4 ms·

I don't see how you can say an assessment based on people's actual behavior is about as valid as completely made up predictions based on the alignment of the st

• pfooti 10y ago
  The point is more along the lines of: the MBTI really can't tell you much. It has very bad psychometric properties (people regular test differently on different days, or show as a mix of two supposed opposing factors). As a theoretical framework, there is little in the way of peer reviewed work to even support anything other than introversion - extroversion as a measure. MBTI is pretty much pseudoscience that we keep using because it Feels Correct. Psychics and astrologers do the same thing - make broad and generic claims to make you think they're talking to you because you fill the gaps in the story. So, it's an aggressive claim I make yes. Partly (perhaps largely) driven by the fact that too many otherwise reasonable people do not treat the MBTI with the skepticism it deserves (again, hiring decisions are made and justified based on this pseudoscience). But partly because I've been through both the long form MBTI test and explanation (with subfactors, where I was thoroughly mixed with stuff that wasn't supposed to correlate) and the explanation phase felt precisely like a psychic reading.