Biggest flaw in the MBTI?

[wonkavision]

What's the biggest flaw in the MBTI?

In my opinion, it's the P/J dichotomy.

I think that's the biggest source of confusion/mistypes. Especially when it comes to the stereotype of "organized/orderly."
It just doesn't fit certain J-types very well. (Particularly INFJ and INTJ.)

It seems like scores of people think they're Ps because of lack of organization, planning, task-completion, follow-through, time management, etc. but they may not be Ps at all.

Other than the P/J dichotomy, In think the rest of the theory is solid.

What do you think is the biggest flaw in the MBTI?

 

[Hawkeye]

Stereotypes

 

[own8ge]

The vague and confusing definitions of the dichotomies, 99 percent misunderstands them.

 

[Brontosaurie]

the idea of fundamental cognitive functions is difficult to support empirically.

it's really a heuristic rather than a fact although many (me included) treat it more or less as fact..

 

[Pizzabeak]

This one "feeler" I was in contact with (typed as ENFJ) was all obsessed with the T, probably because we were under the impression I had dominant Ti while she had inferior Ti & she wanted to make it seem like we had more in common or something... I probably teased her too much during obvious inferior Ti moments and it hurt her feelings maybe... I dunno. But one day she told me she retook the test and typed as ENTJ.

Once I was using her iPad and saw that she googled "how to use feelings less and think more".

 

[Brontosaurie]

Once I was using her iPad and saw that she googled "how to use feelings less and think more".

but really that's terribly sad.

 

[Pizzabeak]

We used to have a Shiba-inu but he died of some tumor last year... Was gonna post a picture of him but that might not be necessary. It was pretty sad.

 

[Absurdity]

The nervous impulse to conflate the map with the territory.

Edit: To be fair this is more user-error than anything.

 

[scorpiomover]

Mostly? Far too many people using the theory to support their personal beliefs, and personal egotistical agendas, and not actually using it for rational and practical purposes.

The theory itself? It's a set of binary divisions. Like saying you can classify every book, into only one of 16 types. Even Roget's Thesaurus classifies into more detail than that.

 

[wonkavision]

Yeah, on second thought, I guess the T/F dichotomy is pretty
confusing as well.

And the more you think about it, the whole theory starts to unravel.

Man, MBTI sux.

Isn't there a better model out there?

Jung's Psychological Types is OK, but not fleshed out enough.

Socionics isn't much of an improvement, IMO. And Kiersey's kind a goofy and overly simplistic.

Enneagram is fairly useless. And Pod'Lair's got a little something, but it's way too culty and weird.

Are we really stuck with Jung/MBTI?

 

[Pizzabeak]

I always tell people the deeper you get into it the more it starts to break down...

Is being aware of the "flaws" enough? Is there anything you can do? I guess I try to be wary of all the ego related crap & practice acceptable form but we're all human. Sometimes it isn't always at the top of my mind. However, that's why I ask if being aware is enough. You can have a thought or perform a behaviour and then come to some realizations afterward. Can't really go back in time and correct it.
I try I guess. We all do, I suppose. I apologize if I'm doing it wrong and offending anyone in the process.

 

[EyeSeeCold]

What do you think is the biggest flaw in the MBTI?

Its popularity and how ordinary people treat it / use it.

As a theory it's something to constantly be researched, tested, critiqued, and improved upon by psychologists, but the popular presentation of it makes it out to be a finished fact of reality, which inevitably falls apart the more one learns of it.

 

[Pizzabeak]

As a theory it's something to constantly be researched, tested, critiqued, and improved upon by psychologists,

Well I like the idea of that.

We can discuss what I mean/meant by "fall apart" if need be.

Maybe I should think this through more.

See y'alls

 

[BigApplePi]

What's the biggest flaw in the MBTI?

Its subjectivity. Categories are not perfectly defined and can't be as human organisms are not meant to be split down the middle.

In my opinion, it's the P/J dichotomy.

I take P for the tendency for reserved observing and J for the tendency to select or judge. Since I favor perception consciously, that is a judgment about perception. One has to evaluate the meaning of that.

