It is currently Thu Nov 23, 2017 10:53 am

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 132 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Myers-Briggs, redux
PostPosted: Thu Oct 06, 2016 2:15 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2005 2:10 am
Posts: 5857
These are my scores and the descriptions that rang true:

Openness moderate 65%

Conscientiousness high 77.5% (orderly, organized, unlikely to develop addictions)

Extraversion low 22.5% (conserve energy, reserved, independent, deliberate)

People who are low in Extraversion tend to be fairly independent, and do not need a lot of admiration or recognition from others in order to feel satisfied. They tend not to be interested in money or status, and would rather lead a life that is personally pleasing than one that gains them the attention of others.

Agreeableness high 87.5%

Neuroticism low 30%

In general, low Neuroticism scorers report solid self-esteem and a positive outlook on life.

_________________
Avatar photo by Richard Lykes, used with permission.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Myers-Briggs, redux
PostPosted: Thu Oct 06, 2016 3:28 pm 
Offline
Lali Beag Bídeach
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2005 4:42 pm
Posts: 13250
Location: Rivendell
Dave_LF wrote:
Lali already touched on this, but it's important to understand that the definition of "neuroticism" used on this test is different from the word's general meaning*. It has to do with how susceptible people are to negative emotions (sadness, paranoia, jealousy, anger), and how quickly they recover from them. Some versions of the test try to avoid confusion by inverting the score and renaming it "emotional stability." As (evidently) the most neurotic person here**, I feel obliged to point this out. :blackeye:

I think big-5 is less fun than MB because it tends to just echo back what you tell it. MB at its best will take your answers and use them to make predictions in areas it didn't ask about at all. Except, it doesn't always work. For some people, it doesn't seem to work at all.

*Why do people insist on appropriating well-understood words from common circulation and reusing them as technical terms with related but quite different meanings? :nono:

**o=90, c=60, e=35, a=80, n=67.5


:highfive: from your fellow "neurotic" INFP who's been masking as an INTP for decades to hide the neuroticism.

I don't like the use of the term here either because it does come with a negative connotation from the outset. Of course, you can say the same about some of the other terms, too.

For Dave and myself, especially, a nice thing to keep in mind is that the research also shows that people who are higher in neuroticism but also high in processing speed for incoming information (something I venture to say we both possess) don't experience more negative emotions than our lower neuroticism counterparts. It's only when you're slower at processing incoming info and, therefore, have to rely on that trait to interpret the situation that the person experiences more negative emotions/moods.

Also, interesting info for our extraverts: positive mood is at the core of extraversion. :) And the research shows that even acting like an extravert increases positive emotions and moods. (I do find this to be true for myself. Perhaps this explains my score of 55% on this test. I've been having to act and be more extraverted since working, and I find that I kind of don't hate it so much. It is still draining to me in the long-term but energizing in the day-to-day.)

General other info that is interesting:

Conscientiousness is the most important trait for predicting GPA.
But it doesn't have as strong of a predictive factor for scores on the SAT. (GPA is an overall, broad assessment of multiple skills—the product of several years' worth of work. The SAT is more about measuring aptitude in a single test.)
High openness equates to higher verbal ability scores on the SAT but not necessarily math scores.
Higher neuroticism relates to anxiety and self-consciousness but can also mean taking tests over and over again to do better each time.

I guess the important thing to keep in mind is that, while these five categories are the basic tendencies a person is born with (yes, they're genetic), there is always a dynamic process going on in our lives that can lead to characteristic adaptations and changes. IOW, our basic tendencies* (OCEAN) are relatively stable, but we adapt to our society, culture, circumstances, etc. I think this truth is why things like the MBTI probably don't sit well with some. We clearly know that we change as people over time.

*Other basic tendencies (i.e., inherited characteristics) include "cognitive abilities, artistic talent, sexual orientation, and the psychological processes underlying acquisition of language." (I'm taking most of this info from my Theories of Personality textbook.)

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Myers-Briggs, redux
PostPosted: Thu Oct 06, 2016 5:17 pm 
Offline
Wrong within normal parameters
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 17, 2006 9:59 am
Posts: 4195
Location: The other side of Michigan
Lalaith wrote:
:highfive: from your fellow "neurotic" INFP who's been masking as an INTP for decades to hide the neuroticism.

