Reason Magazine
- reason.com
- reason.tv
- reason.org
- Donate
- Site Search:
Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSSGet Reason E-mail Updates!
Manage your Reason e-mail list subscriptionsadvertisements
Myers-Briggsing the Candidates
I have a love-hate relationship with personality tests,
but the one that always gets mileage at cocktail parties is the
Myers-Briggs.
Originally developed for use in determining personality types of
women who could work well in wartime industry (according to
Wikipedia), the test has remained popular since WWII. Each
personality is defined by a series of dualisms:
Introvert/Extrovert, iNtuitive/Sensing, Thinking/Feeling,
Sensing/Perceiving: Read more about the types on the official
site. Slate administers a Myers-Briggs test
to the candidates--remotely and without their knowledge. The
results:
Hillary Clinton is a Guardian, and her specific type is an ESTJ, what Keirsey calls "the Supervisor." Supervisors are, Keirsey says, steadfast, cautious, methodical. They are the reliable, detail-oriented people without whom organizations and society fall apart—which is something ESTJs won't hesitate to point out. "[T]heir first instinct is to take charge and tell others what to do," says Keirsey. They are "devoted public servants, seeing their role in government … in almost sacred terms of self-sacrifice and service to others." This service is an obligation, not given "freely and joyously."...
Barack Obama—no one will be surprised to learn—is an Idealist. His specific type is an ENFP, what Keirsey calls "the Champion." ENFPs, says Keirsey, are "filled with conviction that they can easily motivate those around them." Champions work to "kindle, to rouse, to encourage, even to inspire those close to them with their enthusiasm." Idealists "usually have a tongue of silver" and are "gifted in seeing the possibilities" of institutions and people....
John McCain is an Artisan, and his specific type is an ESTP, what Keirsey calls the Promoter. The ESTP is, according to Keirsey, "practical, optimistic, cynical, and focused on the here and now." If the ESTP portrait gives you a feeling of déjà vu, it's because George W. Bush is an ESTP, too. They are a common presidential type: Both Roosevelts, JFK, and LBJ were ESTPs. "Artisans need to be potent, to be felt as a strong presence and they want to affect the course of events," writes Keirsey. They hunger to "have a piece of the action," "to make something happen" whether "on the battlefield" or "in the political arena."
NB: Here's what Slate found for Bush's type (ESTP) the last time around:
"They are decisive and little bothered by second thoughts and self-doubt." "Since [they] do not reflect very much on their errors or analyze their mistakes to any great extent, it is difficult for them to learn from their errors, and so they can become caught in a loop, repeating their mistakes."
Full-disclosure: I am an ENTJ, a type sometimes called "the Executive." Maybe I should be president.
what?|2.21.08 @ 4:43PM|#
how could you possibly administer the test without them
answering the questions?
ISTP/INTP tie
Bingo|2.21.08 @ 4:45PM|#
Interesting, ENFJ here. "The Giver"
I've never encountered either Hillary or McCain's type among any
people I consider to be my friends.
Taktix®|2.21.08 @ 4:46PM|#
I think I was an ENFP when I took it years ago. Whatever the letter combination is, I am the "Philosopher" or some shit.
Click \'n\' Learn|2.21.08 @ 4:53PM|#
Like Jefferson, I'm INTJ.
On the PoliticalCompass, I'm also in the same quadrant as
Gandhi.
More on me in a later comment.
Say, could everyone stop linking to Wikipedia? That's one of the
reasons they turn up near the top in search results, and their
entries are occasionally little more than disinfo.
|2.21.08 @ 4:54PM|#
This INTJ thinks this country would be in better shape if we got a few more I-types into the halls of governance.
|2.21.08 @ 4:56PM|#
I agree with the person above who asked, "how could you possibly
administer the test without them answering the questions?"
These are based on observation and perception. People don't always
appear to others as they really are, so these assessments are
pretty useless.
Personally, I'm an INFP, but some people have been surprised to
hear I'm an introvert because by necessity I have to get out there
and project myself sometimes. Slate would probably get my type
wrong.
Jesse Walker|2.21.08 @ 4:58PM|#
The test dubbed me an ENFP, though as I recall I was right on the border between F and T. That said, I don't really recognize myself in that portrait of "the Champion." Still, if my wife and Obama's wife ever die simultaneously in a freak accident and we widowers suddenly decide to go gay, it's good to know that Obama and I will be compatible.
highnumber|2.21.08 @ 5:01PM|#
So, Jesse's got that going for him.