I think that's the biggest source of confusion/mistypes. Especially when it comes to the stereotype of "organized/orderly."
It just doesn't fit certain J-types very well. (Particularly INFJ and INTJ.)

That doesn't define P/J though there could be a correlation.

It seems like scores of people think they're Ps because of lack of organization, planning, task-completion, follow-through, time management, etc. but they may not be Ps at all.

Could be.

Other than the P/J dichotomy, In think the rest of the theory is solid.

You are dead right wrong right wrong I dunno about that.

What do you think is the biggest flaw in the MBTI?

Its subjectivity. Categories are not perfectly defined and can't be as human organisms are not split down the middle.

 

[hasen]

All the dichotomies are not very well defined.

The worst one is T/F dichotomy.

Most of the questions in online tests that are supposed to test T/F are actually testing Te vs Fe.

At least I've seen several INTPs (myself included) think they are INFPs .. until they discover the functions and dig into them deep enough to understand that they have Ti/Fe, not Fi/Te.

 

[BigApplePi]

All the dichotomies are not very well defined.

The worst one is T/F dichotomy.

T = Fond of logical placement of things; T=fond of valuation of things. It's position versus value. Very distinctive.

Most of the questions in online tests that are supposed to test T/F are actually testing Te vs Fe.

That's bad. Need Ti and Fi.

At least I've seen several INTPs (myself included) think they are INFPs .. until they discover the functions and dig into them deep enough to understand that they have Ti/Fe, not Fi/Te.

It must be very upsetting not to know for sure.

 

[scorpiomover]

Yeah, on second thought, I guess the T/F dichotomy is pretty
confusing as well.

Depends on how you look at it. I've had people tell me that I was an INTJ, ISTP, INFP, and ISFJ. Even asked the posters on INTJf. Most agreed that I was defo an INTP.

The main problems with the T/F dichotomy, are:

1) Historically, T => rational, knows what he's talking about, unemotional robot. F => caring, never hurt anyone, completely irrational, doesn't know what's what. It's like the old-fashioned stereotypes of men and women, transplanted directly into MBTI. Really doesn't give you anything to understand, only to criticise.

2) Recently, T => likes science, gadgets, atheism. F => likes religion, crying, parties. More stereotypes.

3) There are distinctions, that indicate people's attitudinal approaches to decision-making. However, when you apply those approaches to others, you find that there are many "rational" people who have a very F-based approach, and many "irrational" people who have a very T-based approach. Being honest here, would expose millions to their own insecurities, which right now, they are simply not willing to face.

Isn't there a better model out there?

Not that I've seen.

Jung's Psychological Types is OK, but not fleshed out enough.

I'm working on the kinks. But it's taking time.

There are a number of issues with Jungian functions:

1) He's trying to classify what types of people will get what psychological disorders, and when. It's like his own DSM, with his own diagnostic criteria. Wouldn't cover everything, and certainly not all those things that people like to use it for, which seems to be who would be religious/atheist and why, who would be smart/stupid and why, what jobs/careers one would be good at, what types would be good for friends, what types would be good to have NSA sex with, date, have LTRs with, and marry.

2) He's trying to describe the inner workings of the human mind. Like trying to list out the CPU instruction set to your average Windows user. Goes right over their heads.

Socionics isn't much of an improvement, IMO.

And Kiersey's kind a goofy and overly simplistic.

Keirsey's theory appears at first glance, to be overly simplistic. But over time, I've seen some very deep insights into it.

Are we really stuck with Jung/MBTI?

No. But whatever we come up with, it's gonna have to be complicated, because humans over-complicate things.

 

[Duxwing]

Being honest here, would expose millions to their own insecurities, which right now, they are simply not willing to face.

Lay it on us!

Keirsey's theory appears at first glance, to be overly simplistic. But over time, I've seen some very deep insights into it.

Such as?

No. But whatever we come up with, it's gonna have to be complicated, because humans over-complicate things.

To our credit, the human mind is complex.

