MBTI Personality Types

[Cavil]

I was told by my professor in my college psychology class that the MBTI personality test is just pop psychology because there is no research to back it up. Research as in, people who score in a specific area would most likely do well in the same area applied. If there was a long term study done to either prove/disprove Myers and Briggs' research, only then would I be able to fully accept the idea of being placed in a box. But it's sure fun to take.

 

[White Masquerade]

I was told by my professor in my college psychology class that the MBTI personality test is just pop psychology because there is no research to back it up. Research as in, people who score in a specific area would most likely do well in the same area applied. If there was a long term study done to either prove/disprove Myers and Briggs' research, only then would I be able to fully accept the idea of being placed in a box. But it's sure fun to take.

Yeah. I feel you Lotus. Though I suggest to take a look at it again. MBTI by itself, is exactly what you and your psych professor described. Did you know that it's actually a tertiary source? What you really want to take a look at, is the direct work of Carl Jung. In his studies, he only came up with eight types. Other people came in as secondary sources, and added cognitive functions. The creators of MBTI then came in as a third source, pulled it all together into making 16 types, and then created the sketchy tests your professor is probably referring to.

• Jung talks about personality being primarily innate.
  
• MBTI sees them as preferences. <----This is why you test as INTJ one day, and come up as ISTJ later down the road. The MBTI really does what it says it does: test preferences.
  

When you get into Jung's initial work, even the MBTI starts making sense. You begin understand what the letters actually mean. Simple example:


The ST in ISTJ means the dominant function is either Sensing or Thinking. The I in ISTJ lets you know to pick the first letter: S. It also lets you know it is an introverted type of sensing.


The ST in ESTJ means the dominant function is either Sensing or Thinking. The E in ESTJ lets you know to pick the second letter: T. It also lets you know it is an extroverted type of thinking.


If you look the functions of both types up, you'll see what I mean. It doesn't work the same way for types ending in P by the way. It gets crazy. What I'm trying to say is this: your professor is right. There's just a lot more to the story.

 

[Makise Kurisu]

I was told by my professor in my college psychology class that the MBTI personality test is just pop psychology because there is no research to back it up. Research as in, people who score in a specific area would most likely do well in the same area applied. If there was a long term study done to either prove/disprove Myers and Briggs' research, only then would I be able to fully accept the idea of being placed in a box. But it's sure fun to take.

I can see where you are coming from, but if you do more studying on MBTI and cognitive functions, you will find that it is actually very accurate. I have been studying for about two years now, and I have found it to hold true in almost all cases. If you feel that it is not true because you keep getting different results on the tests, ignore the tests. They are generally inaccurate. The tests only ask questions specific to one or two letters. The only true way to find someone's type is to look at them all as a whole, and to look into the cognitive functions. INTJs and ISTPs are very similar, so you could get traits from INTJ and ISTP together and end up getting ISTJ as the result. If you look at the personality type as a whole instead of four letters, you will be able to type much more accurately. INTJs and ISTPs are similar, like I said, but ISTPs are much better in stressful situations than INTJs, and INTJs are more egotistical than ISTPs. Cognitive functions is the best way to go. INTJs and ISTPs both have Se and Ni, but ISTPs have Ti and Fe, while INTJs have Te and Fi. The Fi and Te combination makes INTJs very egotistical, and the Ti and Se makes ISTPs good in stressful situations.


Have you figured out your type yet?

[QUOTE="White Masquerade]Yeah. I feel you Lotus. Though I suggest to take a look at it again. MBTI by itself, is exactly what you and your psych professor described. Did you know that it's actually a tertiary source? What you really want to take a look at, is the direct work of Carl Jung. In his studies, he only came up with eight types. Other people came in as secondary sources, and added cognitive functions. The creators of MBTI then came in as a third source, pulled it all together into making 16 types, and then created the sketchy tests your professor is probably referring to.

• Jung talks about personality being primarily innate.
  
• MBTI sees them as preferences. <----This is why you test as INTJ one day, and come up as ISTJ later down the road. The MBTI really does what it says it does: test preferences.
  

When you get into Jung's initial work, even the MBTI starts making sense. You begin understand what the letters actually mean. Simple example:


The ST in ISTJ means the dominant function is either Sensing or Thinking. The I in ISTJ lets you know to pick the first letter: S. It also lets you know it is an introverted type of sensing.


The ST in ESTJ means the dominant function is either Sensing or Thinking. The E in ESTJ lets you know to pick the second letter: T. It also lets you know it is an extroverted type of thinking.


