What attracted you to MBTI?

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

I know a lot of us old timers don't discuss MBTI too much anymore, but I thought it might be an interesting topic to discuss.

For me, I was intrigued to learn about the type of INTPs because it suggested there were others like me. I didn't think there were any other people who were logical and nerdy and yet simultaneously a disorganized mess. I found that exciting at the time.

What initially appealed to you about MBTI?

 

[Coriolis]

Part of the appeal for me was that MBTI, like enneagram and some other systems, provides a systematic framework in which to discuss something that otherwise can appear very nebulous and shifting. As this should imply, it is not so much the final outcome that is important - what type you find as the best fit - but rather the introspection, analysis, and improved self-knowledge gained along the way.

 

[Kingu Kurimuzon]

I think my autistic brain craves to make order and sense of the world. Systems like MBTI made it seem easier to put people into classifications and make sense of social dynamics.

These days I'm not convinced MBTI is a great system and I think that type is a lot more fluid and malleable, and also influenced by a many factors including environmental, trauma, etc

I'm also pretty happy it helped me find my type, finally. INSTFJP lol

 

[SensEye]

It was similar for me, after reading an MBTI book more or less at random (Please Understand Me II - Keirsey) I thought the book made good sense it that it paralleled my experience with other people. It gave me a bit more to go on than the usual bumpf about Type A vs Type B personalities.

Then finding other INTPs via online forums, it became clear to me that there is a small segment of society out there who have similar ways of looking at things as me. That was very refreshing compared to interactions with real life people whose irrational ways of thinking often leave me shaking my head.

 

[Totenkindly]

I felt very much an outlier in my community and had only ever met a few people who really I felt a kinship to in terms of thought and approach. I tended to also feel like something might be wrong with me and didn't feel any support (just criticism) from the people around me for being different from them (especially being immersed in religion-world). Was there something wrong with me? But I couldn't successfully be them no matter how much they wanted me to be.

It was a real comfort, regardless of the total accuracy of MBTI, to realize there were actual patterns out there and different categories of people, and that is okay, and I wasn't just an outside but had my valid place as a person and could rest easy in that. It made things make more sense to me.

At the time, I was really immersed in it and tended to focus on it, due mainly to the world it had opened to me. Now I'm more laid back and I just feel like I am who I am, and I don't need to fit into a category or align with others and I'm still okay, there is nothing wrong with me -- but MBTI is like the first thing that gave me that confidence that I was valid and not an aberration of some kind and I could just be myself.

 

[Polaris]

For me, nothing very special. I just happened across an online article about how the MBTI could serve as a useful tool in the development of fictional characters. I was intrigued, so I decided to learn about the system and eventually wound up participating in forums dedicated to the subject. Do I actually use it for writing? No--I usually only have a vague idea of what a particular character's MBTI type happens to be. I use a different, more simple and more effective technique for inventing character personalities. The MBTI is purely a (very) light hobby of mine. I just enjoy having a special label for myself and others.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

I'm wondering if there's a way we could have more discussions about personality differences here. It would probably be best to encourage a less rigid approach, while showing more of a willingness to discuss the topic than someone who is constantly slapping that stupid "not type related" emoji on everything. Some of the differences could be discussed through MBTI, and some through other frameworks or even just personal understandings.

 

[Haight]

A Carl Jung book that I read for a Psychology course.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

A Carl Jung book that I read for a Psychology course.

Which one? I think I read Man and His Symbols, although that didn't really touch on type. That was more about Anima/Animus, the Shadow, and the Self; things like that.

 

[Coriolis]

I'm wondering if there's a way we could have more discussions about personality differences here. It would probably be best to encourage a less rigid approach, while showing more of a willingness to discuss the topic than someone who is constantly slapping that stupid "not type related" emoji on everything. Some of the differences could be discussed through MBTI, and some through other frameworks or even just personal understandings.

That has always been an important part of the purpose here - using MBTI and other typing systems to help understand and appreciate our differences. Much as that "not type related" sticker is overused, many things really are not type-related. Related to this is the observation that basing someone's type on observed behavior is risky, since every typing system goes deeper than that in analyzing how we operate. Any type can exhibit any behavior. It is in the how's and why's that we see the differences that point to type. I would be happy to see more of that sort of discussion.

 

[KitchenFly]

I was invited to do the test by a human resources officer in a workplace a hospital I was working at for some time. I was open to the idea because I had studied the enneagram and new the nine energies and eighteen subtypes well. I knew there was something missing and I was curious it this MBTI was the missing peace I was looking for. Nature had served me once again because it turned out it was. I took the test and a few days the tester came rushing back to me to tell me the resalts and wanting to know what it was like in there she was asking. I had scored 3/4 N 1/4 S 49% T 51% F; I said its ok.

I quickly took to reading MBTI material and correlated/ matched the sixteen MBTI typologies with sixteen of the eighteen enneagram subtypes and realised that the 5w6 and 1w9 where not accounted for they were missing.

It made me laugh that then drawing a line between Point:5 and halfway between Point:9 and Point:1 it looked like the angle of the earth's Magnetic Pole. The ambidextrous T&F & S&N became a curiosity around that time.

Just for fun I will mention one evening at a seasonal work party I sore Malinda Magar; walk into the large venue I liked her and found her attractive. She was about twenty meters from where I was standing, I wanted to connect with her, and I was feeling playful and large in energy, so I went receptive as I focused on her being and touched her on the shoulder in my mind as if I was standing right beside her and said hi. I turned and realised I was not beside her but twenty meters away from her and did not speak out aloud but in the recess of my mind. She was shocked some but held her composed and I receded my focus of attention. I should have said this is what it is like inside, but she was obviously not receptive to having a telepathic conversation.

I like the MBTI but like the enneagram they are not celebrated so I have let the saw go blunt somewhat over the years. But I am interested in the Instinctual layer of the MBTI. Just today I was thinking about how the social instinctive types and self-preservation types doth dislike and somewhat taboo in protest the Sexual instinctive types, active usage of thinking intuitively in the receptive Instinctual zone of active intelligence. Using thinking at the instinctual level because it unmasks too much dishonest manipulation and reveal to much of our animal nature in clouding sexual chemistry active.

The MBTI is fascinating and is a fascinating lens to use with receptivity when going about one's day. It's extraordinarily powerful.

 

[Codex]

Being able to put people in boxes