If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Washington Post)   If your Myers-Briggs personality type is INTJ, that means you're introverted, intuitive, thinking, and will probably judge this article to be full of shiat   (washingtonpost.com) divider line 24
    More: Interesting, Myers-Briggs, personality types, gold standard, Jung, Sigmund Freud, McKinsey  
•       •       •

13696 clicks; posted to Main » on 16 Dec 2012 at 8:42 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2012-12-16 08:50:30 AM
3 votes:
INTP Personality is Best Personality
2012-12-16 05:19:42 AM
3 votes:
Um, 5 pages! Do you really expect the average farker to read that? And what does it have to with INTJ?

/INTP here
2012-12-16 02:05:03 PM
2 votes:

Sid_6.7: Memoryalpha: Myers-Briggs, Keirsey, et al, are no better than astrology when it comes to accurate assessment of personality traits. You can use random numbers to generate answers and still get a perfectly applicable description of anyone's personality for any of those tests.

It's about how you tend to act repeatedly over a period of time.


Yup, and that can be useful information. And it's not at all like astrology, where some entirely irrelevant factor is determinative. It just makes a few classifications based on questions with varying wording that gets at differences in how you think about things when the situation is slightly modified. Hardly radical.


ChubbyTiger: FuturePastNow: XveryYpettyZ: dbirchall: Tigger: Yes.

Two farking decades ago.

I'm not holding out any hope that a friend who's always talking about how she's INTJ (so shut up, already, if you're an introvert!) will switch...

Why would somebody brag about being INTJ?

I recall a TF Discussion thread where subby asked people to take the test (well, I recall many such threads). Around 50% of the posters in the thread scored as INTJ, which is supposedly 1-4% of the population. lulz

And the rest of us were INTP. Farkers are a strange bunch.



It takes a, shall we say, special, type of person to spend hours vehemently arguing on the internet on threads about completely inconsequential things. Message Boards in general seem to be an INTx flystrip.

\INTP
\\INTP type is best INTx type.
2012-12-16 11:40:53 AM
2 votes:
INTP here. Does that mean I have to believe the article?
Sorry, five pages. Bored now. If only some could put it in terms I could understand. Maybe add pon--

oh
i.imgur.com
2012-12-16 09:00:36 AM
2 votes:
The notion that all people can be sorted into just 16 types by the Myers-Briggs test is just as reasonable, logical, and well-supported as the notion that we can all be sorted into 12 types by our zodiac signs.

/Typological thinking is an acquired mental illness.
2012-12-18 03:04:04 PM
1 votes:

Samwise Gamgee: Those who are comparing MBTI to astrology and the like are way off-base.
...

I don't think anyone would dispute the nature of the four scales and deny that they describe something about a person's temperament, and I doubt most people here would argue that statistical analysis isn't useful, so I find it irritating how many people dismiss it out of hand and call it astrology, etc. I imagine those of you who feel that way simply don't know enough about it, or maybe psychology in general.


The reason why you don't see the weakness of the MBTI is that you have not considered the fundamental flaws of typological reasoning, when it is applied to humans (and other biological phenomena).

There is no question that thinking, feeling, sensing, and intuiting and so on are actual, measurable traits. There is no question that statistical analyses are useful. That's not what makes MBTI similar to astrology.

What makes the MBTI analogous to astrology (or other "personality type" indicators) is that it is ultimately based on an essentialist typology, and typological reasoning is not applicable to the phenomenon that the test intends to assess.

Why should emphasis be placed exclusively, or even predominantly on those four axes (S/N, T/F, P/J), rather than any other/additional ones? Why not add "athleticism/sedentariness," "authoritarian/libertarian," "dominant/submissive," "risk-taking/risk averse," "sleep on the left/right side of the bed," or any of an infinite number of other variables that could be measured? The designers selected a few variables out of an infinite array of possibilities and arbitrarily decided that "these, and only these, traits are the necessary and sufficient definitive features of personality." The only reason for continuing to analyze those, and only those variables is tradition: "because we've always done it that way." This is not a sufficient reason, and it makes the MBTI no different from astrology in that respect- there is no real "reason" for this system other than historical inertia.

That problem leads to a second one of utility. Does an athletic INTP have more in common with a lazy fat slob INTP than s/he does with an athletic ESFJ? That depends on why you're asking. If I'm a coach of a sports team drafting new players, the two athletes have more in common as far as my interests are concerned. If I'm hiring a court stenographer, typing speed is the relevant, but the test allows me no way to assess that variable.

You see, the thing is that you can't just classify the world "any old way" that you can imagine and then expect your classification to be a "general purpose" taxonomy. The MBTI may be a perfectly fine way to classify people for some purpose (although I rather doubt it), but again, the same is true of astrology. If I want to know when to mail birthday cards, classifying people by their zodiac sign is also perfectly useful (more so than Myers-Briggs or blood type). What "work" do you expect your classification to actually do? There is no way to evaluate a system of classification that has no explicit purpose, and even then, a classification that is suitable for one purpose will almost certainly be completely useless for other purposes. By attempting to function as a "one size fits all" personality indicator, the MBTI tries to do everything, and ends up doing nothing very well.

The last, but certainly not least of the problems that I want to raise right now is that the MBTI, like astrology, is ultimately an ideational taxonomy. That is, the types are created (and exist exclusively) in the mind of the taxonomist. The person doing the classification starts with the types and then tries to "shoehorn" actual people into the conceptual boxes. Unfortunately, doing so will inevitably result in the phenomenon known as "typological creep": the more individuals are assigned to a given (pre-defined) type, the more the definition of that type must expand in order to accomodate all of its members, up to the point where the taxonomist is forced to further sub-divide the type, or the point at which the definition of the type becomes so broad and nebulous that it is effectively meaningless.