Not that there's anything wrong with that.
(Had to wipe those two obligatory comments out of the way, before
someone who thinks they're funny got to it.)
|2.21.08 @ 5:04PM|#
This is different from astrology how exactly?
(Obama's a Leo, Clinton's a Scorpio, and McCain's a Virgo.
Discuss.)
|2.21.08 @ 5:06PM|#
With all due respect to the person who said M-B is a bunch of
hooey, usually people who say that either 1. Didn't like their
results, or 2. Found their results inaccurate because they didn't
answer honestly.
My father is an example of #2, although he didn't object to his
results.
|2.21.08 @ 5:10PM|#
alkalai,
Myers-Briggs is different from astrology because it is a personal
assessment based on the individual's preferences and tendencies.
Astrology is an arbitrary description of people based on factors
completely outside of the individual and placing all individuals
born at specific times into the same box.
|2.21.08 @ 5:11PM|#
This INTJ thinks this country would be in better shape if we
got a few more I-types into the halls of governance.
This INTJ agrees, except introverts are probably not real
interested in doing the back slapping, palm pressing, and rubber
chicken circuit required to get into any meaningful office.
highnumber|2.21.08 @ 5:12PM|#
(One more obligatory)
"Read this link":
Of course you'd say that - you have the brain pan of a stagecoach
tilter.
|2.21.08 @ 5:13PM|#
ENFP.
Caring and observant, and introspective. That's me.
The rest of you fuckers can go eat shit for all I care.
Brian E|2.21.08 @ 5:14PM|#
This is different from astrology how exactly?
It has a veneer of science.
There are two types of people in the world: those who sort people
into categories, and those who don't.
Cheap idiot|2.21.08 @ 5:16PM|#
How can I take the test without paying the $5?
I went through the links and all wanted money...
Bingo|2.21.08 @ 5:16PM|#
What Al said, also my results are very accurate.
The ENFJ is generally very interested in the happiness and satisfaction of their partner. Because they achieve much of their personal satisfaction from making others happy, they're likely to be skilled lovers.
"The Giver" bow-chicka-bow-bow
|2.21.08 @ 5:17PM|#
Cheap Idiot,
Here's a free test based on M-B:
http://www.humanmetrics.com/cgi-win/JTypes2.asp
|2.21.08 @ 5:18PM|#
Pop psychology! That's what the presidential race needs to lend
it some credibility.
-jcr
M-B is a bunch of hooey|2.21.08 @ 5:20PM|#
Al,
It's not a matter of liking or disliking results - the question is
whether it means anything and can be useful. Did you READ the link?
I had no reason to dislike my results, but investigated M-B to
better understand it.
The person that asked if it's any different from astrological signs
hit the nail on the head.
The link I provide this time (Forer effect) shows how people, like
you and your dad, can deceive themselves into believing crap like
M-B.
kinnath|2.21.08 @ 5:23PM|#
INTP, The architect per Keirsey.
The author of the article explains how one can evaluate public
figures against the types and get close to a correct answer.
In the discussion thread, the author states that Thomas Jefferson
is an INTP (wahoo) as is Al Gore (oh shit).
alan|2.21.08 @ 5:26PM|#
In the discussion thread, the author states that Thomas
Jefferson is an INTP (wahoo) as is Al Gore (oh shit).
At the cemetery gates, we have Socrates on our side, they have
Wilde on theirs.
Episiarch|2.21.08 @ 5:27PM|#
According to Keirsey, us INTJ types are "Rational Masterminds". Since it sounds cool, I will accept the title.
squarooticus|2.21.08 @ 5:30PM|#
Taken these tests at various points in the past, and I always come up INTJ. No surprise to people who know me, and no surprise I'm an anarchist.
|2.21.08 @ 5:30PM|#
According to my type, my best career choices are musician and
writer.
I'm a journalist, and I play jazz on the weekends.
But then again, I also torture cats.
Strange world.
|2.21.08 @ 5:33PM|#
I think that I would give more credence to Myers-Briggs typology
if it were more aggressively judgmental. For example, I'd like to
see Interesting/Boring, Skeptical/Credulous, Amusing/Irritating,
and Brave/Cowardly as axes. "Having reviewed your questionnaire, I
see you're a BCIC, or to use the technical term, a complete
assh*le."