I'm still a bit on the fence over that. I'm definitely more F'ed now than I was six months ago, or at least more willing to admit it (to myself), but there's no shortage of T in there either. Which one is in charge varies from day to day and decision to decision. I might have to cop out and put an X in that position pending further studies (which is an awfully T thing to say, huh? :upsidedown:)
Quote:
For Dave and myself, especially, a nice thing to keep in mind is that the research also shows that people who are higher in neuroticism but also high in processing speed for incoming information (something I venture to say we both possess) don't experience more negative emotions than our lower neuroticism counterparts. It's only when you're slower at processing incoming info and, therefore, have to rely on that trait to interpret the situation that the person experiences more negative emotions/moods.

I think the "neuroticism" trait corresponds pretty well with the pop-psychology label "highly sensitive person," which I accept. The wikipedia page for that (which now redirects to the more science-y "sensory processing sensitivity") notes that the trait is a positive in individuals who also score high on openness to experience, because the combination enables them to have particularly intense aesthetic experiences (no argument from me).
Quote:
General other info that is interesting:

Another one that was in the news recently: of a variety of factors studied, in heterosexual relationships, the woman's openness to experience score was the single best predictor of sexual frequency (positive correlation). The man's made no difference.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Myers-Briggs, redux
PostPosted: Thu Oct 06, 2016 5:41 pm 
Offline
Just Keep Singin'
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2005 12:35 am
Posts: 4645
Location: Boston, MA
Interesting. Here is mine. No big surprises. Glad to see my "neuroticism" is only 10%!

YOU ARE HIGHLY OPEN TO EXPERIENCE

Your score for openness was high, at 95%.
Openness describes a person’s tendency to think in abstract, complex ways. High scorers are prone to associative thinking, meaning that they readily see relationships between things. People high in Openness are more able to connect seemingly unrelated concepts, making them more likely to appreciate art and unusual ideas.
People who are high in openness are typically:
Creative
Imaginative
Adventurous
Intellectual
Unconventional
Artistically Inclined
High Openness scorers are more likely to be politically liberal and to participate in artistic and cultural activities in their leisure time. They tend to be drawn to artistic and scientific careers. High Openness scorers are also more likely to have a high IQ.

YOU ARE HIGHLY CONSCIENTIOUS

Your score for Conscientiousness was high, at 85%.
Conscientiousness describes a person’s ability to exercise self-discipline and control in order to pursue their goals. High scorers are organized and determined, and are able to forego immediate gratification for the sake of long-term achievement.
People who are high in Conscientiousness are usually:
Orderly
Dependable
Hardworking
Cautious
People high in Conscientiousness are more likely to be successful in their careers and less likely to develop addictions of all kinds. They have high levels of self-control and are good at resisting impulses. They usually have neat, organized homes and orderly, well-planned lives.

YOU ARE MODERATELY EXTRAVERTED

Your score for Extraversion was moderate, at 62.5%.
Extraversion describes a person’s inclination to seek stimulation from the outside world, especially in the form of attention from other people. Extraverts engage actively with others to earn friendship, admiration, power, status, excitement, and romance. Introverts, on the other hand, conserve their energy, and do not work as hard to earn these social rewards.
Extraversion seems to be related to the emotional payoff that a person gets from achieving a goal. While everyone experiences victories in life, it seems that extroverts are especially thrilled by these victories, especially when they earn the attention of others. Getting a promotion, finding a new romance, or winning an award are all likely to bring an extrovert great joy.
In contrast, introverts do not experience as much of a “high” from social achievements. Thus, they don’t make as much effort to seek them out. Introverts tend to be more content with simple, quiet lives, and rarely seek attention from others.
Your mid-range score on this dimension indicates that you are fairly average in your motivation to seek out social rewards. You probably have some desire for admiration, influence, and prestige, but you can also be content when you’re not winning recognition from others.

YOU ARE HIGH IN AGREEABLENESS

Your score for Agreeableness was high, at 77.5%.
Agreeableness describes a person’s tendency to put others’ needs ahead of their own, and to cooperate rather than compete with others. People who are high in Agreeableness experience a great deal of empathy and tend to get pleasure out of serving and taking care of others.
People who are high in Agreeableness tend to be:
Kind
Sensitive
Cooperative
Compassionate
Agreeableness is a good predictor of the quality of relationships: people high in the trait are more likely to keep friends and less likely to fall out with people. They are more likely to think of other people kindly and to be forgiving of faults or slights.

