Mistyped TypeCentral Members

[The Ü™]

I knew it!!!!

 

[Jack Flak]

Assuming that you're correct about MBTT, then how do you type somebody at all? And how is it even a predictor of behavior, if time is only an analogy?

Did you know that all space and time is contained in one point, and one instant? But that's beside the point, really.

The easiest ways for me to type people are by

a. Temperament analysis--That is, someone's like others of a type.
b. Preference analysis--That is, determine each preference separately by analyzing their behavior.
c. Functional analysis (with my system)--That is, determine primary and support functions by analyzing behavior.
d. A combination of the above. Which is what I do, most of the time.

 

[Haphazard]

You do the same like every good physic student does. Try and Error, Try and Error, Try and Error, Try and Error...

Failure only means you're getting somewhere.

Did you know that all space and time is contained in one point, and one instant? But that's beside the point, really.

The easiest ways for me to type people are by

a. Temperament analysis--That is, someone's like others of a type.
b. Preference analysis--That is, determine each preference separately by analyzing their behavior.
c. Functional analysis (with my system)--That is, determine primary and support functions by analyzing behavior.
d. A combination of the above. Which is what I do, most of the time.

This is besides the point. The point is criteria. You said 'time,' but then you took it back. If there's no objective criteria, then I can't see how this isn't just a castrated version of MBTT.

 

[Jack Flak]

Failure only means you're getting somewhere.

LOL, I must remember that one.

This is besides the point. The point is criteria. You said 'time,' but then you took it back. If there's no objective criteria, then I can't see how this isn't just a castrated version of MBTT.

What? I didn't take it back. I'll say it again. IT WAS ALWAYS AN ABSTRACT REPRESENTATION. Do you really, really think I somehow thought that it was a realistic interpretation?

This is why I don't like explaining shit to people, for Christ's sake.

 

[G-Virus]

Woah, I feel like I just stumbled onto the MBTIc secret lair. Bad ass.

 

[Haphazard]

What? I didn't take it back. I'll say it again. IT WAS ALWAYS AN ABSTRACT REPRESENTATION. Do you really, really think I somehow thought that it was a realistic interpretation?

This is why I don't like explaining shit to people, for Christ's sake.

I mean concrete, objective criteria.

MBTT is the same -- everything is in the abstract. I don't see how yours is any better if it's... well, exactly the same.

 

[Jack Flak]

I mean concrete, objective criteria.

We don't have any. Ever wonder why SJs don't tend to care for personality typing?

MBTT is the same -- everything is in the abstract. I don't see how yours is any better if it's... well, exactly the same.

Of course it's all abstract, but everything was based on someone's perception. MBTT function order was based on the perceptions of a blasted INFP interpreting the work of who knows what, maybe an INTJ. And here I am, an INTP, telling you what I think. I obviously can't prove it's more correct because that's impossible. If you think it makes sense, use it, that's all.

 

[Haphazard]

Aww.

 

[Magic Poriferan]

I don't mind having something subjectively arbitray suddenly cast as the institutional standard. Hell, that's how the entire dictionary works. What always bothered me is that no one even give a cosistent, arbitrary method for not only measuring a person's type, but (this is important) quantifying it.

The closest thing that has ever come to doing that are tests. In fact, they precisely have done that. But of course a lot of other complaints will be raised about those.

 

[entropie]

Of course it's all abstract, but everything was based on someone's perception. MBTT function order was based on the perceptions of a blasted INFP interpreting the work of who knows what, maybe an INTJ. And here I am, an INTP, telling you what I think. I obviously can't prove it's more correct because that's impossible. If you think it makes sense, use it, that's all.

I yesterday talked to a girl accomplishing her doctor in psychology. I expected her to know everything about MBTT, but she vaguely knew it.

She even got further and said MBTT is BS, because it depends on the style of answering its questions. Like the test taker gets the results he wants.