For the record, I am an ISTJ, just like swimsuit model Tori Praver,
with whom I am totally compatible.(*)
(* I made that up. It's a matter of scientific fact that ISTJs do
that kind of thing.)
Forer effect|2.21.08 @ 5:36PM|#
"The Forer effect refers to the tendency of people to rate sets
of statements as highly accurate for them personally even though
the statements could apply to many people.
Psychologist Bertram R. Forer found that people tend to accept
vague and general personality descriptions as uniquely applicable
to themselves without realizing that the same description could be
applied to just about anyone. Consider the following as if it were
given to you as an evaluation of your personality.
'You have a need for other people to like and admire you, and yet
you tend to be critical of yourself. While you have some
personality weaknesses you are generally able to compensate for
them. You have considerable unused capacity that you have not
turned to your advantage. Disciplined and self-controlled on the
outside, you tend to be worrisome and insecure on the inside. At
times you have serious doubts as to whether you have made the right
decision or done the right thing. You prefer a certain amount of
change and variety and become dissatisfied when hemmed in by
restrictions and limitations. You also pride yourself as an
independent thinker; and do not accept others' statements without
satisfactory proof. But you have found it unwise to be too frank in
revealing yourself to others. At times you are extroverted,
affable, and sociable, while at other times you are introverted,
wary, and reserved. Some of your aspirations tend to be rather
unrealistic.'
Forer gave a personality test to his students, ignored their
answers, and gave each student the above evaluation. He asked them
to evaluate the evaluation from 0 to 5, with "5" meaning the
recipient felt the evaluation was an "excellent" assessment and "4"
meaning the assessment was "good." The class average evaluation was
4.26. That was in 1948. The test has been repeated hundreds of time
with psychology students and the average is still around 4.2 out of
5, or 84% accurate.
In short, Forer convinced people he could successfully read their
character. His accuracy amazed his subjects, though his personality
analysis was taken from a newsstand astrology column and was
presented to people without regard to their sun sign. The Forer
effect seems to explain, in part at least, why so many people think
that pseudosciences "work". Astrology, astrotherapy, biorhythms,
cartomancy, chiromancy, the enneagram, fortune telling, graphology,
rumpology, etc., seem to work because they seem to provide accurate
personality analyses. Scientific studies of these pseudosciences
demonstrate that they are not valid personality assessment tools,
yet each has many satisfied customers who are convinced they are
accurate."
Stop drinking the kool-aid people!
Mr. Hooey
lunchstealer|2.21.08 @ 5:44PM|#
Yeah, INTPs are the least common personality type, making up about 2% of the population at large, but we're easily a quarter or more of the H&R readership, if my nonscientific, skimming-the-comments-section survey is to be believed.
robc|2.21.08 @ 5:47PM|#
This INTJ thinks this country would be in better shape if we
got a few more I-types into the halls of governance.
This INTP agrees. And thinks all INTJ's should be the first against
the wall.
|2.21.08 @ 5:51PM|#
I don't make too much out of M-B, either, but it isn't totally useless. At least it's not based on where some planets were when I was born.
Nash|2.21.08 @ 5:52PM|#
I'm ISTJ. That apparently makes me a fascist bureaucrat.
"Inspectors are not likely to take chances either with their own or
others' money, and the thought of a bankrupt nation, state,
institution, or family gives them more than a little
uneasiness."
At least that explains that portion of my paleo-conservatism.
robc|2.21.08 @ 5:52PM|#
lunchstealer
I went to an engineering school, so despite us being 2% of the
population Im used to being around bunches of them. It isnt
surprising I would self select to forums in which we tend to
congregate.
Lev Strauss|2.21.08 @ 5:57PM|#
Yeah, INTP as well. I knew I hated hanging around fellow libertarians for a reason...they're just as weird as I am.
Kim Scarborough|2.21.08 @ 5:58PM|#
Actually, Mr. Hooey's comments remind me why I take the
Meyer-Briggs test much more seriously than superfically similar
stuff like astrological signs, etc. When I read the personality
descriptions in "Please Understand Me" of personalities other than
my own, they were like descriptions of Martians. I couldn't believe
anyone thought like that. If somebody attempted the Forer test by
handing out randomly-selected personality-type descriptions, you'd
get a lot of heads shaking and people saying "this doesn't describe
me at all!", unlike with zodiac crap.