YOU ARE LOW IN NEUROTICISM

Your score for neuroticism was low, at 10%.
Neuroticism describes a person’s tendency to experience negative emotions, including fear, sadness, anxiety, guilt, and shame. While everyone experiences these emotions from time to time, people low in Neuroticism seem especially resistant to them.
People who are low in Neuroticism are typically:
Carefree
Optimistic
Relaxed
Self-Confident
Calm
Low Neuroticism scorers are less likely to get divorced or to suffer mental illness. They tend to handle stress well and take unfortunate events in stride. Major stressors like losing a job or getting a divorce are less likely to cause depression or anxiety in people who have low levels of Neuroticism. In general, low Neuroticism scorers report solid self-esteem and a positive outlook on life.

_________________
"Live! Live! Live! Life is a banquet, and most poor suckers are starving to death!" - Auntie Mame

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Myers-Briggs, redux
PostPosted: Thu Oct 06, 2016 6:00 pm 
Offline
Lali Beag Bídeach
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2005 4:42 pm
Posts: 13250
Location: Rivendell
Dave_LF wrote:
Lalaith wrote:
:highfive: from your fellow "neurotic" INFP who's been masking as an INTP for decades to hide the neuroticism.

I'm still a bit on the fence over that. I'm definitely more F'ed now than I was six months ago, or at least more willing to admit it (to myself), but there's no shortage of T in there either. Which one is in charge varies from day to day and decision to decision. I might have to cop out and put an X in that position pending further studies (which is an awfully T thing to say, huh? :upsidedown:)


No, I get it, and I can switch on my T quite handily, as evidenced by the past 20 years or so. I'm just more willing to admit that, for me, suppressing the emotions isn't the same as not really having them in the first place.

Quote:
I think the "neuroticism" trait corresponds pretty well with the pop-psychology label "highly sensitive person," which I accept. The wikipedia page for that (which now redirects to the more science-y "sensory processing sensitivity") notes that the trait is a positive in individuals who also score high on openness to experience, because the combination enables them to have particularly intense aesthetic experiences (no argument from me).


No argument from me either. I agree with this for myself as well.

Quote:
Another one that was in the news recently: of a variety of factors studied, in heterosexual relationships, the woman's openness to experience score was the single best predictor of sexual frequency (positive correlation). The man's made no difference.


That is interesting!

Jewel, et al., it is interesting to read your scores. I know this is probably not the most authoritative test on the Big Five, but it's an intriguing start.

Just remember that there are positives and negatives to each end of the spectrum. Highly open people may have wonderful imaginations, but people on the other end of the spectrum are practical and down-to-earth. Agreeable people might be trusting, but people on the other end of the spectrum are suspicious—not necessarily a negative thing. (Being overly trusting can get you in trouble, while being suspicious can keep you safe.) But, yes, there are some undeniably negative traits for some of these.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Myers-Briggs, redux
PostPosted: Thu Oct 06, 2016 6:58 pm 
Offline
bioalchemist
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2007 12:08 am
Posts: 9740
Location: the dry land
Frelga wrote:
This is actually the first personality test I've seen that is capable of reflecting neurological disorders. Low extroversion plus high neuroticism, for example, could be correlated to social anxiety.

So I actually have social anxiety. Based on my own experience with it, it's something completely outside of emotion and how those emotions are expressed or regulated. It's more like a state of being than anything else, and emotion is overlaid on it. So I'm not sure how it would correlate with neuroticism.

_________________
When you can do nothing what can you do?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Myers-Briggs, redux
PostPosted: Thu Oct 06, 2016 7:32 pm 
Offline
Hobbit
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 15, 2006 7:45 pm
Posts: 4876
Location: Missouri
Your score for openness was 75%.
Your score for Conscientiousness was high, at 90%.
"People high in Conscientiousness are more likely to be successful in their careers and less likely to develop addictions of all kinds. They have high levels of self-control and are good at resisting impulses. They usually have neat, organized homes and orderly, well-planned lives." :rofl: Neat, organized home! Ha! :rofl:

Your score for Extraversion was low, at 20%.
Your score for Agreeableness was moderate, at 65%.
Your score for neuroticism was low, at 15%.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Myers-Briggs, redux
PostPosted: Fri Oct 07, 2016 3:38 am 
Offline
Throw me a rope.
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 11:13 pm
Posts: 5691
Location: Deep in Oz
Your score for Openness was high, at 97.5%.
Your score for Conscientiousness was low, at 45%.
Your score for Extraversion was low, at 45%.
Your score for Agreeableness was high, at 87.5%.
Your score for Neuroticism was low, at 27.5%.

