I'm starting to think the Myers-Briggs test is a load of crap

[gnome]

For reasons that have already been mentioned. People answer the questions to try to turn out like famous people with the personality type. People read the description and want to be that type. As an experiment I took the test and answered as honestly as possible to all questions after just playing a gig last night at a bar and socializing with a ton of people. I turned out ENTP. If I sit at home for another two weeks I'll probably turn out INTP. I bet I can be ENTJ one night and INTJ another. I am sure a professional psychologist has to be the one to truly decide your personality type. Isn't this test based off of some book Jung wrote like 100 years ago? Haven't we made a ton of advancements in psychology since then? Also I find myself limiting my personality to some description I read on the internet. This test is crap. We should seriously just burn it. You should just be who you are and fuck the test. Is it really possible to limit all of humanity into sixteen different personality types?

 

[James Black]

The underlying logic is somewhat sound--for the time. Any method of organizing people is going to have its problems, but MBTI is still (to me) one of the most accurate. (thats not saying its too accurate, however, just relatively) The main problem with MBTI (and, perhaps, most other methods of typing) is knowing yourself---Not what you do, but what you want to do... That, and people's tendencies to have slightly varying opinions/desires/etc by day.

And no: its not possible to pigeonhole all of humanity into 16 types. There are roughly 7 billion different types... And thats just counting the people alive today, not retroactively counting all of Human history.

 

[Auburn]

I think most people in this forum knows the vague online tests are crap. v,v I am actually not in favor of the test so much, but rather the concepts..

I've never heard of Jung himself proposing a "test" to find out one's type. He was a psychologist and would himself psychoanalyse his patients to figure out their psyche. I think he knew better than to believe that giving his patients a vague questionaire to answer could spit out the right type. A psychologist's job often includes knowing things about your patients that they don't even know about themselves.

Jung also didn't make standard "profile-descriptions" for each type, instead his focus was on explaining the cognitive functions in detail and elaborating on how/why those functions can lead to certain behaviors. Simply skipping right to the behaviors and creating profiles based on generalities will naturally make it so that loads of people don't fall here or there.

It was Myers-Briggs who came up with the test in order to make Jung's work "useful" in the work field (in other words, condensing all of Jung's work, leaving out tons of crucial information, in order to present it in a way that looks appealing at-a-glance to those who are not deeply inclined to explore topics at the level they should). Not everyone wants to read an entire book, or go searching for an expert, just to find out their type - so the MBTI is a quicky/condensed approach ( fast survey + uber-generalized descriptions of type = profit!). But to invalidate the actual concepts that the quicky are based on simply because the quicky is lacking is robbing yourself of so much.

Jung's book was written in 1921, so yea, close to 100 years. The advancements made since then have a lot of controversy and different psychologist have proposed different variations of Jung's work, ultimately causing a bunch of confusion. But yea, you're right - no real major breakthroughs have been made since Jung..

You should just be who you are and fuck the test. Is it really possible to limit all of humanity into sixteen different personality types?

I like your style, but as much as I'm for freedom, I think it's impossible to escape your own psyche, or biology in general. I can't will wings to grown on my back (I really wish I could.. =/ ) , I can't change gender at will, or change my eye color, and likewise cannot change the way my mind is hardwired (however that may be). All I can do is learn to use the body I have to it's fullest potential~

 

[ijustprotectedmyidentity]

to the original poster, i took the Mbti test online when i first knew nothing about it.

so when i got intp, i googled it and then i realized what it was

 

[Magnetosphere]

to the original poster, i took the Mbti test online when i first knew nothing about it.

so when i got intp, i googled it and then i realized what it was

OP is also assuming that the majority of test-takers are dumb-dumbs who either know nothing about themselves or are so mindlessly stupid that they're going to answer their questions in an effort to be placed into the same category as their FAVRITE CELEB LOL. While this may be true for some people - if not quite a few of them - it in no way renders the concept of the MBTI invalid.

The first time or two I took the MBTI, I was said to be an ENTP. Thereafter, I did a little more introspection, realized that I wasn't quite the social butterfly that I wished I was, and have gotten nothing aside from INTP ever since.

Of course the test isn't going to be accurate if people aren't honest with themselves. And of course the MBTI isn't capable of cordoning all like-minded people into sixteen, perfectly compatible little groups. That'd be impossible, with a global human population of some seven or eight billion.

 

[gnome]

OP is also assuming that the majority of test-takers are dumb-dumbs who either know nothing about themselves or are so mindlessly stupid that they're going to answer their questions in an effort to be placed into the same category as their FAVRITE CELEB LOL. While this may be true for some people - if not quite a few of them - it in no way renders the concept of the MBTI invalid.