My problem with the test is that I'm an edge case on three of the
four axes. I'm always a T, but I tend to fluctuate between N/S and
J/P. As I've gotten older and taken the test over time, I've
gradually moved from E to I but I still get an E sometimes when I
take it. Just now I got INTP.
Nash|2.21.08 @ 6:03PM|#
"I've gradually moved from E to I but I still get an E sometimes
when I take it. Just now I got INTP."
It's probably a sex thing.
What's wrong with tipping?
Kim Scarborough|2.21.08 @ 6:05PM|#
In fact, don't take my word for that--go read the description of
the "opposite" of the general type here: the ESFJ
(http://www.personalitypage.com/ESFJ.html). Do you really think
that sounds like you, in the sense that the Forer vagueness does?
Examples:
"ESFJs are warm and energetic. They need approval from others to
feel good about themselves. They are hurt by indifference and don't
understand unkindness. They are very giving people, who get a lot
of their personal satisfaction from the happiness of others."
"The ESFJ's value system is defined externally... they weigh their
values and morals against the world around them, rather than
against an internal value system."
That doesn't sound like too many libertarians I know.
Kim Scarborough|2.21.08 @ 6:07PM|#
"It's probably a sex thing."
What, as in if I haven't gotten any in a while, I tend more towards
"E"?
|2.21.08 @ 6:13PM|#
I don't know what i am but I remember that Ayn Rand was the same as me...which made me a bit upset.
Bingo|2.21.08 @ 6:19PM|#
lol Kim, as an ENFJ a large portion of what you posted describes my personality type.
Bingo|2.21.08 @ 6:23PM|#
Maybe the cosmotarians are more extroverted and the paleo-libs follow the introverted path?
Jennifer|2.21.08 @ 6:28PM|#
I never took the Meyers-Briggs (that I know of), but I don't see why "sensing/observant" and "intuitive/introspective" are considered opposites. What, you can't observe things AND have intuition at the same time?
Bingo|2.21.08 @ 6:34PM|#
Jennifer:
They aren't opposites, they are giving additional information. The
characteristics in the top letters are opposite the ones in the
bottom letters ie: I vs. E, S vs. N, etc. It doesn't mean you
always act that way, but your personality tends to gravitate toward
one.
Chuck|2.21.08 @ 6:35PM|#
INTP here. Three of them were strong, but I can't remember which three (it's been several years).
|2.21.08 @ 6:40PM|#
INTP.
Thank you Al Newberry. Cheap idiot is not the only frugal person
commenting today. He's not the only idiot either. ;-)
kinnath|2.21.08 @ 6:41PM|#
I never took the Meyers-Briggs (that I know of), but I don't
see why "sensing/observant" and "intuitive/introspective" are
considered opposites.
I once had a discussion with one of my son's teachers about his
habit of staring into space during instruction. The teacher seemed
to think this was a problem of some sort.
So I suggested that she conduct a little experiment. Go home, push
a table against a blank wall. Clear the table of everything except
a clock. Then keep herself amused for at least half a hour.
She was horrified. I then explained that I could do at least an
hour without a problem and that I frequently wrote software in my
head while staring into nothingness.
She was a "sensing" person. I am an intuitive person. My son is
also an intuitive.
|2.21.08 @ 6:44PM|#
Wow. Dropping the E, there are a lot of "NTPs" showing up around here. Interesting.
kinnath|2.21.08 @ 6:44PM|#
I have taken the test multiple times. I am extremely I, N, and
P. Three out of four times I come up T, one out of four I come up
F.
So I am a fairly hardcore INTP ;-)
|2.21.08 @ 6:52PM|#
Mr. Hooey,
I'm curious what you think that Forer experiment has to do with
Myers-Briggs considering that, as Kim Scarborough notes, there are
sixteen paragraphs rather than one.
If you want to prove M-B to be hooey you have to repeat the
experiment by giving the subjects the sixteen paragraphs, have them
rate each paragraph 1-5 for how well they describe themselves, then
have the subjects take the test.
If M-B is hooey, then there will be absolutely no correlation
between the rating numbers and the results of the tests.
I contend that using the 16 M-B paragraphs will show a strong
correlation, while using 12 astrological paragraphs -- regardless
of their content -- will show no correlation.
Mr. Hooey|2.21.08 @ 7:03PM|#
All of you that embrace M-B just reinforce one of the facts of
life I've learned:
Generally, people are idiots.
I had better hopes for the Reason crowd...
I should have known better, because another fact of life is:
The only person you can change is yourself.
