20 replies to this topic

[8143FF763271]

Yup. That's right. Neither are valid.

[Waser Lave]

Well duh...

[luvsmyncis]

Bitch, whatever. I'm a Scorpio. That means I'm sexy without trying to be sexy. Right, Cronus?

ETA: Those are actual pics of kami12? Hmmmm. What's your sign?

[Nymh]

I get the astrology being shit argument, because it is typecasting people based on their birthday with no basis on their individual qualities. But why is the MBTI shit? It is completely based on answers that people give about themselves and their preferences, so it seems it would be more accurate and/or reliable than a blanket astrological template.

[Dazz]

Big up all da Leo's, muthafuckin lions are so badass.

Spoiler

[8143FF763271]

I get the astrology being shit argument, because it is typecasting people based on their birthday with no basis on their individual qualities. But why is the MBTI shit? It is completely based on answers that people give about themselves and their preferences, so it seems it would be more accurate and/or reliable than a blanket astrological template.

The problems with MBTI lie in the constant assumption that they tell you anything more than a superficial and highly variable set of preferences. "Cognitive functions" aren't concrete and they're liable to fluctuations. This is especially problematic in the sense that it is divided into different binaries, which are A or B categories. There's no continuous distribution. You're either "thinking" or "feeling", but if you're somewhere in between, one different answer could change your "cognitive function" and, with it, the entirety of the results given to you. People aren't neatly divided into contrary types where you're either an artist or a mathematician. Two people that are exactly alike will get a completely different, indeed, opposite results because they picked one thing differently. That's problematic.

MBTI is based on arbitrary criteria and superficial personality traits liable to fluctuations, on top of it it has a poor methodology that can divide very similar people in opposite categories. Yet it is often used to tell people what careers they should follow and as a type of constitutional psychology (this is what you are), when it shouldn't be used for either.

Edited by kami12, 19 August 2012 - 09:44 AM.

[NapisaurusRex]

I don't understand why cognitive functions are coming up in every single conversation. What's your major again?

Edit: guess I just read this thread more than once for some reason.

Edited by Napiform, 19 August 2012 - 09:45 AM.

[8143FF763271]

I don't understand why cognitive functions are coming up in every single conversation. What's your major again?

Edit: guess I just read this thread more than once for some reason.

international relations

[Waser Lave]

international relations

Given that your reputation is -71 it doesn't seem like your international relations are too good.

[NapisaurusRex]

Fantastic to have a fellow fish swimming around.
I haven't met very many Pisces.

I had no idea you were too!

So is my oldest daughter.

[Nymh]

Big up all da Leo's, muthafuckin lions are so badass.

Spoiler

Hell yeah, Leos represent

Happy late birthday BTW

[Yung]

I'm a Cancerian Snake.

[8143FF763271]

Given that your reputation is -71 it doesn't seem like your international relations are too good.

Just applying that Bush diplomacy.

[Sweeney]

The MBTI is only shit when it's interpreted incorrectly. An "ENTJ" type, for example, isn't necessarily an "extravert". The test simply indicates a preference for "extravert" traits over "introvert" traits. The degree isn't specified, mostly due to the attitudes of the test's creators.

Astrology is obviously bollocks.

[NapisaurusRex]

I'm a Libra

You're also likeable.

[Mishatu]

Sagittarius, baby!

-shoots pretend arrows around the room-

[redlion]

The MBTI is only shit when it's interpreted incorrectly. An "ENTJ" type, for example, isn't necessarily an "extravert". The test simply indicates a preference for "extravert" traits over "introvert" traits. The degree isn't specified, mostly due to the attitudes of the test's creators.

It's only useful in a limited sense, yes. I can't believe you actually have to explain this to someone.

All such methodological testing and classification is skewed by test questions. This is common knowledge I thought.