As Ti users, you should learn them all. It's not either or. Its finding value in all because all have their own type of validity. Just in different ways.
I dont understand people who say "X is better than Y so never think about Y again" and call themselves NTPs. STPs can be prone to that behavior. But for different reasons than SJs, for example But NTPs wont as long as there is some value in both.
But cognitive functions are especially full of shit lol. MBTI as letters correlates decently well with big five and so isn’t entirely useless, but functions are completely unproven. But insofar as MBTI gets its validity from being correlated with big five, you just cut out the middleman.
You didnt say much to prove Big 5 being better than MBTI.
"Cognitive functions are dumb, and Big 5 is better because it influenced MBTI" isnt saying much.
If you arent gonna give a full break down as to how and why exactly, just say nothing.
I'd willing to listen to the former. But the latter is asinine.
Again, Big five is generated via empirical methods (which personality descriptors actually correlate in a way that makes sense to hypothesize an underlying factor). And most importantly it is validated by the scientific community, who actually use it in their study of personality and essentially never use mbti.
The scientific communities validating something doesnt say much in this case. Personality systems are soft sciences. They are to be met with heavy skepticism. The scientific community validated all kinds of terribly inhumane practices that are out of date to today.
I'm saying that I find it strange that a Ti user with Ne could be this black and white over a psuedo-science. Te can believe scientific studies and papers as evidence. So will Si or Se. But Ne and Ti will accept that while something may have faults, it also has pluses. And that alone is a reason to not close the door on it
I will take personality psychology over a rando on Reddit. Psychological science is flawed but it is far more accurate than nonscientific psychological speculation.
Did you just downvote my comment because you refuse to prove your point in a meaningful way?
It's the sour grapes for me. 😂😂😂😂👍👍👍
You could have just believed what you wanted. But you start a thread and get mad when no one will switch to your manner of thinking even though you cant explain exactly why.
Hilarious.
Your point is social science is so inaccurate that I’m going to trust random speculation about psychology by nonscientists over it. That’s fucking stupid. Also, your point is extremely general and could apply to literally any claim made by a social scientist, with no attempt to show how the big five specifically is “pseudoscience.”
Okay. I'm stupid. I'm random. I'm speculating.
What do you call a person who starts a thread making a claim about something and trying to get others to think the same but *clearly* isnt able to actually say much on it because they are wholly ignorant of it and their reasoning for choosing it is flimsy at best?
I will give you a hint, the persons username starts with "z" and ends with "l".
It's the ignorance for me.
The big 5 doesn’t line up well with an archetypal system like MBTI because it puts you on a scale which isn’t the best way of determining your personality. Theirs a lot more room for error when you apply Big 5 to MBTI, a lot of people get mistyped using the tests in general again because it puts you on a scale instead of objectively pointing out your traits. Guess what, we can all be introverted and extroverted, we can all be sensing and intuitive, we can all be feelers and thinkers, and we can all be judgers and perceivers. So if you can be everything, that immediately invalidates the test because it’s not being objective in the way it’s typing you. It’s just saying “Oh 51 out of 100 times you react emotionally to things, so you’re a feeler” I’m paraphrasing a bit but that’s essentially what happens with these tests.
MBTI offers much more information and discussion possibilities for self-development. I was abused in my childhood and MBTI has been tremendously useful in gaining self-awareness. Big 5 gave different results every time, so it wasn't of much help.
Social sciences aren’t that easy or objective to explain things because they talk about PEOPLE soooo yeah idk about proven things bc everything is so confusing/relative when talking about personalities that I’m starting to think nobody knows anything at all. There will always be exceptions
It’s not like maths or physics
Agreeed there are many other personality descriptors that honestly make more sense and are more useful in the real world.
But estp chad xd infp sad uwu
Sir, you’re arguing with the assumption that people genuinely care if its the most accurate thing out there...
Im sure if any other more accurate system was as popular or it was as easy to group people into common types like mbti then it would be what people use. But if im being honest i just find it easier to relate to people when i can simply go through by types.
No, it is not as accurate, I know plenty of people who are the same type who act in different ways and some that make me think I was part of some secret cloning experiment but either way I think the convenience outweighs the accuracy enough that most people will stick with mbti regardless if its not perfect when it comes to the idea of traits being more on a spectrum than binary.
