Is economics a good major for an INFJ?What are the best career choices for an INFJ?

[the]

its completely subjective. Its not based on facts or science, its all theory that is unproven and unsupported with anything close to real.

Idk I'd usually agree with you but, although we didnt really cover the material specifically in class lectures the textbooks would usually touch upon how mbti is accurate for some careers and job positions. Which makes sense that if you test a certain way you would probably match up to a corresponding career.

The test doesn't have to be accurate for your 'true personality' but it just has to match up what you say and think you like to what a career requires (which has pretty measurable characteristics).

If even more clarity is needed:
i mean you basically are just saying that you like xyz so you get paired with a job that caters to trait xyz.

 

[the]

Yes, they could, but as was mentioned above, they would maybe have to interact a lot with people who are money-hungry and that could be pretty stressful for INFs. It has to do with the work environment, a fair amount.

Maybe a backbone could help. Every job is going to have stress. Get over it.

 

[subwayrider]

Maybe a backbone could help. Every job is going to have stress. Get over it.

Yes, but perhaps it's best to minimize stress as much as possible, especially considering INFJs go batshit crazy when under stress. They're pretty prone to suicide, etc.

 

[Billy]

Your statement is completely subjective. Its not based on facts or science, its all theory that is unproven and unsupported with anything close to real.

AS well as YOUR FACE

This is patently untrue!

 

[subwayrider]

This is patently untrue!

You gotta love INFJs forum for the way no one cares about debates enough to keep them going after the first round.

No, we like our peace and harmony.

 

[Billy]

If you want to know what people who identify with the INFJ Personality Type end up going into, statistically, it's:

- Teaching
- Psychology
- Religious work
- Medicine ---> Psychiatry
- Social work
- Counseling
- Art
- Music
- Child Development
- Writing

Bottom line is that people who identify with INFJ have certain traits and preferences. This is what it means to be INFJ; this is what binds INFJs together. If there weren't certain prerequisites for being INFJ, everyone would be INFJ. These preferences make certain career paths less suitable for them; these preferences make them less suitable for certain careers. It doesn't mean an INFJ CAN'T follow a certain career path, it just means that there is work that is more likely to appeal to those traits and preferences.

I think...

People mistype and misidentify in MBTI constantly. Which is hilarious, because its not even real shit, its just a box to put yourself in. Its like running a virtual machine and saying that's your computer. There is much more to the person than their type and even as a preference, I have seen people change constantly. That people DO change and its all pseudoscience is reason enough not to use it to decide what kind of career you want. Its not based on very much. I can get any score I want on those tests (the caliber almost EVERYONE uses to decide their type) nobody goes to professional MBTI testers (do they even exist?) You actually have to have a degree of faith in it, to really buy into it, which makes it a little too wonky for my tastes.

It would be a real shame if the next self typing INFJ Steve Jobs went into "spiritual work" instead of making the next giant tech company because he is an "INFJ" and he has to hold dear to that self made box of a persona... I dunno man, it just seems wrong to buy into and then tell other people that stuff to me.

 

[Billy]

You gotta love INFJs forum for the way no one cares about debates enough to keep them going after the first round.

No, we like our peace and harmony.

There wasn't a debate to be had.

 

[subwayrider]

There wasn't a debate to be had.

Kinda.

 

[Billy]

Kinda.

Do you admit that MBTI is just a model? There really is no way to prove if someone is a true INFJ, there is nothing liable to be quantified.

 

[AhSver]

If you like counting money and finding ways they are created and transferred, how money behaves, gets invested, looses its value and gains it back and most importantly, how to make money out of poor and repressed for the greatness of the elite you gonna love Economics!
Or if you really hate money and want to see what can be done to make it less painful and you are ready to spend your life with numbers and such emotions - economics is also for you!
How about law?

 

[subwayrider]

People mistype and misidentify in MBTI constantly. Which is hilarious, because its not even real shit, its just a box to put yourself in.

OK. What would be "real shit?"

There is much more to the person than their type and even as a preference, I have seen people change constantly.

Type is sorta like the groundwork, it doesn't attempt to fully define the person.

Identifying with a type doesn't preclude change.

That people DO change and its all pseudoscience is reason enough not to use it to decide what kind of career you want.

I don't think anyone here is advocating that. I, at least, am saying: "do what you want. By the way, this is what INFJs usually do, if it helps. Just 'cause INFJs are stereotypically bad at math doesn't mean you can't be an engineer."

nobody goes to professional MBTI testers (do they even exist?)

Yes.

You actually have to have a degree of faith in it, to really buy into it, which makes it a little too wonky for my tastes.

If you drink tap water, if you vote, if you use brand-name toothpaste and deodorant, if you do what your doctor tells you to, if you're religious, if you don't think the world is ending next month, if you're an atheist, if you use zero-calorie sweeteners, if you eat at KFC, if you only eat organic, if you're ever in a committed relationship... you have bought into something that you need a certain degree of faith in to believe.

