Beyond MBTI - Is It Practical?

[BigApplePi]

Let's be clear here, the MBTI is a very reductionist approach towards personality, especially at first glance. Cue Only 16 types? That cannot be true! ..... because there are only so few types, it makes precise predictions about a single individual impossible.
You can say INTPs dislike smalltalk and you will see it is true for an overwhelming majority. The smaller the group becomes, the harder it is to make exact predictions. Searching advice about a single individual solely based on MBTI renders it nonsensical because the INTP does not exist, it is nothing but an archetype. You will only get commonplaces. Every INTP has had a different upbringing and has made different experiences that transformed him into a unique brand of INTP.

That was a quote from Re: I'm sick of romance...

While there are 16 broad personality types conjoined with eight main cognitive functions, a questions remains. Can personality characteristics be further narrowed down? I'm sure the answer is yes, but what I don't know is what would be good ways to make that breakdown? Or it is arbitrary? Here are some proposals:

1. Energy: type A versus type B
2. Sexual: masculine versus feminine
3. Social: self-centered versus socially minded

Are these adequately different from the cognitive functions of the MBTI? #3, for example, does not refer to introvert/ extrovert. An extroverted politician can be self-centered; a cancer researcher can be socially minded. Another qualification would be, does it divide the population in a broad enough stroke? A proposal dividing one percent/ninety-nine percent would have a low value.

 

[Words]

Can personality characteristics be further narrowed down? I'm sure the answer is yes.

I can imagine some tried. What I don't understand is why none are acknowledged.

Is it wise to narrow it down? Would that ruin the practicality? Would it ruin the theory? ..considering it was only meant to give slight guidance.

Though I'd certainly like to have my 100 sets of ESTP, INFP, ESTJ etc. I daresay, 1600 is not so hard to remember.

 

[bluesquid]

Its a foothold. Infinite variability in this world. Thank god for that. I have to get drunk to get out of the room with myself. I cant imagine 6 billion me's!

 

[BigApplePi]

I guess what I was thinking of was NOT creating 1600 categories (now that you mention it), but rather clues to identifying behavior. The 16 different MBTI personalities help tell us what we are and help tell what others are.

Then what do we do after that? How do we refine what a person is? Once one has isolated the one of sixteen to start with, we can go further.

My examples were energy, sex, sensitivity to others. There is also age, marital status, schooling, health, work satisfaction -- things like that

 

[Adymus]

If a person is trying to lock all personalities to the exact 16 type descriptions then they are missing the point. MBTI does not suggest that there is a maximum of 16 types, but a minimum of 16 potential personality facets. I have my own way of thinking that get's me up to minimum 1024 potential personality types.

Adaptive or directive: 2
Extroverted or introverted: 4
Dominant function types: 8
Dominant+Auxiliary types: 16
Male or Female: 32
Sexual orientation: 64
eight age groups: 512
Grip or Healthy Flow: 1024
Culture, upbringing, misc: Infinity

However, everything can be back tracked and traced down to the base 16, even base 2 if you like. It does not matter how much variation you will find in a single personality type, they are all going to be using the same hierarchy of cognitive functions, and will all share this connection.

 

[Dormouse]

The challenge would be finding characteristics that would remain static throughout the persons life. To take Adymus' suggestions, as an example:

Male or Female: Okay, under normal circumstances that should remain the same.

Sexual Orientation: Again. should remain the same.

Age Groups: Changes, obviously. And maturity won't necessarily correlate.

Grip or Healthy Flow: If this is referring to mental health, it would change.

And to include Pi's last suggestion -

Self-centered versus Social minded: To be honest I don't know exactly what you mean. Libertarian vs authoritarian? Utilitarian vs it's opposite? This could certainly change with age.

I personally believe the MBTI works because it determines how we think, not what we think. (Though the two certainly affect each other.)

 

[BigApplePi]

If a person is trying to lock all personalities to the exact 16 type descriptions then they are missing the point. MBTI does not suggest that there is a maximum of 16 types, but a minimum of 16 potential personality facets. I have my own way of thinking that get's me up to minimum 1024 potential personality types.

Adaptive or directive: 2
Extroverted or introverted: 4
Dominant function types: 8
Dominant+Auxiliary types: 16
Male or Female: 32
Sexual orientation: 64
eight age groups: 512
Grip or Healthy Flow: 1024
Culture, upbringing, misc: Infinity

However, everything can be back tracked and traced down to the base 16, even base 2 if you like. It does not matter how much variation you will find in a single personality type, they are all going to be using the same hierarchy of cognitive functions, and will all share this connection.

All of those affect the personality. Some I don't understand. What would be the defined hierarchy as to starting point? That is, do we start with Adaptive or directive versus Extroverted or introverted or does it matter?

What is "Grip" of Grip or Healthy Flow? What about psychosis?

An issue with "culture" is the category is complex. We can define introversion and extroversion and then look at the person, but culture? We can divide the word into cultures but can we start with a person not knowing their culture and place them? This not being my field, I've never thought about it.

 

[BigApplePi]

The challenge would be finding characteristics that would remain static throughout the persons life. To take Adymus' suggestions, as an example:

Male or Female: Okay, under normal circumstances that should remain the same.

