3 ms·
Summary: Myers-Briggs is a useful model, when a few adjustments are made. 1. Problems I've Discovered 1a. Myers-Briggs pigeon-holes people into one "personali
by forgotmypw17 6y ago
Summary: Myers-Briggs is a useful model, when a few adjustments are made.
1. Problems I've Discovered
1a. Myers-Briggs pigeon-holes people into one "personality type", and generalizes what they should think and do based on that. I think that's kind of silly and limiting.
1b. If you read the personality descriptions, it is favorable towards the "rare" types, describing them as brilliant geniuses, while the other types are portrayed as barely sentient worker drones. I think that's really condescending and divisive.
2. Adjustments I've Made
Nevertheless, I think the questions and the other text is a USEFUL tool for SELF-ASSESSMENT and also for UNDERSTANDING others, so I don't want to throw the baby out with the bathwater.
Here is how I make Myers-Briggs make sense and fit into my other mental models:
2a. First, instead of four scales, I consider it an EIGHT-SCALE system, with each trait being its own measure. For example, you can be high on the introversion scale (needs alone time to recharge) and at the same time also be high on the extraversion scale (connects with others readily, needs socializing to thrive.) I think the worldwide quarantine made this obvious to many an self-described introvert.
This applies to all the other scales as well. You can be someone with intense feelings and at the same time a thorough and dedicated thinker, who sits down and combs their mental models for hours. You can be very good at listening to your intuition while also being highly perceptive to your senses. And you can have firm general rules about how things "should be", especially as one gets older, while still remaining to new possibilities.
2b. The other adjustment I have made is that I consider each scale to be a measure of how much ABILITY a person has developed and PRACTICING that trait. In other words, beyond natural predisposition, each person can grow considerably in any of these traits, provided they practice and apply it regularly.
Conclusion: People are neither introverts, nor extraverts, but both. People are both thinkers and feelers, both judgers and perceivers, and both intuiters and sensers.
- cbfrench 6y ago> 2b. The other adjustment I have made is that I consider each scale to be a measure of how much ABILITY a person has developed and PRACTICING that trait. In other words, beyond natural predisposition, each person can grow considerably in any of these traits, provided they practice and apply it regularly. I do think, at its best, this is what MBTI aims to emphasize: each of us is capable of developing those areas where we are deficient, be it introversion/extraversion, thinking/feeling, etc. Problems only arise when people treat these factors as static binaries. I’m mostly an MBTI agnostic, but I have been surprised at how consistently I have been typed as an INTP across the various versions of the test I have taken (including the ‘official’ one). I view it as a rough indicator of where I am at a particular moment in time, and the domains I can seek to develop to become a more ‘well-rounded’ person. I agree completely with you that, understood correctly, it can be a useful model when people view it as a means of growth. Not, I guess, to get too self-helpy about it.
- edjrage 6y agoYou should probably read Myers-Briggs' book Gifts Differing, they do say it over and over again that traits are preferences.
- forgotmypw17 6y agoI will look into that book, and maybe you can clarify it for me in the mean time. If I need alone time to recharge, and also do not feel complete without socializing, am I an extravert or an introvert?