If you look the functions of both types up, you'll see what I mean. It doesn't work the same way for types ending in P by the way. It gets crazy. What I'm trying to say is this: your professor is right. There's just a lot more to the story.

[/QUOTE]
Have you done any reading on cognitive functions, Masque?

 

[Cavil]

@White Masquerade


It does seem to work differently in diverging contexts. However, I think the problem with so many people is that they take the test and place themselves in their own personality box, when it should be used as a guide. If someone takes the MBTI once every day, then there's a higher risk that they'll act like the result they're given that day, thus rendering the test 'surprisingly accurate'.


@Makise Kurisu


I'm not trying to take the MBTI test again. I'm bipolar, so of course I would get different results each time. I'm inserting a different point of view that I would like to discuss into the conversation.

 

[Makise Kurisu]

@Makise Kurisu
I'm not trying to take the MBTI test again. I'm bipolar, so of course I would get different results each time. I'm inserting a different point of view that I would like to discuss into the conversation.

And I am discussing that point of view with you. I was just curious what type you are. It is up to you whether or not you tell me or take the test or not. I was just asking. Though it would be interesting to try to type your different personalities. I've heard of people with bipolar disorder that have figured out the MBTI type for all of their personalities.

 

[White Masquerade]

@Makise Kurisu


I have! I also agree with you when you say the system is almost true in all cases. It was easy to pick out my father as an ISFJ through noticing the functions. I know his tendencies...but that doesn't mean I'll ever really understand him xD . That Si+Fe is too strong. (> )


And yeah of course, like L0tus says, it can't describe everyone to a T, but DANG.


It can get close. Like real close.





For people who take the time to understand the things behind it, it's a seriously good tool. It's kind of like cheating huh, Ma-chan? ( ) (It's crazy how you can usually type everyone BUT yourself (> ). I'm still looking =/)

 

[Makise Kurisu]

@Makise Kurisu[/URL]
I have! I also agree with you when you say the system is almost true in all cases. It was easy to pick out my father as an ISFJ through noticing the functions. I know his tendencies...but that doesn't mean I'll never really understand him xD . That Si+Fe is too strong. (> )


And yeah of course, like L0tus says, it can't describe everyone to a T, but DANG.


It can get close. Like real close.





For people who take the time to understand the things behind it, it's a seriously good tool. It's kind of like cheating huh, Ma-chan? ( ) (It's crazy how you can usually type everyone BUT yourself (> ). I'm still looking =/)

I don't know many ISFJs. I don't want to imagine Si+Fe. Fe needs Ni. ISTPs have the perfect stack of functions. Ne and Te are pointless because Te wants everything to make sense, and Ne is about seeing possibilities. Ti makes sense of everything instead of expecting it to make sense, and Ni makes sense of abstract information. Si is pointless and I should not have to explain why that is. It doesn't matter that the Dr. Pepper you are drinking tastes different than the Dr. Pepper you drank last week. Fi is selfish. ISTPs Fe+Se takes in information, and our Ti+Ni makes sense of it and organizes it. It all works out perfectly. That is why we are the master type.


It isn't cheating, Masque. There is no such thing. If it is available, it is fair game.

 

[White Masquerade]

(:3) Oh, what's this? You know better than to say one type the best xD . Everyone is lovely in their own special way.

 

[Makise Kurisu]

No. ISTPs are best. xP SPs are the best, so you're up there too. ;3 Not everyone is lovely, Masque. INTJs suck. (Sorry INTJs.)

 

[White Masquerade]

[QUOTE="Makise Kurisu]No. ISTPs are best. xP SPs are the best, so you're up there too. ;3 Not everyone is lovely, Masque. INTJs suck. (Sorry INTJs.)

[/QUOTE]
I'm going to withhold my comments so I don't end up dead. I will say SP rocks, but nothing more

 

[Xen Chaotik]

[QUOTE="White Masquerade]I'm going to withhold my comments so I don't end up dead. I will say SP rocks, but nothing more

[/QUOTE]
Your kung-fu is strong, but the INFJ kung-fu will give you a run for your money.

 

[White Masquerade]

[QUOTE="General Meow]Your kung-fu is strong, but the INFJ kung-fu will give you a run for your money.

[/QUOTE]
Puh-leeeez. Everyone knows INFJ are crybabies. They're too soft to learn Kung Fu (8))

 

[Xen Chaotik]

[QUOTE="White Masquerade]Puh-leeeez. Everyone knows INFJ are crybabies. They're too soft to learn Kung Fu (8))

[/QUOTE]
I understand the pain you feel, my friend. It's okay, come to General's shoulder and he will be your ears to rant to.

