Stop Making MBTI Larger than it is.

[Mole]

The proof is in the pudding.

Precisely.

 

[wolfy]

The real flaw is not with systems and symbols. The flaw is in people. People mistake systems and symbols for reality.

Type is the social medium of the forum.

 

[Mole]

"The Magic Pudding", by Norman Lindsay.

Norman Lindsay's best known children's book is, "The Magic Pudding". He wrote it in 1917, partly to settle an argument with his friend Bertram Stevens of, "The Bulletin and Art in Australia", who maintained that children liked to read about fairies, whereas Lindsay said they liked to read about food.

First published in 1918, it is still in print and has been translated into Japanese, German, French and Spanish as well as having been published in Britain and the United States. It is regarded as a classic of children's literature.

 

[Kalach]

That's what I said in my OP.

But I think people need to realize that, in reality, MBTI isn't as relevant and concrete as [we] infer here. It's a problem because we learn to make judgments from it that are unnecessary and sometimes wrong. It's like over using a tool, so much that it becomes over redundant, annoying, and faulty.

"We", Kemo Sabe?

BTW, what is the larger picture that is being missed?


(Please let it not be some NP vision that no one can really know anything and people are free to wander about in love and joy.)

 

[FemMecha]

Since it is now typology central, it might make sense to also explore other approaches to personality and temperament available. Of the ones I've encountered, MBTI was the most interesting, but there might be new ideas being generated. That would give further ways to develop cohesion here while reducing obsession?

I communicate in MBTI terms here, but am a skeptic.

 

[Yloh]

I personally think the OCEAN test is a better personality test.

Anyways, MBTI is a good way to get a general idea about yourself and others, but I agree it should be seen as a general test and not let if define you. There are some things the ENFJ profile said that is WAY off for me.

I'll admit, I've made topics that were really dumb, but I've notice there are other topics that are really great.

This forum is a great place for us to come and learn about ourselves and others. Sharing different life experiences, views, philosophies, believes, and knowlege is great for helping us understanding our lives better. If we didn't have this desire, then we wouldn't want to take any personality test in the first place. This forum gives us a reason to share these personal things with each other.

While I agree with you that MBTI is taken WAY too seriously, I also believe there is some truth to the MBTI. I mean there are E/Is, S/Ns, T/Fs, and J/Ps and everybody prefers one over the other.

I think this person did a good job criticizing the MBTI.

YouTube - Myers Briggs, Part 5A: Criticisms of the MBTI

YouTube - Myers Briggs, Part 5B: Criticisms of the MBTI

YouTube - Myers Briggs, Part 5C: Criticisms of the MBTI

 

[Tamske]

Agreed, many people define themselves by their type instead of letting their type define themselves.

Indeed. I'm more of an ENTP here than in real life.
On the other hand, it really helps me to understand the MBTI system. And that was my purpose when I joined.
It doesn't help me to understand myself. I had a quite good understanding of myself before the types and they won't change me.

The only drawback, for me, is that they are changing my novel characters. Main character is now being more ESTJ than ever. I had some problems there. I wrote a bit where she wasn't following tradition at all and I was like "this doesn't seem ESTJ to me - is this right?" And then it hit me. It was Main being herself. Under these circumstances she wouldn't act the ESTJ stereotype. I actually should stop wondering if it fits, just write the novel and maybe afterward typecast the characters to see whether they are different.

 

[01011010]

It's interesting to analyze and deconstruct everything. The problem is, when people can't see beyond the types. I agree that some people take this crap way too seriously.

 

[LEGERdeMAIN]

The religion comment was right on. The forum is bad, but it's even worse in chat. Certain members will type and retype others every other sentence...kind of like:

Oh, you sound more like a INTJ, not an INFJ....

thirty seconds later:

Yeah, that's actually very common with ISFJ's, maybe you're not an INTJ....

seriously, it keeps going and going and going and then I have to close vent so I don't become vomitious.

 

[Tamske]

I do the opposite... Before I knew of types I might say:
Main Character is like Husband in this, that and that aspect.
She's like me in that and that aspect. She's like Friend in that aspect.

Now I might say something like:
Main Character is mostly ESTJ, but she's more of a scientist trying to see/experiment how things work and she would rebel if authority doesn't follow common sense and...

I think this is a good way to use the MBTI...

I actually imagined Main and Secondary Characters learnt about MBTI in a psychology lesson. This was interesting.
Main: Nice, this doesn't seem as random as most of the psychology course. I might actually understand this. Let's try with this test.
Secondary: AWESOME!!! I'm ENFP, you seem to me INTJ...
Main: Shut up, I'm counting my score.
Secondary: See, you're introvert. You're shutting yourself of.
Main: Actually I got ESTJ.
Secondary: Extravert? Sensing?? Come on, you're good at maths!
Main: Can we stop this? We've still got to learn for the religion test tomorrow.