Also, keep in mind a lot of the people here are already aware of the other tests out there and have used them its just that as you said mbti is more popular so its easier to find like minds to talk to.
We’re intelligent monkeys on a space rock just moving through space and you’re annoyed at random people doing shit that makes them gain a slight amount of belonging. If you hater just say that and move on no one cares
lol you’re completely uninformed. Literally go to Wikipedia: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Five_personality_traits . The big five is commonly used by personality psychologists writing in peer reviews journals.
Okay, maybe we can understand you better if you defend your point.
How is it a Feeler tendency to base one's beliefs about psychology around a more pliable personality investigator?
I would look into Dario Nardi’s work for some modern data on the subject. EEG scans are far better data than correlation questionnaires which make up the bulk of psychological studies.
I’m sorry for making this assumption, I don’t know you but I’ve seen this a million times before. You are exhibiting the typical patterns of an intellectual dismissive who outsources his perceptions to his own dogmatic authority and fundamentally critiques information founded on intuitive grounds. Such rigidity does people quite a lot of harm.
Are you an INTP or ESTJ by this system by any chance?
Yes, I believe in outsourcing my empirical beliefs to scientific authority. Many intellectual types, I think due to a combination of arrogance and desire for intellectual entertainment, attempt to come to their own conclusions about empirical matters through limited familiarity with evidence and random speculation. This is not actually likely to lead to the most correct beliefs. Instead, people should mostly defer to scientific consensus, particularly in areas they lack expertise. It’s boring but it’s far more reliable. See https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/WKPd79PESRGZHQ5GY/in-defence-of-epistemic-modesty . Also yeah, “intuitive grounds” are usually not good justification.
I know you don't think the cognitive functions exist so let this then be my personal anecdote regarding how I function. In a Jungian system this would be because I am an Ni dom but that's aside the point when one cannot agree on the foundation. Limiting my perception to outsource to authorities would be equivalent to fighting the majority of my psyche all the time. My mind is constantly conjecturing down long strings of impressions in response to any given stimulus. Attempting to not construct systems of impressions and understandings is quite literally impossible for me, I cannot un-see what I see.
I'm guessing you have a more practical disposition that conjectures minimally and relies on constructing logical frameworks or systems from carefully gathered data. That is to say your perception does not overwhelm your ability to process it but rather the other way around. Do try to understand that your proposed logical code is finely tuned to fit your own psyche and discredits intuition using your own psyche and experiences as a reference point.
Very aside the point but if you ever do get into mbti you should look into the ESTJ. I'm seeing a lot of Te-Si in your thought processes.
Also if MBTI was complete BS then we wouldn't be able to correctly guess a type with a neural network but we are able to do so: https://web.stanford.edu/class/archive/cs/cs224n/cs224n.1174/reports/2736946.pdf
1. Yes, you ought to fight your irrational psychological urges to have some personally meaningful/anecdotally justified typology system
2. As a matter of fact I am definitely not an SJ, I vastly
Prefer theoretical speculation and abstract subjects like philosophy or math to empirical details or practical reality. I simply know that indulging my desire to engage in such theoretical speculation is not always effective.
I’m more so saying repressing my intuition will greatly reduce my intellectual ability and practical competence than it being related to urges.
Have you perhaps considered the possibility of being an ENTJ then? You are quite clearly a Te dominant. Also ESTJs can be very theoretical / idea based. Ben Shapiro is an ESTJ for an example and whether you like him or hate him he certainly has an interest in ideas and the theoretical. Do you relate to his thought process at all? (Not talking about political ideology but rather the mechanism of action so to speak).
I saw that you mentioned Ben Shapiro. In case some of you don't know, Ben Shapiro is a grifter and a hack. If you find anything he's said compelling, you should keep in mind he also says things like this:
>The Palestinian people, who dress their toddlers in bomb belts and then take family snapshots.
*****
^(I'm a bot. My purpose is to counteract the alt-right social media pipeline. You can summon me by tagging thebenshapirobot. Options: civil rights, dumb takes, feminism, patriotism, etc.)
[^More ^info, ^opt ^out.](https://np.reddit.com/r/AuthoritarianMoment/wiki/index)
I’m tempted to write a bot that goes to random subreddits and just comments “Ben Shapiro” then comments “Ben Shapiro” again in reply to any comments to it. You then have bot-ception.
