Oh okay, thank you. I used to be fluent in how to use technology but these days I’ve kind of fallen out of the loop. This is also my first forum I’ve ever joined so I’m really unsure how to work a lot of things. Thanks for the assist =)
Mistyping happening ALOT
- Thread starter zsedftghj830
- Start date
If you mean looking at the million of INFJs on "10 Signs you're an INFJ" youtube comments saying "omg that's literally me", then yeah. Peak.
If you mean going to reddit and seeing a bunch of INFJs say shit that would have you question yourself, as an INFJ, absolutely.
That's the judging alarum going off. Stop making us look bad online. It's gross.
Being an under developed INFJ is like seeing a younger sibling (I have no siblings) struggle
with basic math.
You know they can do it, but you're embarrassing the fuck out of me, shut up and go learn in silence before you say some more stupid shit in a group setting or in
front of people who will be real judgers and permanently think you're a moron.
If you mean going to reddit and seeing a bunch of INFJs say shit that would have you question yourself, as an INFJ, absolutely.
That's the judging alarum going off. Stop making us look bad online. It's gross.
Being an under developed INFJ is like seeing a younger sibling (I have no siblings) struggle
with basic math.
You know they can do it, but you're embarrassing the fuck out of me, shut up and go learn in silence before you say some more stupid shit in a group setting or in
front of people who will be real judgers and permanently think you're a moron.
Last edited:
Lmao. I said something like this in the 'Infjs are rare' thread. The irony is too good.
Accuracy of information is necessary. The way to figure out if something is accurate, is if it aligns with not only a core 'truth' that you find in pattern recognition, but in consistency despite your own leanings or 'wishes'. What I've found to be the case, more often than not, is a rise to self-actualized ideations. Instead of a focus on a consistent and logical pathway to ascertaining what is accurate based on gathering of a specific pattern; there is a new mode of thinking that says, "I feel this, so this is what is 'true'", regardless of pattern. It's like putting on a gorilla costume and saying, "Now, I'm a gorilla". No, you only look like one, and this is the difference.
Where we find trouble in figuring out the best path to accuracy is in the differing terminologies and systems. Oh well.
Last edited:
I thought this thread was about pinging @Misty a lot.
My mbti is DINGBAT
My mbti is DINGBAT
Firstly, I think you're correct, that anyone interested in typology should keep diving into it in order to learn, especially if they are calling out mistypings without sufficient knowledge. Though, in the spirit of what you've said about INFJs making you question yourself, your delivery is extremely harsh. You may have better success in communication if you don't initiate it with calling someone a potential moron. If you hope for any reciprocation, easing up a bit in the aggression may be useful to you.
We all had to start somewhere. Being mindful of where we began can give a dose of empathy when confronted with anyone who may or may not have comparative knowledge. The point is, encouraging them not to stay there, but to keep moving and growing.
Just my advice. Take from it what you will.
If you're a dingbat, I'm a dingbat.
Lol reminds me of the scene in 'The Notebook'.
<3
D
Deleted member 16771
I'm not sure it really matters.
MBTI does not have any objective criteria defining its 'types', and the only validity it possesses is tautological. That is, groups of questionnaire answers can be categorised as relating to the dichotomies.
This tautological validity varies bases upon which test is taken. There is no formal validity outside of testing.
There's a strange kind of gatekeeping which goes on when people declare others to be 'mistyped', and the comparison does not look well for the accuser.
I don't know what motivates accusations of mistyping, but it doesn't seem too wholesome to me. We'll notice, for example, that Intuitives don't tend to complain about people being mistyped as any kind of sensor. The principal objection seems to come from people who self-identify with a certain label, and then object to certain others identifying with the same label.
Occasionally there will be attempts to 'correct' supposedly 'mistyped' people, but I've never seen any good come of this process - invariably it's psychologically damaging for the object of the effort.
Personally I don't see anything wrong with people choosing a type for themselves that might be more 'aspirational' than strictly' real'. This is how they see themselves; or this is who they want to be.
Exploring MBTI is a deeply personal endeavour, and there is absolutely no basis whatever by which any outsider has any right to interfere with that.
MBTI does not have any objective criteria defining its 'types', and the only validity it possesses is tautological. That is, groups of questionnaire answers can be categorised as relating to the dichotomies.
This tautological validity varies bases upon which test is taken. There is no formal validity outside of testing.
There's a strange kind of gatekeeping which goes on when people declare others to be 'mistyped', and the comparison does not look well for the accuser.
I don't know what motivates accusations of mistyping, but it doesn't seem too wholesome to me. We'll notice, for example, that Intuitives don't tend to complain about people being mistyped as any kind of sensor. The principal objection seems to come from people who self-identify with a certain label, and then object to certain others identifying with the same label.