 

[wildcat]

It's being blown way out of proportion.

We're analyzing every single strain of information we can, drawing unreasonable assumptions, and just taking this thing way too far.

We fail to see the basic and general fundamentals at which Myers Briggs really revolves around. We've gone off on irrelevant tangents. We've lost touch of reality. Reality being that MBTI is not as serious as we presume it to be.

But take this aspect away from our forum, and we don't have a forum.

You cannot make an object of study larger than it is.
When you come closer the object only appears larger.
It is of the same size as before.

Experiment is of the subject.
It affects the experiment of the object.
Not the object.

If it did change the object, it would not be a study of the object.

 

[Ozz]

If we stop discussing beyond the type description, there wouldn't anything to discuss.

 

[wildcat]

If we stop discussing beyond the type description, there wouldn't anything to discuss.

Correct.

 

[Athenian200]

You cannot make an object of study larger than it is.
When you come closer the object only appears larger.
It is of the same size as before.

Experiment is of the subject.
It affects the experiment of the object.
Not the object.

If it did change the object, it would not be a study of the object.

+1

Very good. I thought something seemed off about his logic, but I couldn't put my finger on it.

 

[The Outsider]

But take this aspect away from our forum, and we don't have a forum.

There's still the community, the people. That's what I come here for. MBTI is just a nice thing to make fun of and to theorize about.

 

[Saslou]

If we stop discussing beyond the type description, there wouldn't anything to discuss.

Granted there is a common ground that brings us together, however a lot of what we speak about is from life experiences etc .. Our types are only a part of who we are.

 

[Synapse]

Is amused, recurring patterns crop up time and again. this is one of those fascinating explorations that tend to release a sense of nostalgia.

Remember nostalgia for life isn't an MBTI construct, it is a dimensional reality that transcends personality ideology. Its fun to think about, but stop taking it into bed and making out with it so much.

Did you want a tattoo with that.

 

[Nonsensical]

Let me put my opinion as concrete as I can.

Well, I think that people are taking the descriptions of Typology too specific and serious. I don't think you can really type by face (or elbow or bewbz ), I don't think there is a specific type that is best in bed, and I don't think that we need to pin down every characteristic, both concrete and abstract, with a Typology trait or Function. I think that all of these things are crossing the line to taking MBTI a little too far.

But on the other hand, I'm NOT saying don't do these things. They make the forum fun. Those are the sort of things that bring me back everyday- go look, I post a lot in those kinds of threads. All I'm saying is that I feel that we need to have the awareness of how and what we make MBTI to be. Our perspective of Typology probably changed after we became involved with this forum- I know mine did. I blow MBTI way out of proportion, and use it too much, think about too much, analyze it too much, and link it to too many things. But I'm trying to take a step back, look at the larger picture, and hopefully begin to realize that we can't rely so heavily on Myers Briggs.

Is that fair to say?

 

[LEGERdeMAIN]

You cannot make an object of study larger than it is.
When you come closer the object only appears larger.
It is of the same size as before.

Experiment is of the subject.
It affects the experiment of the object.
Not the object.

If it did change the object, it would not be a study of the object.

Physical bodies(objects) can change shape and size.

Conceptual objects cannot.

However, conceptual objects have no size, no shape, no structure to begin with and, therefore, we cannot apply phsyical attributes, such as shape, size or structure to conceptual objects, except in a purely representational way(ie; Time is linear, Personality is divided into 16 types, Earth is large.)

shove it. raaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaawr.

 

[Kalach]

Let me put my opinion as concrete as I can.

Well, I think that people are taking the descriptions of Typology too specific and serious. I don't think you can really type by face (or elbow or bewbz ), I don't think there is a specific type that is best in bed, and I don't think that we need to pin down every characteristic, both concrete and abstract, with a Typology trait or Function. I think that all of these things are crossing the line to taking MBTI a little too far.

But on the other hand, I'm NOT saying don't do these things. They make the forum fun. Those are the sort of things that bring me back everyday- go look, I post a lot in those kinds of threads. All I'm saying is that I feel that we need to have the awareness of how and what we make MBTI to be. Our perspective of Typology probably changed after we became involved with this forum- I know mine did. I blow MBTI way out of proportion, and use it too much, think about too much, analyze it too much, and link it to too many things. But I'm trying to take a step back, look at the larger picture, and hopefully begin to realize that we can't rely so heavily on Myers Briggs.

Is that fair to say?

There was some chance we could have seen boobs. See what you did?! There's people out there putting their shirts back on and turning off the webcams now. Only Halla posted his boobs before this consciousness raising thing you got here, but he was going to do that anyway. SEE WHAT YOU DID?!

We can only hope this subforum is as boring to most people as it seems to be. Maybe they didn't see your messages.