I've got some other problems with MBTI (and all typological models of humans), but those are the big three. 

Note: I don't intend any of the above as a critique of you, personally, or of your profession. I just feel that typological reasoning is a flawed system of classification for this particular type of phenomenon. It works just fine for physics and chemistry, which actually have "essence-like" units of analysis. It just doesn't work in the social or biological sciences, and the sooner social scientists become aware of that fact, the sooner we can move on to something better.
2012-12-16 09:53:57 PM
1 votes:

FloydA: The notion that all people can be sorted into just 16 types by the Myers-Briggs test is just as reasonable, logical, and well-supported as the notion that we can all be sorted into 12 types by our zodiac signs.


You forgot blood type.
2012-12-16 07:07:02 PM
1 votes:
This INTJ has better things to do than read a 5 page article. Like post about how I'm not going to read a 5 page article.
2012-12-16 06:17:02 PM
1 votes:
The company I work for is international. A few years ago, they gathered us all together in Finland and administered this test. Twenty five or so software developers from the US and Scandinavia. Exactly one developer was not an INT variant. All the managers were ENT variants. Being a bunch of smug, INT types, this did not surprise us.
2012-12-16 04:38:34 PM
1 votes:

Karma Crusade: my extraverted clinical psychologist professor


It's not easy being extra green.
2012-12-16 01:07:05 PM
1 votes:
I like my INTPness better. INTJ are assholes anyway.
2012-12-16 12:29:56 PM
1 votes:
INTJ.

MBTI is useful in the sense that it's useful to know that the stock market will go up in good times, and down in bad ones; it's a 10,000-foot viewpoint, and is broadly useful when such a viewpoint is called for, but if you're down at the 6-inch level where psychologists and behavioralists like to work, it's more or less useless. It's like having a map of the entire state when what you need are directions to the nearest grocery store.
2012-12-16 12:11:43 PM
1 votes:
OK actually read the article and I had no idea the test was used like that. That is a stupid thing to do. Personality comes down to neural structures in the brain and hormonal balances in the brain. Neither of these things are fixed. Brain chemistry especially is, well, fluid. Look at how we treat depression, for example. We shock the brain through chemicals and then use therapy to physically alter how the brain works, instilling new more positive pathways in the brain.

I can see why people have an issue with the test. From the article's information it sounds like they are massively abusing the notion of personality tests. Obviously I've never worked somewhere that uses it, and probably I would quit if I knew that corporate policy was built around such nonsense. It's equivalent to preferentially hiring Asians because you think they are good at math.
2012-12-16 11:36:30 AM
1 votes:
All of psychology is a bunch of bullshiat it's nothing more than guessing. Voodoo is more scientific.
2012-12-16 11:26:29 AM
1 votes:

bikkurikun: INTP Personality is Best Personality


Damn straight!
2012-12-16 11:07:13 AM
1 votes:
I'm an INFJ, and the type describes me pretty well. I teach psychology and generally have my students take it. It works well for most, but not all. I think falling in the middle of the percentages makes it less relevant. However, I'm not convinced that there is a personality test in existence (even the big 5) that can explain all of behavior. There are things in my typology that don't get covered in the Big 5 and vice-versa. (For example, I'm usually not great with details, but if I do get into them, I can't see anything else. I do math by intuition, and I'm usually right. I can tell you a lot about person after meeting them once, but I don't really care much for making friends)
2012-12-16 09:47:23 AM
1 votes:

bikkurikun: INTP Personality is Best Personality


My intuition tells me yes. You are correct.

Nothong magic or mumbo-jumbo about Myers-Briggs, it's simply a classification system and method for determining which box best describes your personality.
2012-12-16 09:28:35 AM
1 votes:
Meyers Briggs, is that nonsense still around? What am I saying, of course it is as there is an entire industry of 90-IQ human resources dolts who make money off of peddling this pseudo science.
2012-12-16 09:12:25 AM
1 votes:
Myers-Briggs is very useful in getting me the job I want. I just study the job requirements and answer this silly test accordingly.

/and slightly alter my name to make the numerologists happy
//and don't disclose (or alter) age, gender, and race to throw off the affirmative action idiots
///finding out the team that the boss likes would have me buying a little team pin down at the local truck-stop
////no need to manipulate, just let others do it to themselves
2012-12-16 09:07:04 AM
1 votes:
Yah, what crapola. I never hung with the MBTI crowd. And whenever I was asked what my type was (job interviews included, fark that!), I'd tell them I'm an ESPN cuz I like to watch sports on TV. It was fun to watch them try to decipher it, and then the light go on over their pointy little heads.
2012-12-16 08:53:53 AM
1 votes:

bikkurikun: INTP Personality is Best Personality


That's what mine was as well. Though I have no idea what it means.
2012-12-16 07:39:42 AM
1 votes:

giftedmadness: So people are rated based on their percentile on the 5 traits? I think it's a little easier to put people into 16 categories than in infinite categories. After taking this new Big Five test, how do you know anything about yourself? Who decodes it?


Myers-Briggs is also % based. I'm INTJ but I'm only like 3% J. I've always seen it as astrology with a sprinkling of science added for flavor, but I will say the writeups on my 'type' do hit a few nails right on the head. I also had a coworker who was really into this stuff, and she was able to guess what I tested at just having worked with me for a little white.
2012-12-16 05:59:38 AM
1 votes:
It's not the 'gold standard of personality tests.' It's a bunch of Freudian horseshiat that the entire psychological community has discredited.
2012-12-16 05:33:23 AM
1 votes:
INTJ, and I don't need to read the article to know it's a piece of shiat.

Meyers Briggs crapola is crapola.
 
Displayed 24 of 24 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report