4 ms·

Although questionable as a psychometric test, he is describing the Myers–Briggs INTJ [1] or INTP [2] personality type here. In terms of the Big-Five [3], I woul

Although questionable as a psychometric test, he is describing the Myers–Briggs INTJ [1] or INTP [2] personality type here. In terms of the Big-Five [3], I would suggest: Moderately-high Openness, High Conscientiousness, Average-to-Low Extraversion, Low Agreeableness, Average-to-low Neuroticism. [1]: https://www.16personalities.com/intj-personality https://www.16personalities.com/intj-personality [2]: https://www.16personalities.com/intp-personality https://www.16personalities.com/intp-personality [3]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Five_personality_traits https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Five_personality_traits

carlisle_ 5y ago
>Although questionable as a psychometric test That's an understatement. It's meritless pseudoscience.
- fraud 5y ago
  What makes you say so?
  - sn9 5y ago
    Probably an awareness of the history of MB and the research about its utility: https://www.vox.com/2014/7/15/5881947/myers-briggs-personality-test-meaningless https://www.vox.com/2014/7/15/5881947/myers-briggs-personali...
    - davidhunter 5y ago
      All models are wrong, but some are useful. I have found the MBTI to be useful despite the empirical inaccuracy of the test itself. Even without taking the test, people can self-identify as one (or more) types. This then serves as a meaningful basis for discussion as well as raising awareness that people are deeply different in terms of their ways of thinking. It is quite an eye opener the first time you see someone self-identify as a personality type that is very different to your own. None of the personality theories are 'proven' of course. We won't get that until we have a fuller understanding of the brain. But it is well accepted within psychology that personality is a thing. And personality types (Big 5, MBTI, etc) are useful models for now despite their shortcomings. This is a fairly good post with some additional thoughts on the MBTI debate: https://dynomight.net/in-defense-of-myers-briggs.html https://dynomight.net/in-defense-of-myers-briggs.html
      - csa 5y ago
        Check out “the human element” which is the basis for firo-b. It actually has international data to support its model.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

carlisle_ 5y ago

>Although questionable as a psychometric test That's an understatement. It's meritless pseudoscience.

fraud 5y ago
What makes you say so?
- sn9 5y ago
  Probably an awareness of the history of MB and the research about its utility: https://www.vox.com/2014/7/15/5881947/myers-briggs-personality-test-meaningless https://www.vox.com/2014/7/15/5881947/myers-briggs-personali...
  - davidhunter 5y ago
    All models are wrong, but some are useful. I have found the MBTI to be useful despite the empirical inaccuracy of the test itself. Even without taking the test, people can self-identify as one (or more) types. This then serves as a meaningful basis for discussion as well as raising awareness that people are deeply different in terms of their ways of thinking. It is quite an eye opener the first time you see someone self-identify as a personality type that is very different to your own. None of the personality theories are 'proven' of course. We won't get that until we have a fuller understanding of the brain. But it is well accepted within psychology that personality is a thing. And personality types (Big 5, MBTI, etc) are useful models for now despite their shortcomings. This is a fairly good post with some additional thoughts on the MBTI debate: https://dynomight.net/in-defense-of-myers-briggs.html https://dynomight.net/in-defense-of-myers-briggs.html
    - csa 5y ago
      Check out “the human element” which is the basis for firo-b. It actually has international data to support its model.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]