The first time or two I took the MBTI, I was said to be an ENTP. Thereafter, I did a little more introspection, realized that I wasn't quite the social butterfly that I wished I was, and have gotten nothing aside from INTP ever since.

Of course the test isn't going to be accurate if people aren't honest with themselves. And of course the MBTI isn't capable of cordoning all like-minded people into sixteen, perfectly compatible little groups. That'd be impossible, with a global human population of some seven or eight billion.

Well some of the INTP people here are proud to have the same personality type as Einstein. Anyhow I give this test about much credit as I would some guidance counselor telling me what career I'd excel at. Fuck that. I'll decide. I won't let some stupid test limit me.

 

[EyeSeeCold]

Well some of the INTP people here are proud to have the same personality type as Einstein. Anyhow I give this test about much credit as I would some guidance counselor telling me what career I'd excel at. Fuck that. I'll decide. I won't let some stupid test limit me.

Granted, the test may be a load of cowpie, you cannot say that your psyche and body are alterable at will. Yes you have free will...within the confines of natural law.

 

[Magnetosphere]

Well some of the INTP people here are proud to have the same personality type as Einstein. Anyhow I give this test about much credit as I would some guidance counselor telling me what career I'd excel at. Fuck that. I'll decide. I won't let some stupid test limit me.

Is anyone really going to limit themselves and their abilities based on what the MBTI says?

 

[gnome]

Granted, the test may be a load of cowpie, you cannot say that your psyche and body are alterable at will. Yes you have free will...within the confines of natural law.

Obviously. I will never have the vertical leap of Kobe Bryant. I'll never have the genius of Einstein. I'll never be able to throw a football like John Elway. What I am saying is if you're going to base your life off of some stupid test why not just read a horoscope instead.

 

[EyeSeeCold]

Weak analogy, btw. Horoscopes are based on birth days and star charts while typology is based on behavior classification.

Typology is not intended to predict your "soul path", but rather to identify similarities in human personalities. The career advice and stereotypical life descriptions are not supposed to be definitive, just guides inferred from observation. You are not required to take them as truth, but it would be helpful to know the areas where you will encounter difficulty, so as to prepare yourself.

 

[Magnetosphere]

Obviously. I will never have the vertical leap of Kobe Bryant. I'll never have the genius of Einstein. I'll never be able to throw a football like John Elway. What I am saying is if you're going to base your life off of some stupid test why not just read a horoscope instead.

I'd also like an example of any living person of whom you know that has actually (and willingly) "based their life" off of MBTI descriptions.

A lot of people come here for advice because, as a "personality type", we share many things in common. However, few of us are so foolish as to believe that our characteristics are universal and thus applicable to all.

 

[gnome]

I'd also like an example of any living person of whom you know that has actually (and willingly) "based their life" off of MBTI descriptions.

A lot of people come here for advice because, as a "personality type", we share many things in common. However, few of us are so foolish as to believe that our characteristics are universal and thus applicable to all.

You haven't read some of the posts I have then. There are some dark souls on this mother fucker.

 

[Solitaire U.]

I am sure a professional psychologist has to be the one to truly decide your personality type.

*scoff*

The construct is sound, but the test instruments are, like all human inventions, subject to malfunction. This doesn't necessarily equate to a flawed construct. Obviously, improper use of anything tends to exacerbate the extent to which things become fucked-up.

Yes, the tests function upon a formulaic structure that can indeed be deciphered. Furthermore, third graders have shown themselves capable of doing so. Seems somewhat of a moot point in relation to personality tests...I mean, what's the point of going through all that effort to learn how to manipulate a given result? Do ENTJ's get put into a different tax bracket? Does being INFP grant you an additional "get out of jail free" card?

If you want to be something you're not, fudging a test result isn't going to make you any less full of shit, so forget about the fucking formalities and just go for it.

 

[gnome]

*scoff*

The construct is sound, but the test instruments are, like all human inventions, subject to malfunction. This doesn't necessarily equate to a flawed construct. Obviously, improper use of anything tends to exacerbate the extent to which things become fucked-up.

Yes, the tests function upon a formulaic structure that can indeed be deciphered. Furthermore, third graders have shown themselves capable of doing so. Seems somewhat of a moot point in relation to personality tests...I mean, what's the point of going through all that effort to learn how to manipulate a given result? Do ENTJ's get put into a different tax bracket? Does being INFP grant you an additional "get out of jail free" card?

If you want to be something you're not, fudging a test result isn't going to make you any less full of shit, so forget about the fucking formalities and just go for it.

