/sci/ - Science & Math

>>8264058
Interesting, but non-empirical. Use it for entertainment, more than scientific reason.

>>8264058
It was invented by two women, who were inspired by Carl Jung. I think that's says a lot about how useful you can expect it to be.

>>8264058
INTP here.

I think it describes me very well.
I am generally introverted.
I am very good at math so you could say intuition is my talent.
I tend to think a lot.
I am good at prospecting.

It works.

>>8264082
desu, no one likes Myers Briggs better than INTPs. I say this as an INTP.

>>8264058
It's a useful tool.

>>8264058
INTP here
one of my exes was an INTP as well
one of my friends is an ENTP and he sure is more extroverted than me

but self-analysis is an oxymoron

>>8264070
>Hurr durr wuumynzzzz

>>8264097
I didn't notice she was a foreigner and I thought that when she said here pronouns where 'hen' she sexually identified as a chicken or something.

But who knows, I may be wrong here. She may be a foreigner AND identify as a chicken.

I mean, it is 2016 after all.

INTP here, I like to think it describes me well also.

I'm extremely introverted, keep to myself, reserved,quiet

highly intuitive,very idealistic, a dreamer , future orientated, tend to have my head in the clouds

I'm extremely logical and objective. No coincidence my major will be mechanical engineering

and i'm a very "go with the flow" laid back person, procrastinate unhealthily and usually always fucking late

as we know psychology isn't a very hard science but I guess this is the best you can come up with when it comes to personality tests(besides the big 5) like the other guy said Interesting but non-empirical

btw /sci is Analyst haven

>>8264099
Sorry, I didn't mean to imply that women are inferior. Just saying they weren't actual scientists, just women.

>>8264106
>Sorry, I didn't mean to imply that women are inferior. Just saying they weren't actual scientists, just women.

I literally can't even.

>>8264097
God I love tattoos but why do people get rubbish fucking tattoos? Seriously get a high tier expensive tattoo or nothing

>>8264112
It is funny because just the skin of the part of her chest that contains the drawing of the woman is more skin than any muslim woman will ever be allowed to show without being executed or jailed in the more hardcore muslim countries.

But yeah, muslims are progressive right? Saying otherwise would be hatespeech.

>>8264106

that is some A+ bait anon, i hope you catch the big one

>>8264112

>hipster faggot doesn't get it

>>8264112
Cuz ur a faggot

I usually test as INTJ and that seems pretty accurate to me, although when I'm being social I seem to be more like an ESFP.

>>8264183
>Looks judgmentally and with envious eyes at a yuppie hipster with tattoos and a good fashion sense whilst with a 9/10 girlfriend whilst making 80k

Don't me mad that some people simply have more going for them then you ever will

And I don't even have tattoos

>>8264058
Very, very fun to do, but obviously it's not really scientific.

>>8264106
Back to your containment board, [r9k].

>>8264269

why does anon always lie for tho

>>8264058
Dumb wolfposter

it's like horoscopes but for people who like to fill out questionnaires (autists)

pic related

ENTP or ENTP-A if you're using the 16personalities questionnaire.
Unmotivated masterrace reporting in.

>>8264058
INTJ here and I fucking hate this meme.

>inb4 "lol anon spoken like a true INTJ!"

>>8264058
astrology for """intellectuals"""

Socionics is better.

>>8264061
What that guy said. It's a decent way to waste a few hours clicking through different links, but it's useless for any serious research, and there are some people who treat this waaaay to seriously (eg, basing their romantic choices based on what result their prospective partner got, or or actually buying a shitton of books on the subject and insisting on typing everyone, real or not)

>>8264315

Spoken like a true INTJ trying to outsmart another person calling him out on being predictable in an attempt to still be in control

>>8264058

It seems to be very accurate for me. For those saying its astrology for plebs, you must be angry INTJs not wanting to realize youre not a special snowflake.

>>8264412
If anyone thinks they're special it's the infp types.

>>8264058
Very biased, but a good starting point for getting to know yourself a little better (the functions, not descriptions of XXXX)

>>8264298
I honestly don't have any tattoos. I just dont judge people on appearances, people who do that are the real "dushbags" or "fagets"

>>8264099
>>8264109
>>8264175
>>8264296

Go back to R*eddit, nu male betas.

Modern day horoscope. You might as well be taking fortune cookie advice seriously.

>>8264573

>>8264061
Correct answer, it's pseudoscience but can still be entertaining.

>>8264058
I think it's bullshit, ya furry faggot. It's like a horoscope for men. The mind is too enigmatic to be accurately summarized by five traits and a bunch of stupid disagree-agree questions. There's no way to answer the questions empirically without bias

So is there some sort of scientific test that is more accurate than the MBTI?