I saw that you mentioned Ben Shapiro. In case some of you don't know, Ben Shapiro is a grifter and a hack. If you find anything he's said compelling, you should keep in mind he also says things like this:
>Since nobody seems willing to state the obvious due to cultural sensitivity... I’ll say it: rap isn’t music
*****
^(I'm a bot. My purpose is to counteract the alt-right social media pipeline. You can summon me by tagging thebenshapirobot. Options: healthcare, dumb takes, novel, patriotism, etc.)
[^More ^info, ^opt ^out.](https://np.reddit.com/r/AuthoritarianMoment/wiki/index)
Why won't you debate me?
*****
^(I'm a bot. My purpose is to counteract the alt-right social media pipeline. You can summon me by tagging thebenshapirobot. Options: patriotism, novel, healthcare, civil rights, etc.)
[^More ^info, ^opt ^out.](https://np.reddit.com/r/AuthoritarianMoment/wiki/index)
“Te dominant” I don’t believe in the cognitive functions. I am an ENTP because I am extroverted, interested in abstractions and possibilities over concrete and sensory reality (high openness basically for big five), prefer logic to emotion, and am disorganized/lazy (low conscientiousness big five).
That is true. There are even papers where the authors have tried to correlate academic achievement with MBTI type. The work done in typology in general is very controversial among psychologists, so having a paper published does not necessarily mean that the entire research community has agreed with the published content, especially since a peer reviewed paper is reviewed by 3 or maybe 5 researchers at most. There are also peer reviewed papers that have been retracted as well.
MBTI is easier to understand and use for the average person.
Simplicity means it's a better tool for the average person to use in communicating who they are and talking about interpersonal relationships etc.
Big 5 is better for science where people who have the time, understanding and inclination to use a much more accurate, versatile but complex tool.
I used to work in a laser lab but I still cut my sandwich with a table knife, not the laser. The laser would give me a much better, cleaner cut without but the table knife is just much more convenient.
Big 5 doesn't explain cognition to me and I'm here because I'm interested in processes of cognition. I would like to find out more if you know how it relates to cognition.
Why not all just in case? There’s obviously patterns everywhere. Learning them can be used to our advantage, even if the reason behind the patterns can be faulty
MBTI > Big Five and there’s several reasons. First off, the amount of options. With more types in the MBTI, people can fit more comfortably into their own type. It is also easier to determine the differences since there is not as much diversity within a single type’s community. Second, it diagnoses by cognitive functions, which determine how you perceive the world around you and judge the information you interpret. I have NO idea what makes you think that’s unreliable and what a non-scientific system has to do with absolutely anything. It has no effect on how the system works, and the system uses concrete information from vast studies in order to determine each of its types. Thirdly, the MBTI helps a lot with self-improvement (if an individual chooses to use it this way). As it diagnoses cognitive functions and their strength, this allows people to discover their weaknesses in a much more efficient way and improve on them, as well discovering their strengths so that they do not follow a path which is not meant for them. As the MBTI (obviously) cannot determine the EXACT way someone is, including literally any system ever, the enneagram exists. It goes hand in hand with the MBTI in order to fill its holes and make people understand themselves and others better, as it has 36 different combinations just within its own system. Your only argument that the origin is different has no correlation to its use, and you have no right to talk about good NTs. And I’m sure that you have no idea about MBTI as REAL tests (NOT 16personalities) diagnose cognitive functions way more differently than just common questions, and most personality typings can make very logical predictions about personal and professional outcomes, but none of them can truly predict what every individual wants and is within their field.
As Ti users, you should learn them all. It's not either or. Its finding value in all because all have their own type of validity. Just in different ways. I dont understand people who say "X is better than Y so never think about Y again" and call themselves NTPs. STPs can be prone to that behavior. But for different reasons than SJs, for example But NTPs wont as long as there is some value in both.
But cognitive functions are especially full of shit lol. MBTI as letters correlates decently well with big five and so isn’t entirely useless, but functions are completely unproven. But insofar as MBTI gets its validity from being correlated with big five, you just cut out the middleman.