Relatively low N score was surprising for someone who lives on emotion. Actually, Openness score was also surprising to me.

_________________
Mornings wouldn't suck so badly if they came later in the day.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Myers-Briggs, redux
PostPosted: Sun Oct 09, 2016 5:32 pm 
Offline
Creature of the night
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2005 1:36 pm
Posts: 8370
Location: Where least expected
YOU ARE HIGHLY OPEN TO EXPERIENCE
Your score for openness was high, at 97.5%.
Openness describes a person’s tendency to think in abstract, complex ways. High scorers are prone to associative thinking, meaning that they readily see relationships between things. People high in Openness are more able to connect seemingly unrelated concepts, making them more likely to appreciate art and unusual ideas.
People who are high in openness are typically:
Creative
Imaginative
Adventurous
Intellectual
Unconventional
Artistically Inclined
High Openness scorers are more likely to be politically liberal and to participate in artistic and cultural activities in their leisure time. They tend to be drawn to artistic and scientific careers. High Openness scorers are also more likely to have a high IQ.

YOU ARE LOW IN CONSCIENTIOUSNESS
Your score for conscientiousness was low, at 37.5%.
Conscientiousness describes a person’s ability to exercise self-discipline and control in order to pursue their goals. High scorers are organized and determined, and are able to forego immediate gratification for the sake of long-term achievement. Low scorers are impulsive and easily sidetracked.
People who are low in Conscientiousness are usually:

Impulsive
Disorganized
Spontaneous
Carefree
People who are low in Conscientiousness are more likely to develop addictions of all kinds, as they have trouble resisting the impulse to engage in pleasurable activities. They also have more disorganized homes and offices. On the other hand, they tend to be more flexible and spontaneous, and do well in unpredictable environments where they must respond to constantly changing circumstances.

YOU ARE MODERATELY EXTRAVERTED
Your score for Extraversion was moderate, at 57.5%.
Extraversion describes a person’s inclination to seek stimulation from the outside world, especially in the form of attention from other people. Extraverts engage actively with others to earn friendship, admiration, power, status, excitement, and romance. Introverts, on the other hand, conserve their energy, and do not work as hard to earn these social rewards.
Extraversion seems to be related to the emotional payoff that a person gets from achieving a goal. While everyone experiences victories in life, it seems that extroverts are especially thrilled by these victories, especially when they earn the attention of others. Getting a promotion, finding a new romance, or winning an award are all likely to bring an extrovert great joy.
In contrast, introverts do not experience as much of a “high” from social achievements. Thus, they don’t make as much effort to seek them out. Introverts tend to be more content with simple, quiet lives, and rarely seek attention from others.
Your mid-range score on this dimension indicates that you are fairly average in your motivation to seek out social rewards. You probably have some desire for admiration, influence, and prestige, but you can also be content when you’re not winning recognition from others.

YOU ARE HIGH IN AGREEABLENESS
Your score for Agreeableness was high, at 92.5%.
Agreeableness describes a person’s tendency to put others’ needs ahead of their own, and to cooperate rather than compete with others. People who are high in Agreeableness experience a great deal of empathy and tend to get pleasure out of serving and taking care of others.
People who are high in Agreeableness tend to be:
Kind
Sensitive
Cooperative
Compassionate
Agreeableness is a good predictor of the quality of relationships: people high in the trait are more likely to keep friends and less likely to fall out with people. They are more likely to think of other people kindly and to be forgiving of faults or slights.

YOU ARE MODERATE IN NEUROTICISM
Your score for Neuroticism was moderate, at 45%.
Neuroticism describes a person’s tendency to experience negative emotions, including fear, sadness, anxiety, guilt, and shame. While everyone experiences these emotions from time to time, some people are more prone to them than others.
This trait can be thought of as an alarm system. People experience negative emotions as a sign that something is wrong in the world. You may be in danger, so you feel fear. Or you may have done something morally wrong, so you feel guilty. However, not everyone has the same reaction to a given situation. High Neuroticism scorers are more likely to react to a situation with fear, anger, sadness, and the like. Low Neuroticism scorers are more likely to brush off their misfortune and move on.
Your score indicates that you are fairly typical in your tendency to experience negative emotions. You probably feel sadness, worry, anger, and guilt about as much as the average person. You are neither overly reactive, nor especially resistant to the stresses of life.
Register now to save your results

_________________
Take my hand, my friend. We are here to walk one another home.


Avatar from Fractal_OpenArtGroup


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Myers-Briggs, redux
PostPosted: Sun Oct 09, 2016 7:07 pm 
Offline
Living in hope
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2005 12:43 am
Posts: 38578
Location: Sailing the luminiferous aether
Nothing that surprised me much here:

Quote:
Your score for openness was high, at 95%.