>>8264638
Accurate for what? What testable claims does Myers Briggs even make? When someone says it's not scientific they're not saying it's gay they're just saying it has nothing to do with empiricism and the scientific method.

>>8264561
I find it funny that now I get "sent" to rreddit for being a beta male while just yesterday I was "sent" to /pol/ for saying women are inferior to men.

Honestly, I no longer know where I belong. Is it reddit or /pol/? Who am I even? Who would have ever guessed that people did not fit nicely into the ideological boxes retards construct so that they can avoid discussion by categorizing someone they have supposedly already beaten in debate and no longer need to address and now only have to tell them to go back to rreddit or some shit because the debate, in their heads, is already settled.

Go back to fucking killing yourself. This meme is dying today.

>>8264649

Accurate for personality and personality traits. Are you saying that personalities dont exist and that people cant be grouped together into having similar personality traits? Its not perfect but its the best guide that is available atm. Unless you can find a better system to find out someones personality type?

INFP, yeah sure, I have a lot of the same experiences as other INFP's, I have a lot of the same experiences as everyone, but I can hardly associate myself entirely with the personality type or people of the same. It just doesn't work and because of that I take mbti with a grain of salt

>>8264661
So basically it is circular. You ask people if they are introverted/logical/emotional whatever and them say 'it looks like you are introverted and logical, so you probably like solitary activities and would gravitate towards profession where logic is important' and then they reply 'yes that's me! Wow!'

Which part of that, exactly science? Because that doesn't sound like science, it sounds like something you'd find in redbook or reader's digest.

>>8264058
A useful way to classify people at large, but take it with a grain of salt

People come in much more than 16 different flavors

>>8264058
Overrated useless test.

It's a fun thing you can say in a conversation , but that's where it should end.

The problem comes when people start justifying their personality flaws because of 4 shitty letters, or when you start blaming people's flaws for their MBTI. "Oh man I hate people, I am SO INTJ!", "I'm a crybaby, normal ISFP".

Anyway, it's been a while since I've done one, got any recommendation for in-depth ones? I like this one most

http://www.keys2cognition.com/explore.htm

I prefer the four humors personality typology: phlegmatic, sanguine, melancholic, choleric

>>8264058
Hop, Hop....

Bitch.

>>8264638
HEXACO for one
The main problem with MBTI is that it tries to sort people into two different groups when most people fall near the middle (less so for E-I scale, though), which results in horrible retestability.
Also, thinking and feeling are not really opposed to each other

>>8264656
>Go back to fucking killing yourself. This meme is dying today.
It would be extremely painful.

>>8264656
They are inferior to men if you compare their historical achievements.

>>8264409
Prove it

>>8264538

>i cringe
>people have too much money
>boring to have a beer with
>dont show me your fucking tats faggot or tell me what your next back piece is going to be
>planned pieces done in a month or two
>koifish
>japanese water
>rockabilly
>panther
>swallows

ahhhhhh le punk'e, she is dead, oui anon?

>>8264656
i like this post

>>8265671

You are the proof anon.

>read materials of mbti from a test our professor actually paid $15 for
>Intp are like 4% of the population
>Look at chart
>The numbers add up to 100
>Flip page
>This test is not valid for persons with serious diagnosed mental conditions

Well then shouldn't the numbers add up to like 90 or something? Not to mention the number of intp/intj types who are likely on the autism spectrum. Real scientific, retards. Like I said, designed by women.

>>8265916
I honestly have no idea what any of these tests mean, I'm just assuming it's a personality test. But it doesn't matter what the test is. Why is it unreasonable to think that people with serious diagnosed mental conditions consists of less than 1% of the population? Or does every 1 in 10 people you meet have schizophrenia?

>>8265922
1% of the population is just schizophrenia. Bipolar prevalence is estimated as 1-2.5, aspergers around .5, personality disorders (including borderline, pathological narcissism, antisocial, and a half dozen more) combined frequency of 7-10%, and a few others I won't bother looking up because I think I have made my point. Read up on that shit, it's very interesting and more commo than you would think.

>>8265944
>borderline, pathological narcissism, antisocial
Do you consider all these "serious diagnosed mental conditions" sure they are diagnosed but are they really serious? I would argue that not even everyone in that 1% who has schizophrenia should be considered "serious.". Most mental conditions are mild versions of the extreme aka serious counterparts.

Also maybe the people who made the test just removed anyone with a serious mental condition from the results. That doesn't mean they didn't match up with a certain personality type, it just means if you have a serious mental condition then the result of your test has no statistical significance.

>>8265963
If you don't think schizophrenia is serious then I don't know what to tell you, since it's the most severe of the major mental illnesses and the current treatments are still not entirely effective. It's true that most of these people don't end up homeless or in an asylum like some people think, but they still lead very troubled lives since they are mostly never really cured.

