How MBTI Works | INFJ Forum

How MBTI Works

B

barbad0s

Banned
Apr 18, 2011
8,227
3,786
889
MBTI
POOP
I was trying to look for an explanation for why MBTI is supposed to work the way it does, and then I found this.

neither the Myers-Briggs nor the Jungian models offer any scientific, experimental proof to support the existence, the sequence, the orientation, or the manifestation of these functions.[19]
Click to expand...

I like you guys, but why do we have entire forums for fretting over this bullshiot?


Edit:

Pls note, my point is not that I'm wondering why we have forums for MBTI. I should have made it more clear.

I simply asked that question to highlight the fact that I think MBTI is nonsensical and really weird to discuss with any amount of seriousness = my main point.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Reactions: endersgone
I don't know the answer to your question but I am glad that Wikipedia is now considered a reliable source.
 
All you guys focus on is Wiki not being reliable. Point blank: Have YOU ever seen any information out there that states otherwise?
 
  • Like
Reactions: the
I don't fret over it at all. Nope. No fretting done here.

Now...I might consider fretting over there....but...you know...that takes considerable effort to move over there just to fret.

Have you thought about asking the guitars?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jill Hives
Innate human desire for understanding ones self and others selves. And simple curiosity.
 
You can be like something without being exactly like everything else that is also like it.
 
Kgal said:
I don't fret over it at all. Nope. No fretting done here.

Now...I might consider fretting over there....but...you know...that takes considerable effort to move over there just to fret.

Have you thought about asking the guitars?
Click to expand...

so this thread is about how you emotionally handle MBTI
 
niffer said:
I was trying to look for an explanation for why MBTI is supposed to work the way it does, and then I found this.



I like you guys, but why do we have entire forums for fretting over this bullshiot?
Click to expand...

MBTI doesn't work. It's a diluted bastard child of Jung's work. Insofar as functions, empirical research is currently under way by neurologist Dario Nardi. I believe [MENTION=751]Peppermint[/MENTION] created a thread with his video and some information on his work (and published book) somewhere. To your actual question: people like to feel special. Creating false pedestals and all that jazz. It does have uses, though. Forums are like campfires: places for people to gather, share stories and get some in return, before moving on with their journey through life. Some people take it much too seriously, like being a [insert type here] is the end all of all end alls. It's pretty silly.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hush, endersgone and tfg345i4u5lw
niffer said:
I was trying to look for an explanation for why MBTI is supposed to work the way it does, and then I found this.



I like you guys, but why do we have entire forums for fretting over this bullshiot?
Click to expand...

Its a better form of astrology. There was never anything scientific in this nonsense, but I am glad I met most of you. So to speak. I come to this forum to talk to people, not always about MBTI... in fact usually not about MBTI.
 
niffer said:
All you guys focus on is Wiki not being reliable. Point blank: Have YOU ever seen any information out there that states otherwise?
Click to expand...
Just using common sense should be enough to know how horribly inaccurate and subjective MBTI AND Jungs cognitive function work is.

A guy hugs a child

people will say its Fi, Fe, Ti, Te, Se so on and so forth... there is no way to prove its any 1 specific trait, or that any of those functions even exist.
 
Billy said:
Just using common sense should be enough to know how horribly inaccurate and subjective MBTI AND Jungs cognitive function work is.

A guy hugs a child

people will say its Fi, Fe, Ti, Te, Se so on and so forth... there is no way to prove its any 1 specific trait, or that any of those functions even exist.
Click to expand...

Well, so you think that FE, and FI are without merit? Meaning they don't describe behaviors, and that you can't identify more toward one than the other.

I'm new at this, but I have felt more accurate descriptions of behaviors and traits, either prenatal or learned, about stuff I can ID with. But for example the way I see FE in me, while strong, is very different than the way others explain it; regardless, I still see it. But then maybe it's something we all have and doesn't describe one person better than another other.

But at the same time:

I guy hugs a child.

People will say it's love, weird curiosity, sympathy, being protective. Are any of these more clearly defined. We are just describing behaviors and emotions.
I'm not sure if I understand how the science is either strong or weak.
 
Yeah of course this forum is great and you people are all lovely and we've put it to good use. Of course types kinda sorta fit us and functions kinda sorta sound like they might work. Why is it that people even discuss and nitpick about function order when there's no proof for the stacking of functions existing though? It's like seriously arguing over who's imaginary friend had an egg sandwich for lunch. Why can't people be Fe Fi Ti Te? Or Se Ti Fi Ne? What's up with this randomly decided on framework?