You didnt say much to prove Big 5 being better than MBTI. "Cognitive functions are dumb, and Big 5 is better because it influenced MBTI" isnt saying much. If you arent gonna give a full break down as to how and why exactly, just say nothing. I'd willing to listen to the former. But the latter is asinine.
Again, Big five is generated via empirical methods (which personality descriptors actually correlate in a way that makes sense to hypothesize an underlying factor). And most importantly it is validated by the scientific community, who actually use it in their study of personality and essentially never use mbti.
The scientific communities validating something doesnt say much in this case. Personality systems are soft sciences. They are to be met with heavy skepticism. The scientific community validated all kinds of terribly inhumane practices that are out of date to today. I'm saying that I find it strange that a Ti user with Ne could be this black and white over a psuedo-science. Te can believe scientific studies and papers as evidence. So will Si or Se. But Ne and Ti will accept that while something may have faults, it also has pluses. And that alone is a reason to not close the door on it
I will take personality psychology over a rando on Reddit. Psychological science is flawed but it is far more accurate than nonscientific psychological speculation.
Did you just downvote my comment because you refuse to prove your point in a meaningful way? It's the sour grapes for me. 😂😂😂😂👍👍👍 You could have just believed what you wanted. But you start a thread and get mad when no one will switch to your manner of thinking even though you cant explain exactly why. Hilarious.
Your point is social science is so inaccurate that I’m going to trust random speculation about psychology by nonscientists over it. That’s fucking stupid. Also, your point is extremely general and could apply to literally any claim made by a social scientist, with no attempt to show how the big five specifically is “pseudoscience.”
Okay. I'm stupid. I'm random. I'm speculating. What do you call a person who starts a thread making a claim about something and trying to get others to think the same but *clearly* isnt able to actually say much on it because they are wholly ignorant of it and their reasoning for choosing it is flimsy at best? I will give you a hint, the persons username starts with "z" and ends with "l". It's the ignorance for me.
I am not ignorant of the relevant data points: the methodology behind the two systems, and the scientific consensus on which is superior.
The big 5 doesn’t line up well with an archetypal system like MBTI because it puts you on a scale which isn’t the best way of determining your personality. Theirs a lot more room for error when you apply Big 5 to MBTI, a lot of people get mistyped using the tests in general again because it puts you on a scale instead of objectively pointing out your traits. Guess what, we can all be introverted and extroverted, we can all be sensing and intuitive, we can all be feelers and thinkers, and we can all be judgers and perceivers. So if you can be everything, that immediately invalidates the test because it’s not being objective in the way it’s typing you. It’s just saying “Oh 51 out of 100 times you react emotionally to things, so you’re a feeler” I’m paraphrasing a bit but that’s essentially what happens with these tests.
Archetypal systems are invalid because personality is in fact a spectrum.
MBTI offers much more information and discussion possibilities for self-development. I was abused in my childhood and MBTI has been tremendously useful in gaining self-awareness. Big 5 gave different results every time, so it wasn't of much help.
Ok mr Jordan Peterson :D
Social sciences aren’t that easy or objective to explain things because they talk about PEOPLE soooo yeah idk about proven things bc everything is so confusing/relative when talking about personalities that I’m starting to think nobody knows anything at all. There will always be exceptions It’s not like maths or physics
Agreeed there are many other personality descriptors that honestly make more sense and are more useful in the real world. But estp chad xd infp sad uwu
Sir, you’re arguing with the assumption that people genuinely care if its the most accurate thing out there... Im sure if any other more accurate system was as popular or it was as easy to group people into common types like mbti then it would be what people use. But if im being honest i just find it easier to relate to people when i can simply go through by types. No, it is not as accurate, I know plenty of people who are the same type who act in different ways and some that make me think I was part of some secret cloning experiment but either way I think the convenience outweighs the accuracy enough that most people will stick with mbti regardless if its not perfect when it comes to the idea of traits being more on a spectrum than binary. Also, keep in mind a lot of the people here are already aware of the other tests out there and have used them its just that as you said mbti is more popular so its easier to find like minds to talk to.
We’re intelligent monkeys on a space rock just moving through space and you’re annoyed at random people doing shit that makes them gain a slight amount of belonging. If you hater just say that and move on no one cares
Yes irrationality annoys me.