What an idiot I was to think that the information I provided would
help other people realize that M-B is pseudoscience.
[kicks self]
|2.21.08 @ 7:07PM|#
Mr. Hooey,
There's a difference between "embracing" something and believing
that there is some accuracy and value to it.
There is also a difference between responding to a clear refutation
of one's argument and calling people idiots.
highnumber|2.21.08 @ 7:14PM|#
On the other hand, no one around here had very high hopes for someone named "Mr Hooey."
|2.21.08 @ 7:15PM|#
INTJ, J close to P if I remember correctly.
I'm inclined to think it's not completely hooey for the reasons Kim
listed. Also, it's had some predictive power for me and both the
negatives and the positives applied.
On a mostly unrelated note Mr. Hooey, FYI: "хуй" is pronounced
hooey and it is Russian for "cock" and I don't mean rooster. It's
also a Portuguese proper name, but I don't know how to spell
that.
kinnath|2.21.08 @ 8:28PM|#
From
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myers-Briggs_Type_Indicator
The descriptions offered for the Myers-Briggs types are often
quite detailed and specific, unlike the "vague and general
personality descriptions" that characterize the Forer
effect.
Mr. Hooey. There are plenty of legitimate criticisms of MBI (some
of them listed in this article by Wikipedia). You should actually
try to use one of them sometime.
Franklin Harris|2.21.08 @ 8:49PM|#
This INTP agrees. And thinks all INTJ's should be the first against the wall.
This INTJ says just because you got a wimpy P instead of a J is no
reason to be jealous.
intj here. maybe the whole INT thing is in the libertarian water?
At the very least, there has always seemed to be a strong
correlation between being a libertarian and being an NT.
She was horrified. I then explained that I could do at least an hour without a problem and that I frequently wrote software in my head while staring into nothingness.
She was a "sensing" person. I am an intuitive person. My son is also an intuitive.
I've often said that if I ever found myself in prison, I would do
whatever it took to get thrown into solitary.
Franklin Harris|2.21.08 @ 8:54PM|#
For a "brutally honest" version of the Myers-Briggs test, here's a fun version of it.
|2.21.08 @ 9:46PM|#
I dunno about MB types. I come up strong as IN, but am more evenly split between T/F and P/J. Never figured out what that means.
|2.21.08 @ 10:32PM|#
What an idiot I was to think that the information I provided would help other people realize that M-B is pseudoscience.
Man, I bet you're a blast to hang out with at parties.
SIV|2.21.08 @ 10:47PM|#
The Mitt variety was a crude simulacrum.
Voight-Kampfing him was unnecessary.
I am concerned with more sophisticated models posing as
human.Imagine an army of Obamas approaching all chanting "Yes We
can!"
|2.21.08 @ 11:26PM|#
Another INTP; completely blowing the 2% of the population OR showing extreme selection bias.
Stormy Dragon|2.22.08 @ 1:13AM|#
INTJ here; just like our nation's greatest president, Calvin Coolidge.
atrevete|2.22.08 @ 2:31AM|#
ENFP, but sometimes test as ENTP. F(eeling) isn't that dominant. And it's almost like I have an allergy to strong J characteristics. Like Hillary.
Metal Messiah|2.22.08 @ 2:53AM|#
I come up with INTJ, too.
That puts in company with (according to wikipedia): Nietzsche,
Stephen Hawking, Ayn Rand, Isaac Newton, Donald Rumsfelf (now that
offends me), Dukakis, Giuliani, Putin, Thomas Jefferson,
Eisenhower, Hannibal (both the elephant guy and the cannibal), Paul
Atreides, Gandalf, Severus Snape, Professor Moriarty, Sherlock
Holmes, and Captain Picard.
That would be one interesting dinner party, no?
Luke Johnson|2.22.08 @ 3:09AM|#
Another INTP, sometimes INFP. I've seen a majority of INTPs pretty much everywhere I go on the internet. It's probably an internet thing.
|2.22.08 @ 4:07AM|#
Speaking as another INTP, I find that INTPs absolutely love
giving people personality tests. Outward personalities range from
non-existent to bubbly. However, they are always thinking and
reasoning with themselves. I've never met one who isn't prone to
libertarianism even if they don't outwardly acknowledge it. My 3
best friends are all INTPs - if you aren't one, watch two INTPs
interact because you'll be blown away by the flow of information
and the instant connection.
God save the queen!