Your score for conscientiousness was 70%, which is in the moderate range.

Your score for Extraversion was moderate, at 47.5%.

Your score for Agreeableness was high, at 75%.

Your score for Neuroticism was moderate, at 50%.

_________________
“There, peeping among the cloud-wrack above a dark tor high up in the mountains, Sam saw a white star twinkle for a while. The beauty of it smote his heart, as he looked up out of the forsaken land, and hope returned to him. For like a shaft, clear and cold, the thought pierced him that in the end the Shadow was only a small and passing thing: there was light and high beauty for ever beyond its reach.”
― J.R.R. Tolkien, The Return of the King


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Myers-Briggs, redux
PostPosted: Sun Oct 09, 2016 8:00 pm 
Offline
Lali Beag Bídeach
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2005 4:42 pm
Posts: 13250
Location: Rivendell
I do think it's interesting that almost all of us are high or very high in openness. The other scores seem more scattered around, but all but one or two have scored high in openness. I wonder if that's somehow correlated to online communication preferences/practices.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Myers-Briggs, redux
PostPosted: Sun Oct 09, 2016 8:10 pm 
Offline
Pleasantly Twisted
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 6:35 pm
Posts: 8996
Location: Black Creek Bottoms
As it turns out I have low agreeableness, which surprised me at first. Looking over the questions, though, I submit the relevant ones have more to do with trust than empathy.

I can empathize with people just fine. That makes me trust them less, not more.

_________________

Resentment is no excuse for baldface stupidity.
-- Garrison Keillor

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Myers-Briggs, redux
PostPosted: Sun Oct 09, 2016 8:22 pm 
Offline
Lali Beag Bídeach
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2005 4:42 pm
Posts: 13250
Location: Rivendell
Agreeableness, by their definition, isn't about how nice you are, though, or whether or not you have sufficient empathy. It's more about how trusting you are and how cooperative you are.

Wiki says this:

A tendency to be compassionate and cooperative rather than suspicious and antagonistic towards others. It is also a measure of one's trusting and helpful nature, and whether a person is generally well-tempered or not. High agreeableness is often seen as naive or submissive. Low agreeableness personalities are often competitive or challenging people, which can be seen as argumentative or untrustworthy.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Myers-Briggs, redux
PostPosted: Sun Oct 09, 2016 8:42 pm 
Offline
Pleasantly Twisted
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 6:35 pm
Posts: 8996
Location: Black Creek Bottoms
Well that's the problem. I'm compassionate AND suspicious. :whistle: I think it may be a writer thing.

_________________

Resentment is no excuse for baldface stupidity.
-- Garrison Keillor

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Myers-Briggs, redux
PostPosted: Sun Oct 09, 2016 9:01 pm 
Offline
Lali Beag Bídeach
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2005 4:42 pm
Posts: 13250
Location: Rivendell
Sounds like it could be. ;)

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Myers-Briggs, redux
PostPosted: Sun Oct 09, 2016 9:55 pm 
Offline
Ni Dieu, ni maître
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2005 6:19 pm
Posts: 1783
Location: Home
Ax, I score moderate on everything - except high on neuroticism.

I think I score moderate to low on agreeableness because I wildly prefer to work alone. I am not a team person - teams remind me too much of sport at school, always the last to be chosen and I often fear them as being judgmental.

_________________
"nolite te bastardes carborundorum".


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Myers-Briggs, redux
PostPosted: Tue Oct 11, 2016 1:27 pm 
Offline
Wrong within normal parameters
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 17, 2006 9:59 am
Posts: 4195
Location: The other side of Michigan
Lalaith wrote:
I do think it's interesting that almost all of us are high or very high in openness. The other scores seem more scattered around, but all but one or two have scored high in openness. I wonder if that's somehow correlated to online communication preferences/practices.

I think there's a straightforward explanation (bolding mine):
Wikipedia wrote:
Openness involves six facets, or dimensions, including active imagination (fantasy), aesthetic sensitivity, attentiveness to inner feelings, preference for variety, and intellectual curiosity. A great deal of psychometric research has demonstrated that these facets or qualities are significantly correlated. Thus, openness can be viewed as a global personality trait consisting of a set of specific traits, habits, and tendencies that cluster together.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Myers-Briggs, redux
PostPosted: Tue Oct 11, 2016 1:51 pm 
Offline
Lali Beag Bídeach
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2005 4:42 pm
Posts: 13250
Location: Rivendell
Agreed.

