Campaigns/Elections

Myers-Briggsing the Candidates

|

myers-briggs

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.

NEXT: No Bond for Ryan Frederick

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. ENTP

  2. how could you possibly administer the test without them answering the questions?

    ISTP/INTP tie

  3. ENTP, (Weak E Strong N Strong P)

  4. Interesting, ENFJ here. “The Giver”

    I’ve never encountered either Hillary or McCain’s type among any people I consider to be my friends.

  5. Yes, ENTP, the personality score of young gods.

  6. I think I was an ENFP when I took it years ago. Whatever the letter combination is, I am the “Philosopher” or some shit.

  7. INTP here…

  8. LIT,

    So close.

  9. 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.

  10. ENTP, also known as the Urkobold type.

  11. This INTJ thinks this country would be in better shape if we got a few more I-types into the halls of governance.

  12. highnumber,

    Indeed. Megalomania and trolling go hand in hand.

  13. Too quiet for my own good I guess.

  14. 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.

  15. 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.

  16. ISTP baby!

  17. Myers-Briggs is a bunch of hooey…

  18. 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.)

  19. http://www.typelogic.com/ – says Ron Paul is a INFJ

  20. This is different from astrology how exactly?

    (Obama’s a Leo, Clinton’s a Scorpio, and McCain’s a Virgo. Discuss.)

  21. 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.

  22. 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.

  23. 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.

  24. (One more obligatory)

    “Read this link”:

    Of course you’d say that – you have the brain pan of a stagecoach tilter.

  25. ENTJ + Lazy.

  26. ENFP.

    Caring and observant, and introspective. That’s me.
    The rest of you fuckers can go eat shit for all I care.

  27. 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.

  28. How can I take the test without paying the $5?

    I went through the links and all wanted money…

  29. 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

  30. Cheap Idiot,

    Here’s a free test based on M-B:
    http://www.humanmetrics.com/cgi-win/JTypes2.asp

  31. Pop psychology! That’s what the presidential race needs to lend it some credibility.

    -jcr

  32. 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.

  33. 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).

  34. INTJ, according to Al’s free link.

  35. 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.

  36. According to Keirsey, us INTJ types are “Rational Masterminds”. Since it sounds cool, I will accept the title.

  37. 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.

  38. 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.

  39. 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.)

  40. Most liberals I know are FUCKs.
    And most conservatives are PRIKs.

  41. “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

  42. 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.

  43. 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.

  44. 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.

  45. 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.

  46. 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.

  47. Yeah, INTP as well. I knew I hated hanging around fellow libertarians for a reason…they’re just as weird as I am.

  48. 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.

  49. “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?

  50. 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.

  51. “It’s probably a sex thing.”

    What, as in if I haven’t gotten any in a while, I tend more towards “E”?

  52. I don’t know what i am but I remember that Ayn Rand was the same as me…which made me a bit upset.

  53. lol Kim, as an ENFJ a large portion of what you posted describes my personality type.

  54. Maybe the cosmotarians are more extroverted and the paleo-libs follow the introverted path?

  55. INTP

  56. 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?

  57. 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.

  58. INTP here. Three of them were strong, but I can’t remember which three (it’s been several years).

  59. INTP.

    Thank you Al Newberry. Cheap idiot is not the only frugal person commenting today. He’s not the only idiot either. 😉

  60. 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.

  61. Wow. Dropping the E, there are a lot of “NTPs” showing up around here. Interesting.

  62. 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 😉

  63. 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.

  64. intj here. maybe the whole INT thing is in the libertarian water?

  65. 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]

  66. 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.

  67. On the other hand, no one around here had very high hopes for someone named “Mr Hooey.”

  68. 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: “???” 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.

  69. I went to typelogic and scored the same as Ron Paul. Wee!

  70. There’s a Portugese professional soccer player named Arturo Fucks.

    No kidding.

  71. 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.

  72. 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.

  73. For a “brutally honest” version of the Myers-Briggs test, here’s a fun version of it.

  74. 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.

  75. I’d rather see the candidates Voight-Kampfed than Myers-Briggsed.

  76. SIV: but Mitt Romney dropped out of the race!

  77. 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.

  78. 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!”

  79. INTP here also. They recommended computer programming, bingo.

  80. Another INTP; completely blowing the 2% of the population OR showing extreme selection bias.

  81. INTJ here; just like our nation’s greatest president, Calvin Coolidge.

  82. 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.

  83. 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?

  84. 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.

  85. 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).

  86. I’m INTP, too. I would bet that a disproportionate number of libertarians are INTP.

  87. 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.

  88. Myers-Briggs is a bunch of hooey…

    Probably a bit of wine and a bite of bitter in the same cup.

  89. 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.

  90. 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.

  91. 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.

  92. 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.

  93. 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.

  94. 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 😉

  95. INTP, bordering on ISTP.

    Holy selection bias, Batman!

  96. I took this test a while back and got on the boarder between INTP and INTJ.

  97. 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.

  98. INTJ

  99. 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.

  100. So Obama is ENFP? Interesting, because I’d say the same for Bill Clinton, except Bill’s N is borderline.

  101. 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!”

  102. ENTP up in the club baby!!
    but seriously…socionics is a much better system. im an ILE there.

  103. 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.

  104. Oops, I stand corrected. Bush 41 was an ISTJ.

  105. INTJ here according to the freebie test.

    the results explanation listed Ayn Rand among INTJ types.

  106. 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.

  107. 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.

  108. 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.

  109. 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.

  110. 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.

  111. Hi Everyone;

    Has anyone seen Dr.Keirsey’s analysis on the candidates? Check out the following, and please comment. Slate’s article was their opinion, and not from Dr. Keirsey.

    Tim

    http://www.personalityzone.com/view/blog/predicting-the-2008-presidential-election.html

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.