/lit/ - Literature

>horoscope-tier personality test

>read /lit/
>OP is a faggot

>>15764830
>a four letter symbol given to you based off of questions about your personality is the same as the position of the stars at your birth
Why does MBTI trigger pseuds so much?

>>15764778
I only read newspapers

>read a book written by a woman
>she isn't a virgin
dropped

>>15764778
i'm an INFP, what books are you referring to OP?

>>15764778
Believing in Myers–Briggs is no better than believing in astrology.

>>15766472
Cognitive functions are a real system made my Jung.

>>15766472
Astrology is based and true though.

>every tolstoy novel

>Pepe thread
>it's another poorly read, ADHD ridden American zoomer who needs to reduce everything to labels and categories
Stick to Twitch, /pol/ and reddit.

>>15764778
Whats the big deal? INFPs are the most /lit/ MBTI type

>>15766774
The most normie, you meant?

>>15766903
no shit, introverted faggots with a negative feedback loop of introspection make up the biggest group who did this survey, nice data

>>15766774
Intp's drive anything exceptional, All the great men are Intp's by definition.

>>15767140
cope

>>15766903
INFPs are essentially anti-normies though

>>15767148
No. MBTI meme community is the one coping with wrong and contradicting typing.

>>15766903
seething

>>15767140
INTJ*

>>15767238
Contradicted by data

>>15766903
The most common types are the sensing (i.e. the NPCs) a ~75% of the population, yet that shitty graph has them less than half of the sample.

>>15769831
What do you mean? Most of them are "feeling"

>being INFJ

>>15764778
>Knowing what all that alphabet soup stood for
>frog posting

>>15764830
>>15765684
This, MBTI is the opposite of an arbitrarily selected tautology, it's a specific categorisation of opposing traits, although the Big 5 personality test is more scientifically valid

>>15766539
I'm currently reading Jung's account of psychological types. It's thousand times more complicated than MBTI would have you believe.

>>15769831
>sensing are npcs intuitive master race
When will this meme end?

>>15766459
Not op
I’d say probably dostoevskij

>>15770870
It will end whenever you rationally justify why it isn't true.

>>15764830
>>15765684
>>15770800
I really want to beat the shit out of Jungfags.

>>15771225
They aren't even Jungfags retard. Nothing in those statements is particularly Jungian.

>>15771390
Mbti is like joseph campbell, watered down Jung for the masses who never met the God of the Deep as Jung calls him in liber novus.

>>15771400
Well, yes. But still not Jungian.

>>15771406
It's still the same branch of psychobabble pseudo-mysticism NIGGER.

>>15771414
You seem upset

>>15771427
I'm just being honest desu.

>>15764778
>read fiction
>the protagonist is an ENTP

>>15770894
I literally have only ever met one intuitive that wasn't a bugman.

I have met a lot of intuitives.

I have actually met more sensors that weren't bugmen than intuitives.

Now justify why you believe in the intuitive master race without saying:
1. "I'm intuitive and I'm so much more in touch with reality than everyone else so everyone else is an inferior sensor."
2. "Everyone famous is an intuitive because I rely on the typings of random idiots on the internet who have no idea what they're talking about and who are the main contributors as to why mbti is not taken seriously today."
3. "Intuitives are the only people concerned with the big picture, sensors only care about obscure details that don't mean shit."

It goes without saying that if you believe in any of these points you have absolutely no clue what you are talking about.

>>15771486
Intuitives (specifically introverted ones) have direct access to the unconscious. All the prophets of the world, all the creative geniuses, all great artists have been introverted intuitives. The pure essence of being literally talks to you, or rather through you. You have access to knowledge of things nobody else could even conceive. This is a great privilege that while it makes your life nearly unbearable, it nevertheless elevates you enough from the masses that you cannot help but think of other people the way other people think of an ape.

That said, I would agree most people perpetuating the meme are themselves not self-aware enough to realize its significance.

>>15764778
> Read fiction
Yikes!

>>15771486
Nietzsche literally invented the concept of the bugmen and he was intuitive

>>15771533
Everyone has access to the unconscious, read either jung or freud or both.
Also what about ne users? Are they bugmen as well?

Your argument was literally an unholy fusion of both bugman ideas 1 and 2, I specifically requested that you don't use those incredibly flawed ideas to argue your shitty point.