And bingo was his name oh B I N G O.

 

[Solitaire U.]

From the bottom of my dark soul...Go fuck yourself.

 

[nexion]

I am almost to the point of agreement, but definitely not for the reasons the OP said.

Neglecting individual type nuance, why must it be that the human psyche can't be broken down into x number of elementary entities? (in MBTI, these elementary entities are the cognitive functions, and they fit together in sixteen different ways)

So, again, neglecting individual nuances, and assuming that the premises MBTI rests on are correct, then it is perfectly acceptable that all humans can be understood by only sixteen types.

 

[Solitaire U.]

So, again, neglecting individual nuances, and assuming that the premises MBTI rests on are correct, then it is perfectly acceptable that all humans can be understood by only sixteen types.

...though no individual can be constrained entirely within a 1/16 fraction...was how I read the OP's underlying point. I seem to be in agreement with both of you.

But I still find the topic of MBTI entertaining and even educational. I do believe it has limitations...I don't think it can be reliably applied to children, or late-blooming adults, or anyone who is in a developmental phase of self-awareness. TTBOMK no MBTI test instrument featuring a 9 year old friendly context exists. I've toyed with the idea using my own kids as lab rats enough to believe it's possible to create such a test, but I can infer far more about (my kids) personality traits through simple observation and interaction with them than I think any method of testing could reliably measure.

 

[nexion]

...though no individual can be constrained entirely within a 1/16 fraction...was how I read the OP's underlying point. I seem to be in agreement with both of you.

But I still find the topic of MBTI entertaining and even educational. I do believe it has limitations...I don't think it can be reliably applied to children, or late-blooming adults, or anyone who is in a developmental phase of self-awareness. TTBOMK no MBTI test instrument featuring a 9 year old friendly context exists. I've toyed with the idea using my own kids as lab rats enough to believe it's possible to create such a test, but I can infer far more about (my kids) personality traits through simple observation and interaction with them than I think any method of testing could reliably measure.

Yes, of course... hence me talking about individual type nuances. MBTI itself deals only in recurring patterns and sweeping generalizations about a percentage of the population.

I would have to agree with you there. There is no way to accurately measure personality while that personality is developing.

A lot of the MBTI questions may be vague and situational, but it still works to some extent. I'm not saying it's the best, or even the best we have, but it is a useful tool nonetheless. For some reason or another, I highly doubt we will tap into the true nature of the brain anytime soon.

 

[walfin]

I turned out ENTP. If I sit at home for another two weeks I'll probably turn out INTP. I bet I can be ENTJ one night and INTJ another

You have got it wrong. Introvert/extravert do not mean exactly the same thing in MBTI as in general speech. If you read other threads in this forum you will find that this is a much belaboured point.

I would have to agree with you there. There is no way to accurately measure personality while that personality is developing.

Well, how does one know that personality has stopped developing?

Perhaps the brain stops developing as rapidly after about 25 but that doesn't necessarily mean personality cannot change.

In any case, can an ammeter not measure current at a particular instance, while it is fluctuating? Deuce for a thermometer and temperature. All we need to find is a suitable instrument that can measure the changes in real time.

 

[Magnetosphere]

You haven't read some of the posts I have then. There are some dark souls on this mother fucker.

I've seen some people being naive and attempting to explain complicated psychological phenomenon in terms of the MBTI, but no, I haven't seen anything yet that would suggest such a thing is happening.

I really would like some examples, and not just for the sake of a good argument.

 

[dark]

@ EyeSeeCold, I am sure you don't really mean free will exists?

@ OP, those counselors may be shit heads, but there are careers you would not do well in.

Each person has a brain wired a certain way, we call these functions and have a generalization of how they work and each persons dominate functions can be identified by generalization/simplifying and placed into groups, making it easier to understand the human brain.

You can not deny the fact that your brain is wired a certain way, and it makes you enjoy certain things in a certain way, and another person with a completely different wiring will not enjoy the same thing of whatever we will place as the thing.

@ OP, you cannot change your brains wiring without external forces. A slab of concrete will do the trick, drugs and alcohol probably just mask it with an illusionary form of something, I don't really know. If you keep coming up with different types, you need to rethink who you think you are. You also need to be as true as possible with yourself.

...Well I had more I was thinking until my ex just messaged me and now I can't think clearly so I will continue this later when I have a clearer head, damn relationships mess with me to much, damn under developed F function.

 

[nexion]

Well, how does one know that personality has stopped developing?

Perhaps the brain stops developing as rapidly after about 25 but that doesn't necessarily mean personality cannot change.

