Only thing I don't understand about being INFP is that I feel I'm extremely pessimistic. The description tends to describe the F as happiness and sunshine and rainbows and cupcakes and puppies and optimistic things... I tend to be pessimistic about most things.
That description is of and applies to a healthy feeler, someone with a balanced and stable psychology. That may not apply to you for a variety of reasons such as certain stressors throughout your life.
Post by Luto Esperanza on Sept 12, 2014 20:59:04 GMT -5
A WILD THREAD REVIVAL APPEARS
When I posted in this thread the first time I was a wee 15 year old INFP, since then I have very much evolved as a person and have significantly read into MBTI type testing. I am now very very confident in saying that I am an ENTP! I have been tested as an ENTP on various tests and I have enough understanding of the system to type myself now, so yeah! THREAD REVIVAL
Although Mevlevi is also going to be an ESTJ like Luto was, I've discovered. I apparently really like playing fascistic characters.
Post by Luto Esperanza on Sept 13, 2014 0:16:11 GMT -5
Alright, but whereas I'm all for scientific validation through peer reviewed article, I know that sounds very sarcastic, and it is not the best possible test to use to determine someone's personality, it is the best free one that I know of. It's also really interesting, when I took it and read the ENTP description I was astounded by how much I associated with this type. It's also meant to be very broad to allow for error (around and 85% confidence interval I think, considering the idea was conceived before psychology was a peer reviewed science), but I cannot at all believe that it has absolutely no merit. It has less merit than other ones that require a fee, but after interacting with other people who identify as ENTPs I can feel the connection I have with them. I have typed people on my own before they took the test and it was accurate. What does this say? It says that it does, indeed, speak. People often make the mistake of believing they are a cardboard cutout of their MBTI-Type and that is where their flaw is. The MBTI test is there to help you look into yourself and realize why you make certain decisions. It doesn't describe you to a tee because that would be preposterous and it doesn't describe your personality specifically, but generalizes a group of people who are like-minded.
I'm not proofreading this so if it gets ranty and jumbly then I apologize.
Post by Shun Minamoto on Sept 13, 2014 14:44:44 GMT -5
MBTI has exactly zero objective basis. It relies entirely on your own self-perception, meaning those without a clear mirror will have a much harder time with it. That's why you get some people who get wildly divergent results when they take the test. What's changing isn't their psychology, it's their perception of themselves.
The greatest strength of the MBTI isn't its non-existent accuracy, it's the fact that it gives people a language to discuss these things and ideas that they may not have otherwise had. On top of that, objectivity aside the MBTI is measuring your own view of yourself. This can allow you to find other people who see themselves (accurately or otherwise) in a similar light, likely having similar interests, lifestyles, problems, etc.
A fancy horoscope is really all most people need. At least it's based on something a bit more substantial than the month and day of your birth.
Has no scientific basis and requires you to filter the bullshit caused from people not knowing themselves (common in all us, at least at one point or another) from the genuine insights into similarities and differences that can exist between people along with a lexicon to discuss them with.
Post by Garra Desalmados on Sept 13, 2014 16:02:16 GMT -5
>It's Not Theoretically Possible for the MBTI to be a perfect system to classify people. But it's still a pretty good one.
I'm just going to pick one thing out of the possible 3-5 things wrong with that statement and just remind everyone playing at home that 'Theoretically possible' is a set that includes all possible things.
I think what you mean to say is that it is improbable that MBTI would be a perfect system but that doesn't...mean anything? Of course its improbable, a perfect system is always improbable. That doesn't MEAN anything and it certainly doesn't support anything else you're saying. I'm not trying to rain on everyone's parade, I was originally making a joke about how my INTP self wouldn't be capable of just 'accepting' that a system that can't be verified is any good (I found that image Google image searching INTP) but once the logical fallacies come out to play...
I get testy.
Tova's opinion is a perfectly acceptable and defensable one, you're not required to have evidence to find value in something. Trying to scrap together evidence instead of just admitting you have no real basis to believe it besides you want to is where you start to trigger my instincts.
Welcome to Bleach Gotei, an alternate universe Bleach RP!