This is just one of those stupid idle curiosities, so indulge me if you will. I was wondering about personality types here, and if perhaps there might be some patterns among us. I’ve never taken an actual Meyers-Briggs test, but I’ve done one of the “based-on” kind that puts me as an INTJ. Apparently this is a rare personality type, but I was wondering if there might be more here. Anyhow, I’d be interested in knowing how others of you score; it might be interested to se what type of bunch we are. I suppose there might be those of you out there who think that such tests are bunk, but I’ll say that reading an INTJ description was very revealing about myself.

For those of you who don’t know your Meyers-Briggs personality type, there is a “based-on” test at http://www.humanmetrics.com/cgi-win/JTypes1.htm

You got an ENTP over here...

INTP

Edit:

Precise about their descriptions, INTPs will often correct others (or be sorely tempted to) if the shade of meaning is a bit off. While annoying to the less concise, this fine discrimination ability gives INTPs so inclined a natural advantage as, for example, grammarians and linguists.

Sound familiar?

Ditto (INTP)

- Trevor

ISTP

ENTJ..

Myers-Briggs is complete bullshit, no better than horoscopes, numerology, or tarot.

Have you ever read through one of the MBTI type descriptions for someone other than yourself? I have. I've read through many of them, and just like horoscopes, they all sound like they accurately describe me. They all fail the same simple horoscope test that James Randi gave to that college class on his Nova special (everyone rates their horoscopes as being 99 percent accurate, only to find that the entire class was given the exact same horoscope reading).

From the Skeptic's Dictionary Entry on MBTI:

The people at CPP aren’t too concerned if the list doesn’t seem to match your type. They advise such persons to see the one who administered the test and ask for help in finding a more suitable list by changing a letter or two in your four-letter type. (See the report CPP publishes on its Web site.) Furthermore, no matter what your preferences, your behavior will still sometimes indicate contrasting behavior. Thus, no behavior can ever be used to falsify the type, and any behavior can be used to verify it.

Keep in mind that this is based on Carl Jung's concepts, a man who believed in some pretty weird and unscientific shit.

Myers-Briggs is complete bullshit, no better than horoscopes, numerology, or tarot.

Ah, come on. There's more to it than that. It's at least based on how you perceive yourself, not arbitrary data like the time you were born or how your parents named you or total randomness.

On the other hand, I don't think that anyone is really going to base their lives on this stuff. It's just for fun.

Edit: Oh, and to refute, I've read some of the other types (though not all), and none of them seem to describe me remotely as well as INTP does. OTOH, some people have more significant tendencies than others (M-B terminology aside). Mine are fairly significant. Perhaps yours are not.

ENTP, apparently.

It's just for fun.

Some companies make hiring or promotion decisions based on MBTI. Now what's fun?

I've never seen any such thing. Basing any such promotion on any sort of psychological test is asinine, regardless of it's accuracy.

But if that's the case, I understand where you're coming from. At least it's better than an E-Meter or an Oxford Personality Test.

INTJ

Oh, and if you have read the Jargon File, it is amusing to note their discussions on the matter.

Ditto. ENTP

Both at work and at home, ENTPs are very fond of "toys"--physical or intellectual, the more sophisticated the better.


Ah. That explains it.

ENTP.

The one VW audi teaches in their training classes is much more useful. If I get another minute free from my tards, I'll post it.

INFP.

Some companies make hiring or promotion decisions based on MBTI. Now what's fun?

I'd say that's fairly silly, though so are interviews and resumes if you get right down to it. Anyone who believes they can make solid hiring decision based on one conversation (except perhaps marketing-sales people for whom making a good first impression is part of the job) is naive at best. The same goes for looking at few sheets of paper, although at least the information there is more substantial. Still, I’d agree the Meyers-Briggs probably shouldn’t be used for those kinds of decisions.

For my money, though, Meyers-Briggs is useful, not for observing absolutes but for tendencies. And it’s just fun between “friends”.

On the other side of things, I do remember a Dilbert cartoon a couple of weeks ago in which the HR person said something to the effect of, “your personality does not fit within the parameters of our test, therefore you have not personality and one will be assigned to you.”

Apparently I'm INTJ as well. Guess you're not the only one.

I'd have to say, I think Tony is right on this one. Not because of anything the result tells me, but because the questions are so totally bogus and touchy-feely. I really had no idea how to answer half of those questions, and with the only possibilities being Yes or No, I can't think it's very accurate.

On the other hand, I don't really mind being called a "Mastermind"

On the other hand, I don't really mind being called a "Mastermind"

Yes, that does lend the test some credibility.

I don't really mind being called a "Mastermind"

Green, Green, Blue, Red.

Green, Green, Blue, Red.

two white pegs and one black peg.

INTJ here, too...

Yet another INTJ, weren't those supposed to be rare ... ?

weren't those supposed to be rare ... ?

Yes, and that was one of the reasons I started this. Either the profile was wrong (which is possible), and/or this board doesn't represent an even distribution of personality types. Certainly the latter is true at least as we've only had one "S" so far in my counting (sorry Meatballman, you're the odd man out!).

Maybe my googlism is right....maybe I am a woman...

I'd say there's a large percentage of geeks here (especially those posters that are likely to respond within a few hours), which would tend to skew things towards INT*, if you are to believe the literature on such things.

Edit: The Keirsey web site provides some statistics.

Yet another INTJ, weren't those supposed to be rare ... ?

empegs are also rare

Another INTJ here...

/Michael

It's at least based on how you perceive yourself, not arbitrary data like the time you were born or how your parents named you or total randomness.

Yet, as was mentioned elsewhere in the thread, many of the questions aren't easily answered and the process essentially amounts to pseudo-random selection.

And anyway, the selection method is just a red herring. What's important is the end-result. And in this case, the end result is a set of descriptions which are vague enough to apply to anyone... just like horoscopes.

I think the main problem with horoscopes, or MBTI, or any other similar system, is that it tries to make a blanket judgment about something as complex as the human psyche, claiming that a few paragraphs can sum up a personality. They try to split it up into sections, but do you really believe there are only a dozen personality types on this planet? Okay, horoscopes have 12, MBTI has 16, but my point is that the granularity is still too large. With such extreme variation among personalities that I see in this world, even a thousand detailed personality classifications wouldn't be granular enough.

I think there is some value in the concept of having an axis for various facets of your personality. I think MBTI's problem is in assuming that there are only four axes, and that one must choose whether they fall at either end of a given axis to fit their cookie cutter. Because the resolution isn't granular enough, they have to generalize too much in their descriptions of each of the 16 possible results. Hence, the horoscope-like flavor to their types.

I see human tendencies more like a multi-band equalizer, with many many different and subtle traits (Dozens? Hundreds? Thousands?), and a wide variation of balance among those traits. Unfortunately, that metaphor doesn't work into a packageable, saleable product with a simple quick-and-easy multiple-choice test.

Hmm... Then again, with the right marketing, the TFEQ personality system could one day supplant MBTI as the most accurate personality test ever devised. And then... I shall rule the world... and everyone on this BBS will get a piece. But remember, I still have dibs on New Zealand...

iStP or "Top Gun"

Highway to the Danger Zone.

iStP or "Top Gun"
Highway to the Danger Zone.

So is that the personality type that enjoys bad eighties-era manufactured-pop songs?