kangaroo2003
New member
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2015
- Messages
- 70
- Enneagram
- 3w4
Months ago, when I knew nothing about MBTI(couldn't explain what's the difference between Ne and Ni at all), I made a post to critique mbti. I did that, because I was so obsessed with this for a week, and I needed to complete my motivational letter. I needed a reason to quit, and somehow thought this would be a best shot. Also, I could see how people react to it, so why not?
What do you think, is that definitely Ti? +Don't take this critique seriously, I knew little about it.
...[Boring posts]...
Ow, another internet-thing, one "professional" posts that she disagrees, here we go a crowd agreeing on that after that. Also, you are another one who didn't get I'm not even trying to prove anything, have you read what I said, or you just went to the bottom of the thread and critiqued the title of this thread?
player1, it seems like you think I've said that "mbti is bs, test questions are random", no need to show your intelligence. But you said a few good points, that's a good thing.
player2, noticed that many disagree, so decided to say that too? Wise.
You don't get it people, do you?
My first post was more of a critique to the surface of mbti which is easily found on the internet. People do these tests, read descriptions and believe that. That might lead them to suffering from severe consequences because they are likely going to pretend being someone else, or believe that they should study a particular subject in a university, as they find that it's a perfect for their "type". If you have any idea what is mbti, you should agree on that, and that must be changed. Why? Most people know only the basics, so for most people it's actually rather harmful.
The second one was a short one, but it has the main point that it's based on what's most likely.
I agree that mbti is pretty consistent, but not as you think. Statistics is one of the thing which increases believability of it, most of them are a joke, made on the spot. Another thing, how can a person who's studying psychology say that's it's not accurate, while he's overwhelmed with a tons of information gained from reading books, articles? They read tons of information which looks very logical, but is not proven, so they automatically believe in that. Future psychologists, use your logic, use more of your thinking, instead of believing almost everything that makes 70%+ sense.
Back to most likely thing. About the half are 50/50, 60/40, 90/10 etc, cases.
Whatever how you answer to some question, it won't be like okay, it's definitely NE(90%+), not only because functions may have the same role, but that nobody really knows themselves that well, they might be wrong answering a question. If you take a professional tests, perhaps there is a something around 80% it will be correct, but the point is that we all are more or less different, we had different experiences, we have different goals, so different ennegreams, we have differently developed functions. We just simply choose what kind of behavior/thinking works best for us, genes also have an effect cuz you get them from those who have already developed their functions, chose what works best. That kinda explains why the theory that most of us have NE+TI, or NI+TE is logical, it's because if we sum up two functions descriptions together, we can understand that one is needed for another. The other two functions are more likely based just on what's most likely, what functions do, let's say, ne+ti, develop for assistance. But everyone deeply inside realizes that it's not perfect, so they start developing other functions, and if they find them useful, they'll become just as strong, as dominant.
What's type of a person with this functions order? Ne>se>ti>fe>si? You probably thought entp(based on what's most likely, again, it's everywhere.), but for real it's none of the 16, just a short example that there should be 8! "types", if be believe in functions theory.
Functions is something that is pretty accurate, but nearly everything else is a bullshit.
Mbti is fine only because the process lets you understand people much better, but using it in your real life is more likely to be harmful rather than helpful.
All in all, I would say mbti is 60-70% accurate, and 30-45% useful/helpful.
8! Different types? Perhaps it would break 80% after years or centuries of analyzing.
More critique, please.
What do you think, is that definitely Ti? +Don't take this critique seriously, I knew little about it.
...[Boring posts]...
Ow, another internet-thing, one "professional" posts that she disagrees, here we go a crowd agreeing on that after that. Also, you are another one who didn't get I'm not even trying to prove anything, have you read what I said, or you just went to the bottom of the thread and critiqued the title of this thread?
player1, it seems like you think I've said that "mbti is bs, test questions are random", no need to show your intelligence. But you said a few good points, that's a good thing.
player2, noticed that many disagree, so decided to say that too? Wise.
You don't get it people, do you?
My first post was more of a critique to the surface of mbti which is easily found on the internet. People do these tests, read descriptions and believe that. That might lead them to suffering from severe consequences because they are likely going to pretend being someone else, or believe that they should study a particular subject in a university, as they find that it's a perfect for their "type". If you have any idea what is mbti, you should agree on that, and that must be changed. Why? Most people know only the basics, so for most people it's actually rather harmful.
The second one was a short one, but it has the main point that it's based on what's most likely.
I agree that mbti is pretty consistent, but not as you think. Statistics is one of the thing which increases believability of it, most of them are a joke, made on the spot. Another thing, how can a person who's studying psychology say that's it's not accurate, while he's overwhelmed with a tons of information gained from reading books, articles? They read tons of information which looks very logical, but is not proven, so they automatically believe in that. Future psychologists, use your logic, use more of your thinking, instead of believing almost everything that makes 70%+ sense.
Back to most likely thing. About the half are 50/50, 60/40, 90/10 etc, cases.
Whatever how you answer to some question, it won't be like okay, it's definitely NE(90%+), not only because functions may have the same role, but that nobody really knows themselves that well, they might be wrong answering a question. If you take a professional tests, perhaps there is a something around 80% it will be correct, but the point is that we all are more or less different, we had different experiences, we have different goals, so different ennegreams, we have differently developed functions. We just simply choose what kind of behavior/thinking works best for us, genes also have an effect cuz you get them from those who have already developed their functions, chose what works best. That kinda explains why the theory that most of us have NE+TI, or NI+TE is logical, it's because if we sum up two functions descriptions together, we can understand that one is needed for another. The other two functions are more likely based just on what's most likely, what functions do, let's say, ne+ti, develop for assistance. But everyone deeply inside realizes that it's not perfect, so they start developing other functions, and if they find them useful, they'll become just as strong, as dominant.
What's type of a person with this functions order? Ne>se>ti>fe>si? You probably thought entp(based on what's most likely, again, it's everywhere.), but for real it's none of the 16, just a short example that there should be 8! "types", if be believe in functions theory.
Functions is something that is pretty accurate, but nearly everything else is a bullshit.
Mbti is fine only because the process lets you understand people much better, but using it in your real life is more likely to be harmful rather than helpful.
All in all, I would say mbti is 60-70% accurate, and 30-45% useful/helpful.
8! Different types? Perhaps it would break 80% after years or centuries of analyzing.
More critique, please.
