3 ms·

The problem is primarily that the MBTI is misapplied and misunderstood. It is misunderstood by most people as a set of absolutes without any nuances, whereas i

The problem is primarily that the MBTI is misapplied and misunderstood. It is misunderstood by most people as a set of absolutes without any nuances, whereas it's generally intended to simply classify dominant modes of thinking. i.e., most people will have some problems that they approach one way and other problems that they approach another way, but they will also have a tendency to approach most problems in one of a few ways. Think of it as handedness: most people have a dominant hand, but that doesn't mean that they use only their dominant hand for everything, and that doesn't mean that people can't change their handedness. Because of the way that it's misunderstood, it's also misapplied by a couple of groups of people: those gullible people that are seeking either self-understanding or validation without putting any real effort in, and those people that make a living by going around selling snake-oil psychology. So, while certain professional fields do exhibit certain MBTI trends, it should not be used as a way to determine what profession someone would be best at, or what relationships they should have, or any of that other nonsense. Likewise, all of that "ABCDs behave like this or that or the other thing" stuff is all bullshit too. That said, MBTI can be a useful tool. I use it to listen for certain cues in conversations, and then I slightly change my behavior in the conversation to communicate better with the other person. For instance, I listen to whether the person tends to say, "I feel like ..." versus "I think..."; one tells me to communicate with them emotionally, the other rationally. Another cue is in paying attention to whether a person tends to communicate action or observation. In a management context, you can generally rely on an "action" person to let you know if they think something needs to be done (or they'll just do it, if you've granted them the freedom); conversely, an observant person might be even more useful in a group, but you're going to have to take some initiative to find out what they see. I could have learned to do these things without ever learning about the MBTI, but the MBTI made it easier for me to figure out what I should watch out for. That said, I have exactly zero identity as a particular MBTI type, and it has otherwise zero guidance on my life or relationships, as it should.

001sky 14y ago
It is misunderstood by most people as a set of absolutes without any nuances, -- Only the high priests of MBTI know the truth? Puleeeez. That is the nuance: It is in no way 'scientific'. Its about as scientific as any 2x2 (or: NxN) dimensionalized matrix. Which is to say, it says nothing about the dimensionalizing variables. Nor does it say anything about the underlying hypotheses of relevance. Nor the alternative or relative performance different dimensionalizations. It follows that referencing MBTI today says more about the acronym dropper than anything else.
- thaumaturgy 14y ago
  If you're going to argue with me, please at least argue against something I actually said. If you'd rather continue arguing with yourself, carry on, I won't interrupt you again.
  - 001sky 14y ago
    After you reduce the idea (as per your post), then the "idea" of concept of XYZ becomes a ~meaningless heuristic. And on that, we agreee. So there is no need to argue "with" you. Hope you understand. Nothing personal.
- btilly 14y ago
  I agreed with everything you said until the last sentence. About 25 years ago I got an interesting demonstration, in a group of people. I was in a large group of people, who were asked to draw two lines. On the first, mark how noticeable you are. On the second mark how organized you think you are. We were then divided into quadrants based on this, and sent off to talk with others in the same quadrant. The test took just a few seconds. It was based on BS criteria. Everyone understood that. But it was amazing at how much each quadrant shared. And when we came back in and sat down in quadrants, to report back what we'd learned, you could look at all 4 groups and it was instantly obvious which group was which. If you're looking to get a label, and to figure out where you belong, this kind of test does not work. But as a starting place to get ideas for how to get insight about yourself, the test absolutely is valuable. And as long as the personality characteristics measured are consistent and well understood, it wouldn't matter what they are. If you're curious, on the MBTI I came out ENTP. On the tiny test I just described, I was a promoter - I am both noticeable and disorganized.

001sky 14y ago

It is misunderstood by most people as a set of absolutes without any nuances, -- Only the high priests of MBTI know the truth? Puleeeez. That is the nuance: It is in no way 'scientific'. Its about as scientific as any 2x2 (or: NxN) dimensionalized matrix. Which is to say, it says nothing about the dimensionalizing variables. Nor does it say anything about the underlying hypotheses of relevance. Nor the alternative or relative performance different dimensionalizations. It follows that referencing MBTI today says more about the acronym dropper than anything else.

thaumaturgy 14y ago
If you're going to argue with me, please at least argue against something I actually said. If you'd rather continue arguing with yourself, carry on, I won't interrupt you again.
- 001sky 14y ago
  After you reduce the idea (as per your post), then the "idea" of concept of XYZ becomes a ~meaningless heuristic. And on that, we agreee. So there is no need to argue "with" you. Hope you understand. Nothing personal.
btilly 14y ago
I agreed with everything you said until the last sentence. About 25 years ago I got an interesting demonstration, in a group of people. I was in a large group of people, who were asked to draw two lines. On the first, mark how noticeable you are. On the second mark how organized you think you are. We were then divided into quadrants based on this, and sent off to talk with others in the same quadrant. The test took just a few seconds. It was based on BS criteria. Everyone understood that. But it was amazing at how much each quadrant shared. And when we came back in and sat down in quadrants, to report back what we'd learned, you could look at all 4 groups and it was instantly obvious which group was which. If you're looking to get a label, and to figure out where you belong, this kind of test does not work. But as a starting place to get ideas for how to get insight about yourself, the test absolutely is valuable. And as long as the personality characteristics measured are consistent and well understood, it wouldn't matter what they are. If you're curious, on the MBTI I came out ENTP. On the tiny test I just described, I was a promoter - I am both noticeable and disorganized.