3 ms·

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: I

by 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.

by 001sky 14y ago

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.