The fact that you couldn't even use a solid reason to support your argument greatly hinders the idea that intuitives are in any way superior to sensors.

Fucking bugman.

What is this trash? LMAO
People click shit on here and when they get told they're an INTCEL they go aaah yes that's me man totally on point again Major Briggs..

>>15771568
Good argument, can't argue with that logic!

As if no one for thousands of years prior ever believed in the concept of a bugman lol. He was the first person to ever even consider that they existed.

>>15771594
>Everyone has access to the unconscious
What kind of access? I specified "direct access". Of course everyone could extrapolate about the nature of their personal unconscious through dreams and fantasies, but it's altogether another matter to have *direct access* the depository of the collective unconscious.
>Also what about ne users? Are they bugmen as well?
They aren't bugmen, but they take an entirely opposite route. Their intuition is projected upon the external world, so they pursue their instinctive drive without the aid of reason. They are too primal to be bugmen.
>Your argument was literally an unholy fusion of both bugman ideas 1 and 2
Let's review your 1 and 2.
>1. "I'm intuitive and I'm so much more in touch with reality than everyone else so everyone else is an inferior sensor."
This appeals to personal experience which is not what I am doing. I am basing my argument on Jung's description in his work on typology. I could even provide direct quotes with citation if you so desire.
>2. "Everyone famous is an intuitive because I rely on the typings of random idiots on the internet who have no idea what they're talking about and who are the main contributors as to why mbti is not taken seriously today."
I merely listed to explain my other point regarding direct access. It is not a premise. That said, I am again basing my point purely on the work of C.G. Jung: the person who is the reason we are now having this discussion.
>Fucking bugman.
Now, could we not degrade ourselves to the point of calling names? Please indulge my curiosity and explain in what possible way my post pointed to anything remotely bugman.

>>15771660
>What kind of access? I specified "direct access". Of course everyone could extrapolate about the nature of their personal unconscious through dreams and fantasies, but it's altogether another matter to have *direct access* the depository of the collective unconscious.
No one has that. I was best friends with a confirmed infj for a whole year and this never happened. Moreso, that's not even what it is and no actual Ni user that I've met has ever claimed to be able to do so.
I have yet to find a non bugman ni user irl or over the internet and most of the intuitives that I have met are ni users.

>They aren't bugmen, but they take an entirely opposite route. Their intuition is projected upon the external world, so they pursue their instinctive drive without the aid of reason. They are too primal to be bugmen.
Read jung. Please. I beg you.

>This appeals to personal experience which is not what I am doing. I am basing my argument on Jung's description in his work on typology. I could even provide direct quotes with citation if you so desire.
I would want that if I was actually interested in this conversation. You have yet to spark my interest. I'm literally only replying because you replied to me and it would look like I've been pwned if I didnt reply back.

Your superiority complex is so visible it hurts to witness. Actually address my point, or don't, because I don't want to continue this pointless conversation.

Also I've been in the mbti community for a whole year, I can guarantee you have not surpassed basic entry level cs joseph tier mbti. Don't pretend to know what you're talking about.

>I merely listed to explain my other point regarding direct access. It is not a premise. That said, I am again basing my point purely on the work of C.G. Jung: the person who is the reason we are now having this discussion.
You were talking about how all famous people are ni users. You completely evaded the point holy fuck. So much for muh intuitive master race lmao

>Now, could we not degrade ourselves to the point of calling names? Please indulge my curiosity and explain in what possible way my post pointed to anything remotely bugman.
I literally explained it in the previous post and this post as well. If you can't read its not my problem.
As specified, you have proven yourself unfit for this conversation. This is my last post in this thread because you are clearly incapable of reading what I actually have to say, much less discuss it.
Also talk about writing like a pseud holy fuck. I have rarely came across such an unironic, pretentiously worded piece of garbage as that last paragraph.

>>15771776
>This is my last post in this thread because you are clearly incapable of reading what I actually have to say, much less discuss it.
Literally lmao.

If any other anon is following this conversation, I'd direct their attention to the fact that the entirety of this post was either ad hominems or personal anecdotes. So much for dialetic and argumentation.

>>15764778
>person is an adult
>gives any value to a personality quiz made by a bored housewife and her daughter