poki]

The most classical example of why mbti is fail, is that it holds up values in persons that are maybe values in a certain cultural circle of people, which inhabitants are not intrested in soccer. But it completly misses out on other values those I am familiar to.

So if you start believing in it, you automatically start identifieing with a set of values which you are supposed to have by your local society. This tho can heavily hinder you in any kind of development of becoming an independent thinker.

Of course one can say: you mustnt believe in everything mbti says, but this kind of thought is rather egoistical. Cause maybe I am warded against bad ideas, other weaker souls tho, may be not.

Things become to defined and we begin identifying values vs non-values and bring in personal values of values.