It would be a real shame if the next self typing INFJ Steve Jobs went into "spiritual work" instead of making the next giant tech company because he is an "INFJ" and he has to hold dear to that self made box of a persona...

I think the point is that he wouldn't have gone into spiritual work because
A) He wouldn't follow it blindly
B) He would never have identified with INFJ anyway

I dunno man, I don't even know that much about this shit. I just picked it up because it's a cool hobby and I currently use it to understand the world. I was previously using a scientific lens where I would explain all this shit to myself in terms of physics and chemistry. Before that, I used to like the Beatles, so my world was the Beatles and I would see the Beatles everywhere. I also like drugs... see what I'm getting at? Yes, it's bullshit.

XD

 

[subwayrider]

Do you admit that MBTI is just a model? There really is no way to prove if someone is a true INFJ, there is nothing liable to be quantified.

Well, there aren't any blood tests for bipolar disorder or clinical depression, but millions of people die every year because of them. The mind is a tricky thing.

Of course it's just a model. But, so is quantum physics, or newtonian physics, or Molecular Orbital Theory, or VSEPR or String Theory or...

I want to shut up now.

 

[Billy]

OK. What would be "real shit?"

Something that we can know for certain via testing and analysis.

Type is sorta like the groundwork, it doesn't attempt to fully define the person.

I know it doesnt attempt to describe the full person... it doesn't really describe anything we can know for sure.

Identifying with a type doesn't preclude change.

Whats the point of type then?

I don't think anyone here is advocating that. I, at least, am saying: "do what you want. By the way, this is what INFJs usually do, if it helps. Just 'cause INFJs are stereo typically bad at math doesn't mean you can't be an engineer."

Yeah the part about that that is annoying is that your entire premise (INFJ) isnt solid enough to give that kind of advice though, ya know? Especially since so many people mistype and all that. I dont think anyone can even be types properly, its too fluid... the definitions are too loose, its like astrology in that way. The thing that MBTI has value in, is that it gets people into thinking about motives people have and why they may be that way. Where I get annoyed is when it begins to draw lines and then say there are these distinct types and you belong to one of them... thats where it gets all messy in MBTI. It forgets to quantify those claims. And if its just a preference then whats the point of having a type at all? Since you can easily be whatever you want whenever you want.

Yes.

Do they really exist or is it just some group of people with a community college degree in it who are trying to make a business out of it?

If you drink tap water, if you vote, if you use brand-name toothpaste and deodorant, if you do what your doctor tells you to, if you're religious, if you don't think the world is ending next month, if you're an atheist, if you use zero-calorie sweeteners, if you eat at KFC, if you only eat organic, if you're ever in a committed relationship... you have bought into something that you need a certain degree of faith in to believe.

No, it doesn't require faith to check up that your food is organic, it doesn't take faith to be in a relationship. What are you even talking about? and even if it did, how does that make any difference? MBTI is a system that labels people and puts people into boxes, and if people are going to believe in it, then they should know its a faith based thing and not something that they can really rely on to be true universally. And if it cannot be applied in that way, its not a good idea to advise people based on it, if A. MBTI is completely subjective. B. People mistype and C. its just a preference.

It would be a shame to see someone gifted in Economics go into something else because they wanted to be an INFJ more than they wanted to do what they're suited towards.


I dunno man, I don't even know that much about this shit. I just picked it up because it's a cool hobby and I currently use it to understand the world. I was previously using a scientific lens where I would explain all this shit to myself in terms of physics and chemistry. Before that, I used to like the Beatles, so my world was the Beatles and I would see the Beatles everywhere. I also like drugs... see what I'm getting at? Yes, it's bullshit.

XD[/QUOTE]

I just don't think its a good idea to really tell people they should follow an INFJ path because it seems limiting to the person... might close them off to an option.

 

[88chaz88]

Who you are dictates what MBTI you have, not the other way around.

As such you shouldn't let your MBTI dictate what you do in your life, be it careers or relationships. If you think you'd enjoy economics and casual sex with twelve ISTJs at once then go for it.

 

[muir]

Jung discearned certain patterns in human outlook, behaviour, thinking etc

He outlined these patterns through cognitive functions

For example one pattern he outlined was that some people were energised by being around others whilst others needed to recharge after being around others. He called these two groups introverts and extroverts

Is it 'scientific'? Well in a career spanning many decades as an analytical psychologist he interviewed many thousands of people. I'd say the size of his sample pool gives his research some scientific veracity

He was also dealing with other abstract areas such as dreams. Once again this is a difficult area to quantify but should it then be discounted out of hand or does research yeild discearnable patterns and truths

Some people are more comfortable with abstracts than others and are more confident defining patterns and truths from them

 

[subwayrider]

Something that we can know for certain via testing and analysis.



I know it doesnt attempt to describe the full person... it doesn't really describe anything we can know for sure.