Sexual Orientation: Again. should remain the same.

Age Groups: Changes, obviously. And maturity won't necessarily correlate.

Grip or Healthy Flow: If this is referring to mental health, it would change.

And to include Pi's last suggestion -

Self-centered versus Social minded: To be honest I don't know exactly what you mean. Libertarian vs authoritarian? Utilitarian vs it's opposite? This could certainly change with age.

I personally believe the MBTI works because it determines how we think, not what we think. (Though the two certainly affect each other.)

Dormouse. By "self-centered" I was thinking of the narcissistic personality at one end. Some people behave and think as if the world related only to them. Others fully recognize events are independent of their personal wishes. I assume we all fall in between.

If it should turn out that any of these suggestions correlate too highly with any of the MBTI cognitive functions (say 80 to 95 percent), I would discard them as unnecessary as they wouldn't reveal anything new..

 

[Adymus]

The challenge would be finding characteristics that would remain static throughout the persons life. To take Adymus' suggestions, as an example:

Male or Female: Okay, under normal circumstances that should remain the same.

Sexual Orientation: Again. should remain the same.

Age Groups: Changes, obviously. And maturity won't necessarily correlate.

Grip or Healthy Flow: If this is referring to mental health, it would change.

And to include Pi's last suggestion -

Self-centered versus Social minded: To be honest I don't know exactly what you mean. Libertarian vs authoritarian? Utilitarian vs it's opposite? This could certainly change with age.

I personally believe the MBTI works because it determines how we think, not what we think. (Though the two certainly affect each other.)

Everything Above the 16 types is reflected and altered by environmental influence, and is thus subject to change.

Gender and sexual orientation do effect the personality, not it's over all wiring and functionality, but the way it is developed in a certain culture. For instance, on western culture women culturally need a different skill set then men, their is pressure for them to develop means to connect with people more then there is in men, this can be observed in how the types of the same gender use their function. The same would go for sexual orientation, it doesn't affect the base cognitive functions themselves, but they will develop and be used somewhat differently.

 

[Adymus]

All of those affect the personality. Some I don't understand. What would be the defined hierarchy as to starting point? That is, do we start with Adaptive or directive versus Extroverted or introverted or does it matter?

What is "Grip" of Grip or Healthy Flow? What about psychosis?

An issue with "culture" is the category is complex. We can define introversion and extroversion and then look at the person, but culture? We can divide the word into cultures but can we start with a person not knowing their culture and place them? This not being my field, I've never thought about it.

1. Doesn't matter, there is no real starting point.

2. Grip is a term coined by Naomi Quenk in her book Was that really me? It refers to personality types whose flow of cognitive functions is not working properly because of stress factors and being over worked in their weaker areas. Healthy Flow would just refer to a normal healthy personality.
Psychosis would just go in "Misc" I guess.

3. I know culture is complex, that is why I put it in infinity, it is not possible to quantify every possible variable, because there are an infinite amount of variables, we are just trying to expand the amount of minimum personality facets.

 

[Incessantly Introspective]

If a person is trying to lock all personalities to the exact 16 type descriptions then they are missing the point. MBTI does not suggest that there is a maximum of 16 types, but a minimum of 16 potential personality facets. I have my own way of thinking that get's me up to minimum 1024 potential personality types.

Adaptive or directive: 2
Extroverted or introverted: 4
Dominant function types: 8
Dominant+Auxiliary types: 16
Male or Female: 32
Sexual orientation: 64
eight age groups: 512
Grip or Healthy Flow: 1024
Culture, upbringing, misc: Infinity

However, everything can be back tracked and traced down to the base 16, even base 2 if you like. It does not matter how much variation you will find in a single personality type, they are all going to be using the same hierarchy of cognitive functions, and will all share this connection.

Gender may affect personality, but the extent to which it does varies. Also there are 5 sexual orientations- more if you take into consideration the subtypes of asexuality. The extent and manner in which one's age would affect one's personality is relative.

 

[Adymus]

Gender may affect personality, but the extent to which it does varies. Also there are 5 sexual orientations- more if you take into consideration the subtypes of asexuality. The extent and manner in which one's age would affect one's personality is relative.

I consider Asexuality and Bisexuality unnecessary to include in that particular dichotomy, they are more advanced cases that I would leave off to the unpredictable. I personally don't even consider them valid sexual orientations. Low sex drive often pertains to personality more than it does the biological sex drive itself.

 

[Hawkeye]

Even your name affects your personality.

 

[BigApplePi]

I consider Asexuality and Bisexuality unnecessary to include in that particular dichotomy, they are more advanced cases that I would leave off to the unpredictable. I personally don't even consider them valid sexual orientations. Low sex drive often pertains to personality more than it does the biological sex drive itself.

There are those who would scale hetero-homosexuality as extremes and say everyone falls in between. So one could rate bisexuals as those who claim to have no sexual preference or who behave as if they didn't. A curve would look like a double humped camel. That would make bisexuals real but more rare. The question of what is their REAL orientation is is left up for grabs.

I met the author of this book and he seemed real enough:
The Bisexual Option<a href="javascript:void(0)" id="LXPLSS_890891533U1">

 

[Anthile]

I say, MBTI is a telescope, not a microscope.