7 ms·
Keep in mind that in practice this classification is not perfect, as in you cannot just bucketize people into three categories and declare perfect understanding
by H8crilA 2y ago
Keep in mind that in practice this classification is not perfect, as in you cannot just bucketize people into three categories and declare perfect understanding. You should treat the roles described in the article as archetypes of human behavior.
- crngefest 2y agoThis is true for every statement about people.
- H8crilA 2y agoAnd yet it is not obvious to everyone.
- DaiPlusPlus 2y agoI still maintain there are only 10 types of people in the world. Those who know base-2 numerals and those who don't.
- DaiPlusPlus 2y ago> Keep in mind that in practice this classification is not perfect, as in you cannot just bucketize people into Gosh that's such an INFJ thing to say! /s[ubtle]
- nkrisc 2y ago“INFJ”, that’s from that workplace astrology, right?
- _odey 2y agoYou would be surprised, but companies actually pay hard money to consultants to do these astrology readings and present them to shareholders as a "measure of workforce compatibility".
- nkrisc 2y agoI had to do something like that once at work. I picked random answers for all the questions.
- dangsux 2y ago[dead]
- _odey 2y agoThat's the easy part. Did you also have to do a 1 hour interview with the consultant after the questionnaire? EDIT: also an hour long group meeting after the interviews to be presented your collective results?
- osigurdson 2y agoMost people know how to game these now. Want to be a "leader"? Choose extroverted type answers. Get the red patch.
- jhbadger 2y agoI think it was more popular before that book ("The Personality Brokers: The Strange History of Myers-Briggs and the Birth of Personality Testing") came out. Not that I ever believed it before that, but I assumed it was created by actual social scientists rather than two untrained amateurs as is the case.
- 2y ago
- aaron695 2y ago[dead]
- anal_reactor 2y agoThis is true for any kind of generalization. Having said that, I can really see this at my company. At the beginning I was a high-perfoming loser. Then I realized how things work, and since then I do bare minimum. I wish I could be a sociopath, but I don't have the brains nor the lack of morals to do so. I passionately hate the clueless ones because they stand against everything I believe in. My dream is to save enough money not to have to take part in this circus anymore.
- rbanffy 2y ago> lack of morals You don’t really need to be a clinical sociopath for that - you need to know enough to employ the characteristics in order to reach your own goal, which might not be a selfish one at all. It’s a fun sport if you think about it that way.
- H8crilA 2y agoHigh performing is the clueless, not the loser. Bare minimum is the loser. Those names are not chosen well, especially the "loser".
- throaway812 2y ago[flagged]