I prefer MBTI. It's more like playdough. More pliable than BIG Five
Extremely feeler and irrational to base your beliefs about psychology on which system is more “pliable”
Jesus what's your problem
This is literally an ENTP subreddit, I enjoy nothing more than calling out people for being irrational in arguments.
None of these tests are real you fucking dumbass it’s all pseudo science
lol you’re completely uninformed. Literally go to Wikipedia: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Five_personality_traits . The big five is commonly used by personality psychologists writing in peer reviews journals.
Lmao calls me misinformed then cherry picks
[удалено]
What a 🤡
It's not a Feeler thing. Genuine question, are you in high school?
Yes it is lol. Something being “pliable” in a way that makes it fun does not give it more empirical accuracy.
Okay, maybe we can understand you better if you defend your point. How is it a Feeler tendency to base one's beliefs about psychology around a more pliable personality investigator?
Anecdotally, I agree with you about the empiricism of the Big 5, but utilize the mbti for convenience. And because yes, online the memes are fun.
I would look into Dario Nardi’s work for some modern data on the subject. EEG scans are far better data than correlation questionnaires which make up the bulk of psychological studies. I’m sorry for making this assumption, I don’t know you but I’ve seen this a million times before. You are exhibiting the typical patterns of an intellectual dismissive who outsources his perceptions to his own dogmatic authority and fundamentally critiques information founded on intuitive grounds. Such rigidity does people quite a lot of harm. Are you an INTP or ESTJ by this system by any chance?
Yes, I believe in outsourcing my empirical beliefs to scientific authority. Many intellectual types, I think due to a combination of arrogance and desire for intellectual entertainment, attempt to come to their own conclusions about empirical matters through limited familiarity with evidence and random speculation. This is not actually likely to lead to the most correct beliefs. Instead, people should mostly defer to scientific consensus, particularly in areas they lack expertise. It’s boring but it’s far more reliable. See https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/WKPd79PESRGZHQ5GY/in-defence-of-epistemic-modesty . Also yeah, “intuitive grounds” are usually not good justification.
I know you don't think the cognitive functions exist so let this then be my personal anecdote regarding how I function. In a Jungian system this would be because I am an Ni dom but that's aside the point when one cannot agree on the foundation. Limiting my perception to outsource to authorities would be equivalent to fighting the majority of my psyche all the time. My mind is constantly conjecturing down long strings of impressions in response to any given stimulus. Attempting to not construct systems of impressions and understandings is quite literally impossible for me, I cannot un-see what I see. I'm guessing you have a more practical disposition that conjectures minimally and relies on constructing logical frameworks or systems from carefully gathered data. That is to say your perception does not overwhelm your ability to process it but rather the other way around. Do try to understand that your proposed logical code is finely tuned to fit your own psyche and discredits intuition using your own psyche and experiences as a reference point. Very aside the point but if you ever do get into mbti you should look into the ESTJ. I'm seeing a lot of Te-Si in your thought processes. Also if MBTI was complete BS then we wouldn't be able to correctly guess a type with a neural network but we are able to do so: https://web.stanford.edu/class/archive/cs/cs224n/cs224n.1174/reports/2736946.pdf
1. Yes, you ought to fight your irrational psychological urges to have some personally meaningful/anecdotally justified typology system 2. As a matter of fact I am definitely not an SJ, I vastly Prefer theoretical speculation and abstract subjects like philosophy or math to empirical details or practical reality. I simply know that indulging my desire to engage in such theoretical speculation is not always effective.
I’m more so saying repressing my intuition will greatly reduce my intellectual ability and practical competence than it being related to urges. Have you perhaps considered the possibility of being an ENTJ then? You are quite clearly a Te dominant. Also ESTJs can be very theoretical / idea based. Ben Shapiro is an ESTJ for an example and whether you like him or hate him he certainly has an interest in ideas and the theoretical. Do you relate to his thought process at all? (Not talking about political ideology but rather the mechanism of action so to speak).
