4 ms·

It's basically horoscope for geeks More articles https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/give-and-take/201309/goodbye-mbti-the-fad-won-t-die https://www.psycholo

It's basically horoscope for geeks More articles https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/give-and-take/201309/goodbye-mbti-the-fad-won-t-die https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/give-and-take/201309/go... Edit: http://www.forbes.com/sites/toddessig/2014/09/29/the-mysterious-popularity-of-the-meaningless-myers-briggs-mbti/#4f75ae8950ad http://www.forbes.com/sites/toddessig/2014/09/29/the-mysteri... And the Guardian article https://www.theguardian.com/science/brain-flapping/2013/mar/19/myers-briggs-test-unscientific https://www.theguardian.com/science/brain-flapping/2013/mar/...

alex_anglin 10y ago
I first read about the Myers-Briggs controversy via Malcolm Gladwell in the New Yorker over a decade ago: http://gladwell.com/personality-plus/ http://gladwell.com/personality-plus/
aaronchall 10y ago
I'd characterize it as a pseudo-scientific horoscope. It's marginally analogous to the Big Five personality traits (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Five_personality_traits https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Five_personality_traits - this is the personality paradigm recognized by academia), it just leaves out the tendency to experience negative emotions (probably because neuroticism is a negative thing, and businesses like their HR experiences and training to be as positive and feel-good as the bottom line allows.) It is unfortunate that people like the false dichotomies and the Forer effect (the generic but positive descriptions that apply to just about everybody.) I'm sure the Myers Briggs people would be selling the Big Five if they thought they could copyright it.
bognition 10y ago
Not just geeks. Anyone who is looking for easy to digest oversimplification of who they are.
david927 10y ago
I think your missing the point. Do you know what flavor of ice cream you like? I think you do -- and why not know that about yourself? Everyone is some range of introverted to extroverted, for example. It's their preference, such as the flavor of ice cream they like. It can change often, under circumstances, or even not be present, of course. It's not set in stone; it's just a preference. It doesn't define you; you define it. Myers-Briggs is unfortunate in that it assigns that preference as letter. You like Chocolate. You're a C. There are some who have no problem with this sort of designation. They love chocolate always and in every circumstance. Many, however, are not one letter, and so it's a poor test. The point is not the letter. The point is asking yourself the question: do you feel more energized after a dinner party or after a quiet day alone? The point is to know, not just what flavors your prefer usually, but what situations (in this case) you prefer. And why not know that about yourself?
- triplesec 10y ago
  I'd prefer a questionnaire which provides the benefits of self-questioning towards better self knowledge and actualisation. This can be done without MBTI which adds pseudo-science on top of any questioning it might provide, which falsely formalises bull and fossilises fake intellectual structures into public consciousness. The scales are unsound. They actively direct people away from curiosity in discovering other structures which are less wrong.

alex_anglin 10y ago

I first read about the Myers-Briggs controversy via Malcolm Gladwell in the New Yorker over a decade ago: http://gladwell.com/personality-plus/ http://gladwell.com/personality-plus/

aaronchall 10y ago

I'd characterize it as a pseudo-scientific horoscope. It's marginally analogous to the Big Five personality traits (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Five_personality_traits https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Five_personality_traits - this is the personality paradigm recognized by academia), it just leaves out the tendency to experience negative emotions (probably because neuroticism is a negative thing, and businesses like their HR experiences and training to be as positive and feel-good as the bottom line allows.) It is unfortunate that people like the false dichotomies and the Forer effect (the generic but positive descriptions that apply to just about everybody.) I'm sure the Myers Briggs people would be selling the Big Five if they thought they could copyright it.

bognition 10y ago

Not just geeks. Anyone who is looking for easy to digest oversimplification of who they are.

david927 10y ago

I think your missing the point. Do you know what flavor of ice cream you like? I think you do -- and why not know that about yourself? Everyone is some range of introverted to extroverted, for example. It's their preference, such as the flavor of ice cream they like. It can change often, under circumstances, or even not be present, of course. It's not set in stone; it's just a preference. It doesn't define you; you define it. Myers-Briggs is unfortunate in that it assigns that preference as letter. You like Chocolate. You're a C. There are some who have no problem with this sort of designation. They love chocolate always and in every circumstance. Many, however, are not one letter, and so it's a poor test. The point is not the letter. The point is asking yourself the question: do you feel more energized after a dinner party or after a quiet day alone? The point is to know, not just what flavors your prefer usually, but what situations (in this case) you prefer. And why not know that about yourself?

triplesec 10y ago
I'd prefer a questionnaire which provides the benefits of self-questioning towards better self knowledge and actualisation. This can be done without MBTI which adds pseudo-science on top of any questioning it might provide, which falsely formalises bull and fossilises fake intellectual structures into public consciousness. The scales are unsound. They actively direct people away from curiosity in discovering other structures which are less wrong.