3 ms·
I think they just meant INTJ or INTP. The functions are part of the controversial Jungian ideas the article mentioned. Most people ignore them entirely and tre
by pseudalopex 6y ago
I think they just meant INTJ or INTP.
The functions are part of the controversial Jungian ideas the article mentioned. Most people ignore them entirely and treat the preferences as axes.
- nicoburns 6y ago> The functions are part of the controversial Jungian ideas the article mentioned. Most people ignore them entirely and treat the preferences as axes. They do. And IMO this is exactly why the results never reproduce. The functions actually make sense and anecdotally seem to correspond to something in the real world (they've rarely if ever been subject to scientific testing as far as I'm aware). The preferences by themselves are just a somewhat less reproducible variant of the Big 5 as criticisms claim. > I think they just meant INTJ or INTP. I'm sure they did. My point being that if you look at the functions (which most anyone who takes Myers-Briggs seriously does) then INTJ and INTP aren't similar at all. So talking about them together makes little sense. Although reading up the thread, it looks like they were just suggesting that they both have subreddits. Which I guess isn't really talking about their personalities at all.
- pseudalopex 6y agoMBTI reproduces much better if you treat the preferences as axes. Most people who take MBTI seriously don't use the functions.
- mewpmewp2 6y agoThey are similar since they correlate similarly with lots of real world aspects. E.G. most simple is they are both very actively represented on Reddit and second one being top 2 highest average IQs. They also share very many similar interests.