Kalach
Filthy Apes!
- Joined
- Dec 3, 2008
- Messages
- 4,310
- MBTI Type
- INTJ
And this is fine, as long as people are aware that the predictions you take from a biased model will also be biased.
It works as long as you see the predictions that can be drawn from the Mbti model as statistically significant suggestions towards behavioral preferences rather than relying on it to tell you exactly how an individual will act.
Meh. I would prefer to go stronger than that. Statistical significance doesn't allow one to say entities exist. And if you can't say the functions exist, then you can say people could change into different types, which is to say, vary their statistical correlated behaviours enough to alter their statistically correlated identity.
So I'm working like this: extraverted thinking is a relatively shallow function, meaning along with occasionally proving stuff, it tends from time to time to just allow that something is true and then go from there, but it only gets away with that because there's some other function backing up the allowance--and in my case that would be introverted intuition which does a lot more work on guessing what is possible and what isn't and comes closer to "truth" in it's own way--and that makes me feel good because it feels like I'm on the right track to dealing with the world, especially if I can walk around and see things actually play out like that.
Great stuff, except that introverted intuition is itself probably unfalsifiable. It can be truthified but seeing stuff come true, but, well, it's not detailed conceptual analysis, that's fer sure.
Extraverted thinking is the scourge here. You see a lot of stuff about Fe being the devil, but just look at the way extraverted thinking dictates realities too.