-Duxwing

 

[BigApplePi]

The main problems with the T/F dichotomy, are:

1) Historically, T => rational, knows what he's talking about, unemotional robot. F => caring, never hurt anyone, completely irrational, doesn't know what's what. It's like the old-fashioned stereotypes of men and women, transplanted directly into MBTI. Really doesn't give you anything to understand, only to criticise.

2) Recently, T => likes science, gadgets, atheism. F => likes religion, crying, parties. More stereotypes.

3) There are distinctions, that indicate people's attitudinal approaches to decision-making. However, when you apply those approaches to others, you find that there are many "rational" people who have a very F-based approach, and many "irrational" people who have a very T-based approach. Being honest here, would expose millions to their own insecurities, which right now, they are simply not willing to face.

When one runs cold water into a hot tub, how should one play it?

1. This end is hot; the other end is cold?

2. Put an imaginary line cutting the tub in half and call one side "warm" and the other side "cool"?

 

[Montresor]

No you mix hot and cold together and the end result is water with an average temperature of either warmer or cooler than body temp.

Then it feels either "warm or cool".

And you're right back to MBTI.

 

[BigApplePi]

And you're right back to MBTI.

How so?

 

[Montresor]

Well the water either feels warm or cool based strictly on whether it's warmer or cooler than body temp.

It's a great analogy to how MBTI states that an individual has a "preference" for thinking or feeling, and presenting this as though it isn't already interrelated to J/P and I/E as well.

oh the water's hot I'm a F. oh it's cold I'm a T.

 

[MMarcus]

if i had to pick a. flaw id be the J/P dichotomy. their main purpose is to determine cognitive functions but people treat them as a characteristic themself. they do have differences like judgers organizing /dealing with the external world while perceivers observe. but i dont think they should be functions themselves thats wrong.
also i always here how mbti is not scientifically supported but that doesmt mean its not accurate. ive observed thoery of psychological types of people for a while now and it holds up nearly perfectly.i dont care much for scientific studies(external validation) anyway as i am INTP. not that they arent effective just that i get libido for internal validation. mbti is way more helpful than anything ive learned in any of my 1st yr psych classes anyway

 

[Hadoblado]

if i had to pick a. flaw id be the J/P dichotomy. their main purpose is to determine cognitive functions but people treat them as a characteristic themself. they do have differences like judgers organizing /dealing with the external world while perceivers observe. but i dont think they should be functions themselves thats wrong.
also i always here how mbti is not scientifically supported but that doesmt mean its not accurate. ive observed thoery of psychological types of people for a while now and it holds up nearly perfectly.i dont care much for scientific studies(external validation) anyway as i am INTP. not that they arent effective just that i get libido for internal validation. mbti is way more helpful than anything ive learned in any of my 1st yr psych classes anyway

They'll beat that out of you.

If MBTI is accurate, why is it not scientifically supported?

Never use being an INTP as an excuse not to be skeptical. Internal validation is great, but it's difficult to build truly great thoughts without testing the premises.

 

[scorpiomover]

When one runs cold water into a hot tub, how should one play it?

1. This end is hot; the other end is cold?

2. Put an imaginary line cutting the tub in half and call one side "warm" and the other side "cool"?

If it's too hot, then you could put some cold water in it, until it's the right temperature for you. If it's too cold, then you could put some hot water, until it's the right temperature for you.

If someone else is in there, you could ask if they mind if you add hot/cold water to suit you. If they don't, then you could do as above. If they think it's fine, or they think it's too cold when you think it's too hot, or vice versa, then you could just not go in the hot tub. But if your girlfriend thinks the water's fine, she just might cuddle up to the guys already in there, who also think it's fine, in her bikini. You can ask her not to. But she might decide that you're being unreasonable, and dump you. Or, she might be willing to compromise and come with you. But you'll probably have to do something for her in return, like go with her to the opera or to see a rom-com. Or, you can just jump in anyway, and put up with it. But then again, if it's too hot, you might start turning red, and if it's too cold, you might start turning blue.

You have many options. But every option has its problems. You choose what you want to do.

Does it matter how hot or cold you feel? No. The only thing that matters, is whether the water is fine for you or not, and what you are going to do about it.

Do you now understand, how this relates to T/F?