The Syndicate

Dyslexicon wrote: ↑Thu May 28, 2020 5:50 am

TonyStarkPrime wrote: ↑Mon Apr 27, 2020 7:36 am

JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Mon Apr 20, 2020 3:27 pm There's a member of the faculty in our psych department that absolutely loathes Myers-Briggs and shuns its very mention in his presence (which is understandable, to be fair, given that it's not at all scientific). Still, since he likes to be a party pooper my peers and I have made a tradition of gushing enthusiastically over what our types are whenever he is nearby.

I’ve never met psych people who are fans. I can get them behind big 5 trait tests though and there are strong correlations, so, I don’t know.

A lot pf psych people will learn that "MBTI bad" and "Big 5 good". It's very puzzling to me as I see them as being extremely similar systems, though MBTI gives the (somewhat false) impression of being more confined. I can see it from the perspective that MBTI in itself was developed for very practical reasons (sorting different types of women into fitting jobs during WW2), and so it had (and can have) a more generalised and practical use. However, the Jungian psychology the MBTI builds on is very rich, and Jung is one of the greater figures in the whole field of psychology. I think many people dismiss the ideas before they really get to the juicy stuff of what it's about. Which can probably be said about a lot of things in life. =p

No personality or typology system is something concrete that exists in life. I view it as a sort of language. Some of these languages are very useful in describing and making sense of personality, which is often otherwise very hard to describe and discuss with a shared understanding without having anything to grab on to.

Also, I think it's important to be clear about what a specific personality system does and does not account for. MBTI is about cognitive preferences. So it's all about how you gather and sort through information. Which is a pretty limited part of what one can call personality. So it doesn't say anything about what a person does, what motivates them or what drives them. But it can describe, fairly well imo, how a person prefers to perceive and judge information.

But the Enneagram is the real shit for those who want to go to the dark depths of ego and illusions.

MacDougall wrote: ↑Sun May 10, 2020 3:55 am I used to fluctuate between campaigner and debater but for many years I have been firmly campaigner on every test I've done.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Mon Apr 27, 2020 7:43 am

TonyStarkPrime wrote: ↑Mon Apr 27, 2020 7:36 am

JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Mon Apr 20, 2020 3:27 pm There's a member of the faculty in our psych department that absolutely loathes Myers-Briggs and shuns its very mention in his presence (which is understandable, to be fair, given that it's not at all scientific). Still, since he likes to be a party pooper my peers and I have made a tradition of gushing enthusiastically over what our types are whenever he is nearby.

I’ve never met psych people who are fans. I can get them behind big 5 trait tests though and there are strong correlations, so, I don’t know.

I'm not a fan of Big 5 either, though I dwell in the arena of cognitive science and am more psychology-adjacent. I view the entire field of personality psychology with a little derision. These kinds of things can still be fun though and that's what's most important. Folks don't often go around touting Myers-Briggs as science anyway.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Mon Apr 20, 2020 3:27 pm There's a member of the faculty in our psych department that absolutely loathes Myers-Briggs and shuns its very mention in his presence (which is understandable, to be fair, given that it's not at all scientific). Still, since he likes to be a party pooper my peers and I have made a tradition of gushing enthusiastically over what our types are whenever he is nearby.