 

[White Masquerade]

[QUOTE="General Meow]I understand the pain you feel, my friend. It's okay, come to General's shoulder and he will be your ears to rant to.

[/QUOTE]
I would rather cry on Makise's shoulder. SP unite. I don't want to get infected with INFJ coooooties

 

[Makise Kurisu]

[QUOTE="White Masquerade]I'm going to withhold my comments so I don't end up dead. I will say SP rocks, but nothing more

[/QUOTE]
I'm an ISTP, so I'm supposed to be an asshole. I wouldn't be an ISTP otherwise


 


[QUOTE="White Masquerade]I would rather cry on Makise's shoulder. SP unite. I don't want to get infected with INFJ coooooties

[/QUOTE]
Yeah, stay away from those INFJs. I live with one and feel like he is turning me into an N. It's scary. Having no grip on reality sounds terrible.


You can cry on my shoulder anytime you need. Just beware the intuitives.


 


[QUOTE="White Masquerade]Yeah. I feel you Lotus. Though I suggest to take a look at it again. MBTI by itself, is exactly what you and your psych professor described. Did you know that it's actually a tertiary source? What you really want to take a look at, is the direct work of Carl Jung. In his studies, he only came up with eight types. Other people came in as secondary sources, and added cognitive functions. The creators of MBTI then came in as a third source, pulled it all together into making 16 types, and then created the sketchy tests your professor is probably referring to.

• Jung talks about personality being primarily innate.
  
• MBTI sees them as preferences. <----This is why you test as INTJ one day, and come up as ISTJ later down the road. The MBTI really does what it says it does: test preferences.
  

When you get into Jung's initial work, even the MBTI starts making sense. You begin understand what the letters actually mean. Simple example:


The ST in ISTJ means the dominant function is either Sensing or Thinking. The I in ISTJ lets you know to pick the first letter: S. It also lets you know it is an introverted type of sensing.


The ST in ESTJ means the dominant function is either Sensing or Thinking. The E in ESTJ lets you know to pick the second letter: T. It also lets you know it is an extroverted type of thinking.


If you look the functions of both types up, you'll see what I mean. It doesn't work the same way for types ending in P by the way. It gets crazy. What I'm trying to say is this: your professor is right. There's just a lot more to the story.

[/QUOTE]
It actually does work the same way for types ending in P, it is just reversed.


To use your quote as an example:


The ST in ISTP means the dominant function is either Sensing or Thinking. The I in ISTP lets you know to pick the second letter: T. It also lets you know it is an introverted type of thinking.


The ST in ESTP means the dominant function is either Sensing or Thinking. The E in ESTP lets you know to pick the first letter: S. It also lets you know it is an extroverted type of sensing.

 

[White Masquerade]

True! It's just for newbies, the flipping back and forth cause of P & J, might be confusing at 1st @-@

 

[Makise Kurisu]

[QUOTE="White Masquerade]True! It's just for newbies, the flipping back and forth cause of P & J, might be confusing at 1st @-@

[/QUOTE]
Is it really that confusing?


I dunno. That stuff has always come naturally to me.

 

[White Masquerade]

Diff people understand things differently!

 

[Makise Kurisu]

[QUOTE="White Masquerade]Diff people understand things differently!

[/QUOTE]
I know. It just seems way too easy for me.

 

[Ceraunic]

INTJ.


I'd say it's completely accurate.

 

[Makise Kurisu]

INTJ.
I'd say it's completely accurate.

I'm sorry. lol


I'm just kidding. Welcome

 

[Ceraunic]

[QUOTE="Makise Kurisu]I'm sorry. lol
I'm just kidding. Welcome

[/QUOTE]
Haha. Thank you.

 

[Sibylline Oracle]

INTP. Only reason it's probably accurate is because of how unlovable and awkward I am. Can't help but wonder if I'm not just some INTJ or ISTP in disguise though...

 

[Makise Kurisu]

INTP. Only reason it's probably accurate is because of how unlovable and awkward I am. Can't help but wonder if I'm not just some INTJ or ISTP in disguise though...

Might be an ISTP, you say? I think I will have to pull you aside for questioning to confirm. Just don't tell @White Masquerade because he doesn't like when I pull people off to the side for questioning. It got bloody a couple times and he doesn't let me do it anymore.

 

[Sotp]

I'm an INFP-T, but when I engage in a debate or an academic discussion, I find myself veering more towards INTP-A (that is to say, the INTP descriptions fit me more than then INFP).