@Radiant Shadow Found this http://personalitycafe.com/cognitive-functions/92291-dario-nardis-neuroscience-personality.html on it. But it's kind of like diagnosing imaginary illnesses before proving that the illnesses even exist...it should be done the other way around. Especially with something as subjective and weak as functions descriptions.
 
Common Interest.

Honestly, I don't perceive MBTI forums as any different from Comic/Sports Teams or any other forums dedicated to a particular subject.

I personally prefer the threads outside of MBTI discussions now. However, I will engage when I see that I have something valuable to contribute.
 
Everything has a forum, it seems, pretty much anything, so I'm not surprised there would be some for certain "personality types". I don't take it serious, I had different results myself and I'm quite convinced that a type can change depending on your current life events, I know I adjust myself. I used to score as INFJ quite consistenly before but my life was also consistent, be it good or bad. I go through more changes right now, so I have to adjust myself. "If we are not able to change a situation, we change ourselves".
It's nice to meet everyone here, it feels familiar for some reason, INFJ or not - doesn't matter. It is, perhaps, easier to talk to like minded people on a personality forum. Yes, it's nothing more than a test scored more or less in a similar way by the set of the members. You have at least something in common (maybe ideas, principles, etc., not just hobbies), while in real life I meet very few people I enjoy talking to.
 
niffer said:
@Radiant Shadow Found this http://personalitycafe.com/cognitive-functions/92291-dario-nardis-neuroscience-personality.html on it. But it's kind of like diagnosing imaginary illnesses before proving that the illnesses even exist...it should be done the other way around. Especially with something as subjective and weak as functions descriptions.
Click to expand...

I think the entire point of his research was to see if there was actually phenomenon present to investigate. For any task, people showed activity in different brain regions that each have associations correlating with Jung's cognitive functions. He was able to use theory [Jung] to explain evidence [differentiated brain patterns and activity]. Certainty come with ample evidence and visibility in reality (i.e, can be seen outside of a lab); in other words, it's definitely a work in progress but is still a good first step to bringing personality theory into the realm of testability. Admittedly, he needs much higher resolution scans and more people, but it was a pilot study, imo, designed more to raise awareness than make any definite conclusions. This line of research is still very young.
 
Rferraris said:
Well, so you think that FE, and FI are without merit? Meaning they don't describe behaviors, and that you can't identify more toward one than the other.

I'm new at this, but I have felt more accurate descriptions of behaviors and traits, either prenatal or learned, about stuff I can ID with. But for example the way I see FE in me, while strong, is very different than the way others explain it; regardless, I still see it. But then maybe it's something we all have and doesn't describe one person better than another other.

But at the same time:

I guy hugs a child.

People will say it's love, weird curiosity, sympathy, being protective. Are any of these more clearly defined. We are just describing behaviors and emotions.
I'm not sure if I understand how the science is either strong or weak.
Click to expand...

Its weak because it isn't science at all. Its just observation and theory but no evidence and no testing. In that way MBTI is almost identical to astrology. Which as we all know is complete bullshit. The only difference is that MBTI makes much more realistic observations.

"love" is another catchall phrase. I don't agree with it, I think its absurd.

Its exactly the Fe / Te difference that made me understand early on why this cognitive function stuff is junk. If a guy hugs a little kid who is crying

is it Fe? He feels the child's emotions empathetically and wants to soothe them?

or

is it Te? He understands that this is what the child needs and will stop the crying?

is it both?

In my case I have noticed that my motivation for doing 1 thing over the other is almost equally the same for all functions. That I don't really favor 1 thing over another, that the combined understanding of the entire situation is what I read into and make a choice on. Which can literally be ALL functions... well, if I am using ALL functions equally, what's the point of having functions at all?

Its there that the box MBTI and Jung tries to put us in begins to break down. Because too many people are trying to put themselves into a box with these theories not out of understanding but due to pride. INFJs are the WORST when it comes to this and thats been my experience here.

The amount of smug lip smacking self love that I see demonstrated, telling people you're psychic, or a medium, and can read their feelings because you are an INFJ and then using the pseudoscience of MBTI verbiage to back it up, its nonsense.

I've been slowly whittling down my usage of MBTI terms... just because the more I think about it the more absurd it seems. I stick around this forum because I like people here and its a good community. that we talk about MBTI at all is just a sideshow I deal with. Most forums have a "theme" but its the connections we make to the people that I like personally.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back