I'd also bold the "intellectual curiosity" part. I know what drew me into TORC was a desire to discuss Tolkien in a deep and complicated way that I just couldn't seem to find IRL with anyone (without them wanting to poke their eyeballs out). Certainly, I think our online communities continue to satisfy intellectual curiosity, as well as give us variety, a place to discuss inner feelings, indulge our active imaginations, and take part in aesthetically pleasing experiences. (Kitten videos totally qualify, imo.)

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Myers-Briggs, redux
PostPosted: Wed Oct 12, 2016 7:55 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2005 8:37 am
Posts: 4688
Location: Melbourne, Victoria
It’s interesting returning to this thread after a decade. I was one of the early and passionate advocates of the MBTI on these forums, and while I still believe it’s broadly correct in principle I only think about it rarely these days.

The main reason, I think, is that in the last ten years I’ve had far more experience of people, and particularly in the last couple of years my social skills have improved a great deal. So it seems to me that I now make intuitively many of the same assessments I used to need to think through step-by-step. For example, whether a person is more or less comfortable talking about abstract topics (the S v N distinction). Also, as the MBTI actually suggests, people become less clearly-defined as they get older, so as my peer group ages these sorts of things become less apparent. I still believe that Jung was basically correct that certain parts of our personality are hard-wired in the same way that left- and right-handedness are, and that Myers and Briggs found a convenient way to sort some of the major aspects, but I haven’t ‘typed’ anyone in years. Which isn’t to say I’ve rejected the MBTI, but I find I don’t really need it now.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Myers-Briggs, redux
PostPosted: Tue Dec 27, 2016 5:56 pm 
Offline
halo optional
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 10:26 pm
Posts: 7843
Túrin Turambar wrote:
It’s interesting returning to this thread after a decade. I was one of the early and passionate advocates of the MBTI on these forums, and while I still believe it’s broadly correct in principle I only think about it rarely these days.

The main reason, I think, is that in the last ten years I’ve had far more experience of people, and particularly in the last couple of years my social skills have improved a great deal. So it seems to me that I now make intuitively many of the same assessments I used to need to think through step-by-step. For example, whether a person is more or less comfortable talking about abstract topics (the S v N distinction). Also, as the MBTI actually suggests, people become less clearly-defined as they get older, so as my peer group ages these sorts of things become less apparent. I still believe that Jung was basically correct that certain parts of our personality are hard-wired in the same way that left- and right-handedness are, and that Myers and Briggs found a convenient way to sort some of the major aspects, but I haven’t ‘typed’ anyone in years. Which isn’t to say I’ve rejected the MBTI, but I find I don’t really need it now.


I think this thread is interesting, too. I haven't read back enough pages to find it, but clearly there is a newer test that you all are taking, and posting your results here. I might go take it today, if I have a minute, but I suspect I already know what it will tell me. Maybe not. I can see.

Túrin, what's very interesting to me about your post is that it seems you were using your knowledge of MBTI to observe and then "type" people, and then use that knowledge as a basis for appropriate social interaction. In other words, you were using your knowledge to cognitively "think" through social situations, and then thoughtfully apply an "if-then" decision schematic. "If" they are an introvert, "then" they will respond better to interaction X than Y. That sort of thing. You may have clearly said this before, but for some reason I just caught it.

Which, quickly, I must say... how very "T" of you. :P

Whereas I love MBTI because it gives me... a scaffolding, a structure of sorts, on which to hang my already- deduced, subconsciously attained people knowledge. In other words, I think I already knew all this about people, and I actually tend to make pretty good decisions about how to act accordingly, "knee-jerk" style. But I never really saw the PATTERN before I learned MBTI, and I love that. No doubt a function of my always-present "J" tendencies.

There's a reason INFJs are rare. We are such a contradiction. Yes, we are ruled by emotional responses, but we would REALLY like that rampant messiness to be organized, thank you very much. :)

_________________
"What do you fear, lady?" Aragorn asked.
"A cage," Éowyn said. "To stay behind bars, until use and old age accept them, and all chance of doing great deeds is gone beyond recall or desire.”
― J.R.R. Tolkien, The Return of the King


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 132 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group