Occasionally there will be attempts to 'correct' supposedly 'mistyped' people, but I've never seen any good come of this process - invariably it's psychologically damaging for the object of the effort.
Personally I don't see anything wrong with people choosing a type for themselves that might be more 'aspirational' than strictly' real'. This is how they see themselves; or this is who they want to be.
Exploring MBTI is a deeply personal endeavour, and there is absolutely no basis whatever by which any outsider has any right to interfere with that.
I doubt what motivates people to dismiss the validity of types is getting the wrong result. You can always get the right result with enough attempts, lol.
The problem is a complex one. Certainly tests have no validity, yet they're probably the tool most people use overall. So it could be that most people are mistyped. But in relation to what valid criterion? I suppose the criterion of the precise description of the cognitive functions detailed in e.g. Jung's Psychological Types. This is the book where the core concepts are articulated. No doubt they could do with an update, it's been 100 years since the book was published after all, but it seems to me that the basic typological classification is still correct.
However, very few people have actually read Psychological Types because it's a long and demanding work. Which suggests that most people's interest in personality types is not one of clarity of objective understanding. It's something more personal, more subjective, a platform for various types of self-exploration. I think it can also be seen as people experimenting with understandings of who they are. It's a process. Everyone of us will understand themselves better in a year's time, regardless of whether we think we are 'correctly typed' or not.
Sure, there are influential youtubers who may be mistyped and may therefore propagate the mistyping among their audience. But supposing they were correctly typed, would that really change anything? If the core of people's interest in personality types is not clarity of objective understanding but something more personal and self-exploratory, I doubt it. It has to be humbly admitted that only a small minority of the population values objective accuracy. It's not that the others are too dumb to do the same, it's that their values are oriented differently.
The most we can do is engage critically with dubious new models of personality, not with people's self-typings, in my opinion. Leave the individual people alone and critique MBTI, C.S. Joseph, Objective Personality, Vultology, and so on. There's plenty of work to do on that front, and it's vastly more important, as well as better targeted, than focusing on individuals with different value orientations.
D
Deleted member 16771
Do you have an argument for why you think this is the case?
The tautology between empirical input and concept is the basis of practically all personality instruments in psychology. There is no 'validity' outside of that, however much it goes against lay opinion about the usefulness of tests.
In the case of MBTI, that 'Questionnaire Answer X = Concept X' is its only empirical grounding. It's weak validity, for sure, but it's the only kind that it can claim.
That's right Hos, I'm quite happy to grant it weak validity intead of no validity.
Pinging? Was dis? Now my mbti is dingbat too so.. wee! ^_^
@Winterflowers ... I read the title. I really am a dingbat. I get it now.
Hi and welcome to the forum @lostinthisworld !
I find it best to take a wide perspective on this. An analogy - soccer is a game played by many different people in many different ways. There are the kids kicking a ball around in the school playground at one end of the spectrum, then there are the world class professional players competing in international competitions followed by millions of fans at the other end of the spectrum. They all play soccer in their own ways, and they all get enjoyment, satisfaction, comradeship, competition, interest, physical developmen, tactical skill, and many others things, from it in their own way. It's like this with MBTI - a lot of us play with it like kids in the playground, but a few start to cross over into the more substantial aspects. Let folks have their fun with it if they are enjoying themselves - life's too short to pick them to pieces. So personally I'm not going to tell a lad or girl in the playground that they are not a Ronaldo level player - and for all I know one day, they might be.
One of the best ways I know of homing in on our closest fit type is to behave like it, based on the descriptions in the literature. You soon know if the shoes you've just bought are a bad fit - try walking a few miles in them. So I think we should be tolerant of people who seem to be a bad fit for the type they claim - it's hard and exhausting to sustain a misfit type, so it does resolve itself eventually. And who am I to judge someone else's type anyway? Maybe it's me that has the wrong typological glasses on.
Last edited:
Very well said John. I think you are right. Who am I to judge the people who are merely playing with it? It seems that my failure with this whole thing was my inability to understand that not everyone approaches the topic of MBTI with the same seriousness I always have. And as for my unusually judgmental tone, it probably has a lot to do with me being diagnosed with BPD and having extreme reactions to mundane things. Thank you so much for all the input guys =)
time to shock the hell out of you... i have yet to see "The Notebook"
Not at all shocking.
It was a strange movie working on the premise that one should do anything for love, including harming others in pursuit of it. Though, the overall story was endearing (I think). The specific scene was in reference to the commonality between friends (at least from how I recall it-- it's been many years).
This said, I don't think you missed anything. Lol.
Not at all shocking.
It was a strange movie working on the premise that one should do anything for love, including harming others in pursuit of it. Though, the overall story was endearing (I think). The specific scene was in reference to the commonality between friends (at least from how I recall it-- it's been many years).
This said, I don't think you missed anything. Lol.
:3 good to know.