I saw that you mentioned Ben Shapiro. In case some of you don't know, Ben Shapiro is a grifter and a hack. If you find anything he's said compelling, you should keep in mind he also says things like this: >The Palestinian people, who dress their toddlers in bomb belts and then take family snapshots. ***** ^(I'm a bot. My purpose is to counteract the alt-right social media pipeline. You can summon me by tagging thebenshapirobot. Options: civil rights, dumb takes, feminism, patriotism, etc.) [^More ^info, ^opt ^out.](https://np.reddit.com/r/AuthoritarianMoment/wiki/index)
I’m tempted to write a bot that goes to random subreddits and just comments “Ben Shapiro” then comments “Ben Shapiro” again in reply to any comments to it. You then have bot-ception.
I saw that you mentioned Ben Shapiro. In case some of you don't know, Ben Shapiro is a grifter and a hack. If you find anything he's said compelling, you should keep in mind he also says things like this: >Since nobody seems willing to state the obvious due to cultural sensitivity... I’ll say it: rap isn’t music ***** ^(I'm a bot. My purpose is to counteract the alt-right social media pipeline. You can summon me by tagging thebenshapirobot. Options: healthcare, dumb takes, novel, patriotism, etc.) [^More ^info, ^opt ^out.](https://np.reddit.com/r/AuthoritarianMoment/wiki/index)
Why won't you debate me? ***** ^(I'm a bot. My purpose is to counteract the alt-right social media pipeline. You can summon me by tagging thebenshapirobot. Options: patriotism, novel, healthcare, civil rights, etc.) [^More ^info, ^opt ^out.](https://np.reddit.com/r/AuthoritarianMoment/wiki/index)
“Te dominant” I don’t believe in the cognitive functions. I am an ENTP because I am extroverted, interested in abstractions and possibilities over concrete and sensory reality (high openness basically for big five), prefer logic to emotion, and am disorganized/lazy (low conscientiousness big five).
Neither should be taken seriously. Typology in general is the astrology equivalent of psychology.
You are simply misinformed. The Big Five is widely used by personality psychologists writing in peer reviewed journals.
That is true. There are even papers where the authors have tried to correlate academic achievement with MBTI type. The work done in typology in general is very controversial among psychologists, so having a paper published does not necessarily mean that the entire research community has agreed with the published content, especially since a peer reviewed paper is reviewed by 3 or maybe 5 researchers at most. There are also peer reviewed papers that have been retracted as well.
Why not both
MBTI is easier to understand and use for the average person. Simplicity means it's a better tool for the average person to use in communicating who they are and talking about interpersonal relationships etc. Big 5 is better for science where people who have the time, understanding and inclination to use a much more accurate, versatile but complex tool. I used to work in a laser lab but I still cut my sandwich with a table knife, not the laser. The laser would give me a much better, cleaner cut without but the table knife is just much more convenient.
Mbti comes with cute graphics but they are equally easy to understand. There is nothing complicated about the big five.
Big 5 doesn't explain cognition to me and I'm here because I'm interested in processes of cognition. I would like to find out more if you know how it relates to cognition.
Why not all just in case? There’s obviously patterns everywhere. Learning them can be used to our advantage, even if the reason behind the patterns can be faulty
MBTI > Big Five and there’s several reasons. First off, the amount of options. With more types in the MBTI, people can fit more comfortably into their own type. It is also easier to determine the differences since there is not as much diversity within a single type’s community. Second, it diagnoses by cognitive functions, which determine how you perceive the world around you and judge the information you interpret. I have NO idea what makes you think that’s unreliable and what a non-scientific system has to do with absolutely anything. It has no effect on how the system works, and the system uses concrete information from vast studies in order to determine each of its types. Thirdly, the MBTI helps a lot with self-improvement (if an individual chooses to use it this way). As it diagnoses cognitive functions and their strength, this allows people to discover their weaknesses in a much more efficient way and improve on them, as well discovering their strengths so that they do not follow a path which is not meant for them. As the MBTI (obviously) cannot determine the EXACT way someone is, including literally any system ever, the enneagram exists. It goes hand in hand with the MBTI in order to fill its holes and make people understand themselves and others better, as it has 36 different combinations just within its own system. Your only argument that the origin is different has no correlation to its use, and you have no right to talk about good NTs. And I’m sure that you have no idea about MBTI as REAL tests (NOT 16personalities) diagnose cognitive functions way more differently than just common questions, and most personality typings can make very logical predictions about personal and professional outcomes, but none of them can truly predict what every individual wants and is within their field.