Whats the point of type then?



Yeah the part about that that is annoying is that your entire premise (INFJ) isnt solid enough to give that kind of advice though, ya know? Especially since so many people mistype and all that. I dont think anyone can even be types properly, its too fluid... the definitions are too loose, its like astrology in that way. The thing that MBTI has value in, is that it gets people into thinking about motives people have and why they may be that way. Where I get annoyed is when it begins to draw lines and then say there are these distinct types and you belong to one of them... thats where it gets all messy in MBTI. It forgets to quantify those claims. And if its just a preference then whats the point of having a type at all? Since you can easily be whatever you want whenever you want.



Do they really exist or is it just some group of people with a community college degree in it who are trying to make a business out of it?




No, it doesn't require faith to check up that your food is organic, it doesn't take faith to be in a relationship. What are you even talking about? and even if it did, how does that make any difference? MBTI is a system that labels people and puts people into boxes, and if people are going to believe in it, then they should know its a faith based thing and not something that they can really rely on to be true universally. And if it cannot be applied in that way, its not a good idea to advise people based on it, if A. MBTI is completely subjective. B. People mistype and C. its just a preference.

It would be a shame to see someone gifted in Economics go into something else because they wanted to be an INFJ more than they wanted to do what they're suited towards.


I dunno man, I don't even know that much about this shit. I just picked it up because it's a cool hobby and I currently use it to understand the world. I was previously using a scientific lens where I would explain all this shit to myself in terms of physics and chemistry. Before that, I used to like the Beatles, so my world was the Beatles and I would see the Beatles everywhere. I also like drugs... see what I'm getting at? Yes, it's bullshit.

XD

You know, it may be that you and I are just too uninformed to make a solid case, either way.

For instance, a while back I read one of DHT's posts. She was talking about neurotransmitter research as related to the psychological types. I don't remember the details, but if I grab the idea and run with it, I see definite possibilities. For instance, one way to identify an introvert could be to measure their serotonin levels in varying situations: around groups of people; with a close friend; alone in their room. That's at least a start.

Socionics is also significantly more scientific than MB, I hear. You can probably ask someone like bionic about that, but there seems to be research involving physical appearance. I know from your prior posts you don't believe in it, but maybe it's worth looking into, or will be.

If you reject MB on the basis of it being "subjective," you're also rejecting much of what, currently, is psychology. A lot of the psychological concepts I've learned about from books, etc., couldn't be at all be quantified, per se, or verified by chemical tests or anything like that-- and, yet, they can be very useful in predicting outcomes in the physical world. If a scientific model is no more valid than its usefulness in accurately predicting outcomes, then even something like MB can be said to be a valid theory. It can and does with fair accuracy predict outcomes in the real world. It's not infallible, but then, nothing is. That's why even in the physical sciences we have to develop different models for different situations, because not a single one will cover every possible situation. The best that can be done is to find some conglomerate of all of them, find a way to reconcile them, because they so seem to contradict each other.

So, I wouldn't rule it out completely. It can be very useful and even accurate, whether or not there is a blood test for INTJ.

 

[Billy]

You know, it may be that you and I are just too uninformed to make a solid case, either way.

For instance, a while back I read one of DHT's posts. She was talking about neurotransmitter research as related to the psychological types. I don't remember the details, but if I grab the idea and run with it, I see definite possibilities. For instance, one way to identify an introvert could be to measure their serotonin levels in varying situations: around groups of people; with a close friend; alone in their room. That's at least a start.

Socionics is also significantly more scientific than MB, I hear. You can probably ask someone like bionic about that, but there seems to be research involving physical appearance. I know from your prior posts you don't believe in it, but maybe it's worth looking into, or will be.

If you reject MB on the basis of it being "subjective," you're also rejecting much of what, currently, is psychology. A lot of the psychological concepts I've learned about from books, etc., couldn't be at all be quantified, per se, or verified by chemical tests or anything like that-- and, yet, they can be very useful in predicting outcomes in the physical world. If a scientific model is no more valid than its usefulness in accurately predicting outcomes, then even something like MB can be said to be a valid theory. It can and does with fair accuracy predict outcomes in the real world. It's not infallible, but then, nothing is. That's why even in the physical sciences we have to develop different models for different situations, because not a single one will cover every possible situation. The best that can be done is to find some conglomerate of all of them, find a way to reconcile them, because they so seem to contradict each other.

So, I wouldn't rule it out completely. It can be very useful and even accurate, whether or not there is a blood test for INTJ.

Yes I also reject most of psychology as subjective, since it is... although it does have that "statistics" portion as its base which gives it a tiny little more credibility than MBTI which offers nothing of note.

 

[subwayrider]

Yes I also reject most of psychology as subjective, since it is... although it does have that "statistics" portion as its base which gives it a tiny little more credibility than MBTI which offers nothing of note.

Guess you're not budging on this one.

Very well, I understand