I was completly baffled by this, coming from a doctor student of psychology. I was thinking, if she ever thought about the fact that all of live could be subjective and objectivity remains an illusion ?

Someone has to tell her, before she practices, otherwise I probably think, she will think there is never error in her judgement

 

[Jack Flak]

I don't mind having something subjectively arbitray suddenly cast as the institutional standard. Hell, that's how the entire dictionary works. What always bothered me is that no one even give a cosistent, arbitrary method for not only measuring a person's type, but (this is important) quantifying it.

Honestly, in all my years of looking at this crap, the closest thing to a consistent standard is socionics' interpersonal relations. You have to have known some people IRL, and have a good idea of their types, to use it, however. The more interaction you've had and analyzed, the better. Concentrate on Dual and Conflicting, because they're the two most noticeable matches. With a Dual partner, in friendship, work, or romance, it's almost impossible to have a serious problem with each other. With a conflicting partner, it's almost impossible to respect anything about each other.

 

[entropie]

Are we two duals Watson ?

 

[Haphazard]

I yesterday talked to a girl accomplishing her doctor in psychology. I expected her to know everything about MBTT, but she vaguely knew it.

She even got further and said MBTT is BS, because it depends on the style of answering its questions. Like the test taker gets the results he wants.

I was completly baffled by this, coming from a doctor student of psychology. I was thinking, if she ever thought about the fact that all of live could be subjective and objectivity remains an illusion ?

Someone has to tell her, before she practices, otherwise I probably think, she will think there is never error in her judgement

Well, see, what happened to psychologists, is I think around the 1960s, they decided that personality analysis was bull and instead started picking at the deep, ingrained things in people's minds by putting them through bizarre, cruel, and unusual psychology experiments -- with consent, of course. They decided this was more fun and they even keep doing this today.

Subjectivity is fine and dandy but if there's a standard, then it's just plain useless if it's only applied on whims.

 

[Jack Flak]

Are we two duals Watson ?

What was Holmes? Man, I haven't read any since I was like nine years old. Duals aren't uncommon in fiction, I would say. Have you read any of the Jack Aubrey books? I think he's ESFP and Maturin is INTP.

 

[Jack Flak]

Subjectivity is fine and dandy but if there's a standard, then it's just plain useless if it's only applied on whims.

Useless? I use type study all the time, to plan action around people's personalities. Whether to engage or avoid, and how to go about it.

 

[Ivy]

Are those the gay sailor books? I keed, I keed. My brother has bent my ear a number of times about the Master & Commander books.

 

[entropie]

Well, see, what happened to psychologists, is I think around the 1960s, they decided that personality analysis was bull and instead started picking at the deep, ingrained things in people's minds by putting them through bizarre, cruel, and unusual psychology experiments -- with consent, of course. They decided this was more fun and they even keep doing this today.

Subjectivity is fine and dandy but if there's a standard, then it's just plain useless if it's only applied on whims.

I agree and if you dont mind, I will use this to quote to people asking me why I didnt study psychology, if I am so intrested in those things

 

[Jack Flak]

Are those the gay sailor books? I keed, I keed. My brother has bent my ear a number of times about the Master & Commander books.

Yeah. The first one was awesome, but "Post Captain," man, I never finished it. The entire first THIRD of the book is high-falutin' talk and ballroom dancing.

 

[Haphazard]

Useless? I use type study all the time, to plan action around people's personalities. Whether to engage or avoid, and how to go about it.

Yes, but you're one person and may be somewhat internally consistent. I mean something big, like MBTI or government or something, that's spread among a lot of people.

 

[Jack Flak]

Yes, but you're one person and may be somewhat internally consistent. I mean something big, like MBTI or government or something, that's spread among a lot of people.

I know. It's not something which could or should be used by the average person, only the few who are keen on understanding the nature of it.

Believe me, if I were better at explaining things to the masses, I would write a big book about it, in order to attempt to quell what I see as misinformation and bad practice.