>>8265915
I out proved myself?

>>8265981

>typical predictable INTJ speshul snowflake response

Yea, I think there's some validity to it. It correlates with things such as IQ, gender, sex and what not, something you would not necessarily expect if it was complete bullshit. Plus the theory does seem reasonable up to a point, and there is hard-to-ignore pattern of traits matching up with particular personalities. So I am not convinced by the lack of empirical backing. Empirical evidence hasn't invalidated it either.

>>8266882
Do you believe in horoscopes too friendo?

Leave this board.

>>8264058
I think its useful to the extent of determining a human's introversion/ extroversion for compatibility purposes. You can get a better picture of a person based on their social, ethical, sensory and expressive decisions than you would from nothing at all. I am an ENFP and I think it perfectly describes me, even down to the muscular tension

>>8268855
That's an excellent name for them anon. Wish I had thought of that.

Now I can properly insult people that use those dumb personality types

>>8268947
Horoscopes link personality with the month or year you were born, which is obviously complete nonsense.

MBTI classifies your personality based on how you interact with the world, internally and externally, which is completely valid in theory.

>>8268996
>in theory

Lol

>>8268996
>which is obviously complete nonsense.
...you say without taking the time to learn anything about it.

>MBTI classifies your personality based on how you interact with the world, internally and externally, which is completely valid in theory.
Into a set of arbitrary and meaningless binary categories.

You do know MBTI was made up by a woman with no formal education or training in psychology right?

>>8269743
It is no more arbitrary than any classification system.

It is completely reasonable to say that there are certain ways of interacting with the world and processing information that are mutually exclusive with one another, that people vary in how much they use one way vs another, and therefore people can be classified on that basis. Some people do, for instance, incorporate feelings more into their decision-making process than they do consistency in their logical system.

Briggs and Myers weren't psychology scholars, but they basically stitched together ideas of Jung, who most certainly was. What's more important is that there are strong correlations between MBTI types and things like IQ, mental disorder, gender, and sexuality--cross culturally too.

>>8265605
You obviously don't know how this typing works. There's no coninuity between the extrems. Learn about the cognitive functions in MBTI theory. The percentage shown at those tests are meaningless for the MBTI typing.

>>8264058

horoscope for nerds

I got the same type when I answered as honest as possible and as autistic as possible, that's kinda funny.

Seemed pretty self masturbatory, they tried to tell me einstein had the same mbti as me so I could stroke my ego.

How is it a horoscope? People do have different personality types. If you werent autistic you would know that.

What mbti checks the most dubs?
Here are the first ones for ENTJ -->

>>8270202
Funny thing is almost everyone being dismissive of it here is probably an *NTJ.

>>8271118
This desu.
Well knowing the site they are almost all INTJs.
>>8269932
Same, no matter how much I try to inflate the worth of certain questions its always the same.

To me I think that this consistency gives Myers-Briggs more validity, not less.

>>8264070
>>8264304
>>8264315
>>8264573
>>8264620
>>8264724
>>8265605
>>8265916
>>8269743
>>8269932

>>8271470

Anyone who hangs around 4chan is not smart. There's your indicator.

>>8272249
Anyone who hangs around x is not smart. That's your problem to figure out.

>>8271470
Fuck off

>>8264058
I highly doubt ANYONE besides myself in this thread or any other thread on MBTI you have ever seen or will ever see on this website actually owns and has read and studied the MBTI Manual enough to say with -source material to back it up- that the MBTI is -not- pseudoscience, but it is, however, rife with error and inconsistency which makes it very inefficient at sorting people as effectively as they would like - i.e., we are not sorting fucking rocks into bins based on weight and density, or species of frogs based on the patterns on their backs.

The very idea that people even have personalities at all is theoretical. Hell, the fucking idea that people are even -conscious at all- is challenged by modern functionalist theories of the mind that are able to provide an answer to every single mind-body problem except for the hard problem of consciousness.

MBTI is interesting and the more you study it with a fair, open-mind, the more you find clear evidence for the existence of some of the patterns in cognitive behavior that it defines. There is plenty of "evidence" for these patterns, and plenty of studies done, as well as lots of correlative evidence drawn from similar theories (such as the Big 5) that corroborate the categories.

The issues with it are mainly semantic, dealing with effective words to use and test structures that aim at eliminating conceptual barriers, as well as cultural stereotypes.

I have page numbers ready to go if you assholes want to argue.

>>8273544
>A genuine and well thought out answer on /sci/.

I should screencap this.

>>8271470

Is this funny to mbti connosieurs like yourself?

>>8273754

remember to remove the (you)

>>8273544

>The very idea that people even have personalities at all is theoretical.

The Autism brigade has arrived

>>8264058
It's just a beefed-up version of a teen girl magazine personality test, but *NTP is the master race.