In any case, can an ammeter not measure current at a particular instance, while it is fluctuating? Deuce for a thermometer and temperature. All we need to find is a suitable instrument that can measure the changes in real time.

You don't. And I haven't ever really vigorously studied typology/personality development or any of that, so anything that I may say other than that is pure speculation, and/or entirely wrong.

Who is to say that MBTI isn't good for measuring instantaneous personality change (thanks for using that vocabulary, it made me think of calculus, which I am quite fond of). Actually, I'd say it's BEST for that. Maybe it's not really good at typing the true nature of the person, but maybe it is good for typing how the individual thinks at the moment. Even though you are supposed to answer the questions in a general, predisposed method, maybe our subconscious makes us answer the questions based on a moment. I have tested as INTP, INTJ, and INFP at various times, but INTP is always the most frequent.

That whole paragraph was pure speculation. It is impossible to say anything since there is more than one variable that I don't know the value of (inherent flaws of the test and the inherent flaws of the person taking the test).

 

[Anthile]

I don't really understand the complaints about the testing method. Like every other test that relies on human input: when you enter false information, it delivers false results. Everyone can fill out the test that it results in INTP but that obviously doesn't make you one. It's like cheating on an exam and then complaining it was too easy and the exam itself sucks. You're not supposed to cheat. But the main difference is that, unlike an exam, there are no qualitative differences in the MBTI types and thus cheating is doubly hurtful for you. It's like lying on your CV to get your dream job despite not being qualified at all. It's coming back to you, sooner or later. I mostly blame the N bias in so many descriptions and that people rather want to be Gandhi or Einstein instead of... whatever people they chose for the S types (see, I don't even remember those!).
Sure, the MBTI test is not perfect but you are completely missing the point and tackle the issue from the wrong angle.

 

[Solitaire U.]

Well, how does one know that personality has stopped developing?

If there is a means to reliably determine this, it will need to come into existence before this question can be answered. Just FWIW and to clarify, I used the term 'developmental' as applicable to children, but my guess would be that psyche is perpetually changing, which doesn't necessarily equate to 'developing'. Our eyes confirm this is applicable to the body, so it follows the brain...etc.etc.

Chronological age seems a rather arbitrary system of measurement though. Since human development at least appears to proceed in a fairly proportionate and uniform manner, I'd lean more towards the idea that physical and mental growth level off at roughly the same time, rather than try to pick a number and broadly apply it.

With a bit of refinement, I think MBTI could be very useful for studying personality development and change.

 

[Jennywocky]

For reasons that have already been mentioned. People answer the questions to try to turn out like famous people with the personality type. People read the description and want to be that type. As an experiment I took the test and answered as honestly as possible to all questions after just playing a gig last night at a bar and socializing with a ton of people. I turned out ENTP. If I sit at home for another two weeks I'll probably turn out INTP. I bet I can be ENTJ one night and INTJ another. I am sure a professional psychologist has to be the one to truly decide your personality type. Isn't this test based off of some book Jung wrote like 100 years ago? Haven't we made a ton of advancements in psychology since then? Also I find myself limiting my personality to some description I read on the internet. This test is crap. We should seriously just burn it. You should just be who you are and fuck the test.

Thank goodness. Let's shut down the site, now, before someone tries to add some nuance to your opinion!



... more srsrly, the Big Five are probably the most quantified "psychological attributes" currently known in psychology that have some sort of public presence. Those can be PARTIALLY correlated to MBTI attributes, but not completely.

I'm not sure what sort of advancements you'd expect in personality theory, when it's all mostly about rational conclusions drawn from specified assumptions and bolstered by case studies, which might or might not properly represent a cross-section of human beings. There are far too many things that can impact psychological development and personality... with a lot of the subjective environmental factors... to consider "advancement" in the same way we'd consider technological advancement, for example. There are just ideas and theories that try to take advantage of the most broad expanses of data rather than limited pools of data.

All that being said, I personally haven't had the issues you've had with the test. My type reading hasn't really changed over the fifteen years since I ran into MBTI, and I'm happy to accept any ambiguities in my type read. I think part of the problem is people's expectations for the test, and the need to shoehorn people into very rigid boxes of only 16 types, where actually MBTI even has developed a lot of variation to help explain deviations, including the Step 2 and Step 3 tests, function theory, perspective theory, and whatever else. I'm not sure who actually expects people to fit squarely into a type box; of course it would be ridicuous to expect there only to be 16 specific types of people... except for the fact that within each of those boxes, there's a lot of variation. So even in the same box and sharing some broad motivations and coping mechanisms and communication approaches and priorities, people are not really the same.