Oh, and no way is Gore an INTP unless he has some sort of mania
(and we're prone to that, too).
Christopher Monnier|2.22.08 @ 7:57AM|#
I'm INTP, too. I would bet that a disproportionate number of libertarians are INTP.
|2.22.08 @ 8:07AM|#
INTJ, a "rational mastermind."
Very odd. Whatever website that was linked explaining the "INTJ"
type claimed Ayn Rand was one, as well. I somehow doubt that they
type-tested her, but hey, it's the Internet, so it must be
true.
|2.22.08 @ 8:09AM|#
Myers-Briggs is a bunch of hooey...
Probably a bit of wine and a bite of bitter in the same cup.
robc|2.22.08 @ 9:01AM|#
If there was any doubt about why libertarianism isnt successful in politics, just the fact that we have a strong showing from the smallest MB groups explains a lot. When you are drawing from the 2% groups instead of the 15% groups, its hard to build a majority.
Jennifer|2.22.08 @ 9:32AM|#
So I suggested that she conduct a little experiment. Go
home, push a table against a blank wall. Clear the table of
everything except a clock. Then keep herself amused for at least
half a hour. She was horrified. I then explained that I could do at
least an hour without a problem and that I frequently wrote
software in my head while staring into nothingness.
Huh. I guess I could get two completely different Meyers-Briggs
ratings based on my mood when I took the test, then. Sometimes I
can easily amuse myself by staring at the wall--especially when I'm
trying to write something or work out an idea in my head--whereas
other times I need to actually DO things. Odd to think that my
interests at a single point in time would then be extrapolated to
cover my personality as a whole.
|2.22.08 @ 9:41AM|#
If M-B is hooey, then there will be absolutely no correlation between the rating numbers and the results of the tests.
Circular logic when you consider that the rating numbers
determine the results of the test, no?
Hooey, there seems to be a strong correlation between the results
for libertarians, so I wouldn't discredit it completely.
I took the free one. Some of the statements like "It's difficult to
get you excited" and "You find it difficult to speak loudly" are
too whimsical. But some of the statements were pretty good. For
example: "Strict observance of the established rules is likely to
prevent a good outcome" and "You often contemplate about the
complexity of life."
Again, I didn't take the actual test. I'm another cheap idiot. But
I'm sure the actual test isn't perfect either.
A better kind of test would focus more on how people see other
things instead of how people see themselves and their actions.
(Notice that I said "more." I realize that sometimes you just have
to ask people what they think of themselves.) It would rid people
of biases that result as outlooks on themselves. Such a test would
be less subject to whim and better reflect your actual attitude
toward things in life.
kinnath|2.22.08 @ 9:48AM|#
Huh. I guess I could get two completely different
Meyers-Briggs ratings based on my mood when I took the test,
then.
Some of the perceived flaws in the MBTI are that it involves
self-reporting and that results can vary over time.
Sometimes I can easily amuse myself by staring at the
wall--especially when I'm trying to write something or work out an
idea in my head--whereas other times I need to actually DO
things.
Each MB dichotomy (such as sensing/intuiting) is a continuum. Some
people will show a clear preference in one
dichtomy, while others won't. In this case, you don't appear to
display a clear preference for this specific dichotomy. However, if
you took the test, you would like show some clear preferences in
one or more of the other dichotomies.
Odd to think that my interests at a single point in time would
then be extrapolated to cover my personality as a whole.
The MBTI is easy to misuse. The test indicates preferences. People
can overcome their preferences and be quite successful at tasks
that would seem to be inappropriate for their type. However, the
idea is that you have to work hard to overcome your preferences and
this would tend to put a big drag on you if you did it all the
time.
|2.22.08 @ 9:57AM|#
I've spent 20 years successfully evading this test, except once.
My vague recollection is that I scored INTJ.
That puts in company with (according to wikipedia): Nietzsche,
Stephen Hawking, Ayn Rand, Isaac Newton, Donald Rumsfelf (now that
offends me), Dukakis, Giuliani, Putin,
You're offended by Rumsfeld, but not Putin, Metal? Dunno about you,
but I find sneering at reporters to be a lesser offense than having
political opponents assassinated.
kinnath|2.22.08 @ 10:02AM|#
I've spent 20 years successfully evading this test, . . .
.
I've taken a bunch of different kinds of personality tests over the
years. I suppose as an INTP, I am fascinated with the process of
trying to measure the unmeasurable. Of course, the INTJ would find
that a waste of time ;-)
freedom geek|2.22.08 @ 10:29AM|#
I took this test a while back and got on the boarder between INTP and INTJ.
|2.22.08 @ 10:39AM|#
Yup, another INTP. Although I do skew towards INFP cuz I am so
gosh-darned sensitive.
*weeps*
Ok, I am back now. Fwiw, I do understand the skepticism towards M-B
(which is exactly what an INTP would say), but I find it a useful
tool to help me deal with the various kinds of people one meets int
the world (what a typically INFP thing to say).
For instance, when I was coaching a girl's soccer team the girls
really seemed to fall well within their types. Suggestions for
working with the girls based on their M-B types turned out to be
very helpful.
|2.22.08 @ 11:10AM|#
If M-B is hooey, then there will be absolutely no correlation between the rating numbers and the results of the tests.
Circular logic when you consider that the rating numbers
determine the results of the test, no?
No. The rating numbers I proposed come from an exercise that is
not the M-B test.
The experiment I proposed was to give everyone the 16 paragraphs
describing the M-B types, have them rate -- Forer style -- how well
each type described them, and then have them take the actual M-B
test.
The rating number and the test results will correlate.
You cannot say the same thing about the 12 paragraphs
describing the astrological signs. If people read those 12
descriptions, give a Forer-style rating, and then take the "test"
-- what is your birthday -- there will be no correlation.
Furthermore, for the astrological case I could have pointed to any
12 paragraphs describing a personality and there would be no
correlation. That proves that astrology is hooey while Myers-Briggs
has some element of usefulness to it.
|2.22.08 @ 12:44PM|#
So Obama is ENFP? Interesting, because I'd say the same for Bill Clinton, except Bill's N is borderline.
|2.22.08 @ 12:47PM|#
As for astrological signs, it seems they always get "modified" by something else. "Oh, you're a Cancer, but you're not that sensitive? I see, that's because your Moon is in Sagitarrius! Plus your rising sign is in Gemini!"
|2.22.08 @ 12:51PM|#
ENTP up in the club baby!!
but seriously...socionics is a much better system. im an ILE
there.
|2.22.08 @ 1:29PM|#
Yet another INTP here.
This INTJ thinks this country would be in better shape if we
got a few more I-types into the halls of governance.
Someone will correct me if I am wrong, but I think the last I-type
President that we had was Nixon. (Does anyone know if Bush 41 is an
E or an I?)
The fact that McCain has the same personality type as W seals my
vote against him.
|2.22.08 @ 2:30PM|#
INTJ here according to the freebie test.
the results explanation listed Ayn Rand among INTJ types.
Robert|2.22.08 @ 6:49PM|#
Over the years I've taken it I've always come out fairly strongly ENT, but sometimes slightly J and other times slightly P. However, the MBTI seems to insist on calling it for one side or the other rather than acknowledging halfways, so I'm either ENTJ or ENTP. Either way I'm unemployed.
|2.22.08 @ 10:03PM|#
How completely unsurprising that this thread has so many posts.
I'm reminded of Dawkins characterization of religiosity.
Self-labeling and the often stupid quest to be regarded as an apple
and not an orange move people more than whether they pee standing
up or sitting down. Season of silliness, indeed.
Step away from the letters and be yourself, fer pete's sake.
|2.22.08 @ 11:23PM|#
I'm reminded of Dawkins characterization of
religiosity.
If only we could get people to be as breezy about God as they are
about M-B.
TrappedEastOfheBigMuddy|2.23.08 @ 12:31PM|#
I've always come up INTJ. Took the "brutal" one Franklin Harris
posted, and came up that way again. Indeed, the okcupid scripted
placed me at 99th percentile on all four of those metrics.
::sigh::
Liked the "brutal" evaluation: it was every bit as pertinent as the
usual feel good verbiage.
Years ago, I noticed that the descriptions written for that value
could be translated as "Most likely to become an evil
overload."
Now if you'll excuse me, I have to go practice my manic laugh. It
wouldn't do to oppressed people with a substandard cackle.
|2.24.08 @ 9:13AM|#
One, Keirsey and MB are two completely different ways of looking
at Type.
Two, it's not a test. it's a method used to determine Type. There
are no right or wrong answers and you can't fail.
Three, it's about 'preferences' and not an indicator of how you
will behave.
Four, it's unethical for anyone using the MB to reveal your Type to
anyone else without your permission, including your employer.
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245