MBTI FUD takedown thread

[Architect]

OK here's your chance. In one sentence, tell us why you think MBTI is wrong or flawed

Counter-replies can be of the same form; one sentence rebuttals, must quote the original.

 

[Cognisant]

It's just a classification system, may as well be asking which Harry Potter character you're most like because without a solid empirical basis it can never really prove anything.

 

[Rook]

MBTI classes 7.3 billion individuals of the same species into just 16 main categories.

 

[Architect]

MBTI classes 7.3 billion individuals of the same species into just 16 main categories.

Human sexuality classes 7.3B individuals into two categories.

 

[Jennywocky]

MBTI classes 7.3 billion individuals of the same species into just 16 main categories.

Anything and everything can be legitimately generalized into broad classifications; illogic is what leads people to erroneously distill more granularity from a broad theory than warranted.

 

[Architect]

It's just a classification system, may as well be asking which Harry Potter character you're most like because without a solid empirical basis it can never really prove anything.

The Big Five is a classification system as you describe, by having Functions and the Functional stack (which introduces mechanisms or causes) MBTI is elevated to the level of a theory.

 

[Tannhauser]

It is an non-scientific framework in line with astrology or Freud's theories about the ego, in the sense that it does not make falsifiable predictions and does not have clear definitions of any of its constituents.

 

[Architect]

It is an non-scientific framework in line with astrology or Freud's theories about the ego, in the sense that it does not make falsifiable predictions and does not have clear definitions of any of its constituents.

MBTI theory predicts that the existence of an inferior plays a role in making poor mating and career choices (e.g. INTP's who go into helping professions like medicine or psychology, ESTJ's wanting to become inventors), this is one example (of many) of an easily tested hypothesis.

 

[Fukyo]

It's not possible to reliably and accurately assign types to individuals which nullifies any prescriptive and predictive power it has.

 

[Miss spelt]

Human sexuality classes 7.3B individuals into two categories.

Straight, gay, bisexual, asexual

 

[Fukyo]

I think he meant physical sex.

 

[Miss spelt]

The Big Five is a classification system as you describe, by having Functions and the Functional stack (which introduces mechanisms or causes) MBTI is elevated to the level of a theory.

The MBTI has abandoned function stacks as an embarrassing mistake.

 

[Miss spelt]

I think he meant physical sex.

Hermaphroditic.

Or maybe chromosomal?

Kleinfelter's

Hmm whatever

 

[Tannhauser]

MBTI theory predicts that the existence of an inferior plays a role in making poor mating and career choices (e.g. INTP's who go into helping professions like medicine or psychology, ESTJ's wanting to become inventors), this is one example (of many) of an easily tested hypothesis.

It will not be possible to falsify MBTI based on such an experiment because someone being satisfied with the choices dictated by his inferior will not invalidate any statement of the theory.

 

[onesteptwostep]

A type only seems to outline 4 functions, their dom, aux, tert, and inf. What happens to the other four? Is it that we don't have them, or is the theory incomplete, or what?

 

[Miss spelt]

There only are 4 functions. S N T and F.

 

[Ex-User (11125)]

In order for mbti to really work for me, a new amalgam type that combines xntp+infp+infj+isfp should be made

 

[Rook]

Human sexuality classes 7.3B individuals into two categories.

Two classes with a supported biological basis, not a theorized one.

(well that is actually gender. Sexuality has more classes and is more sociologically debatable)

 

[Architect]

It's not possible to reliably and accurately assign types to individuals which nullifies any prescriptive and predictive power it has.

The MBTI Foundations canonical method is to administer a test and be typed by a certified professional, which has been found to be > 50% accurate.

(This is the first good one - excellent.)

 

[Architect]

It will not be possible to falsify MBTI based on such an experiment because someone being satisfied with the choices dictated by his inferior will not invalidate any statement of the theory.

The example given can be statistically verified by comparing a population of professionals, with their type, and their career satisfaction; the fact that self described satisfaction is used in no way invalidates a psychological theory as that is the point behind such a theory at all.

 

[Architect]

There only are 4 functions. S N T and F.

Are you trying to be dumb? This is no different than the population example above which you gave a silly rebuttal to, and additionally those are preferences, not functions.

 

[Miss spelt]

Are you trying to be dumb? This is no different than the population example above which you gave a silly rebuttal to, and additionally those are preferences, not functions.

You mean like an INTP has a preference for the functions of ... Thinking and intuition?

 

[Architect]

Two classes with a supported biological basis, not a theorized one.

You're conflating an obvious truth (there are two sexes) with the biological theory of sexual dimorphism.

(Good rebuttal to my rebuttal, and yes I'm talking about gender, not sexual preference.)

 

[Architect]

A type only seems to outline 4 functions, their dom, aux, tert, and inf. What happens to the other four? Is it that we don't have them, or is the theory incomplete, or what?

John Beebe and others hypothesize a "shadow stack" which includes the other four. I used to doubt its existance until a MBTI professional rubbed my nose in it and examples from my own life.

 

[Puffy]

It's not possible to reliably and accurately assign types to individuals which nullifies any prescriptive and predictive power it has.

Pod'Lair.

 

[Architect]

MBTI has no explanation for why an individual would test or act as a different type, which is frequently observed.

(playing Devils Advocate)

 

[Jennywocky]

MBTI has no explanation for why an individual would test or act as a different type, which is frequently observed.

(playing Devils Advocate)

The observations are wrong and/or people don't know how to properly type themselves.

(returning Devil's Advocate )

Hermaphroditic.

Or maybe chromosomal?

Kleinfelter's

And androgen insensitivity syndrome!

 

[Architect]

The observations are wrong and/or people don't know how to properly type themselves.

That's a reasonable cause, but still not really accounted for in the theory.

(To be accounted for in the theory, there would have to be a predictive reason why people mistype themselves or act out of their type. Therein is the answer, see if anybody spots it)

 

[Tannhauser]

The example given can be statistically verified by comparing a population of professionals, with their type, and their career satisfaction; the fact that self described satisfaction is used in no way invalidates a psychological theory as that is the point behind such a theory at all.

That would entail having to identify exactly which functions were responsible for specific actions taken by the individuals, which is not possible as there are no unambiguous definitions of the functions that allow for such analysis.

 

[Architect]

That would entail having to identify exactly which functions were responsible for specific actions taken by the individuals, which is not possible as there are no unambiguous definitions of the functions that allow for such analysis.

A theory doesn't have to be simple and unambiguous to be valid, it just needs to be verifiable and falsifiable, and should be parsimonious.

Now we're getting somewhere!

 

[Analyzer]

John Beebe and others hypothesize a "shadow stack" which includes the other four. I used to doubt its existance until a MBTI professional rubbed my nose in it and examples from my own life.

Socionics is more in depth compared to MBTI and includes all 8 functions into their model.

 

[Ex-User (5841)]

It's of subjective importance.

Human sexuality classes 7.3B individuals into two categories.

Nope. Kinsey scale.

But then your response is "genitalia!" To which mine is inheritance, to which yours is "what are you talking about," to which mine is an attempt to effectively remove sexual reproduction from the equation of humanity, which I'm pretty sure I can do for the purposes of TT.

 

[BatY]

I have lots of lines for this but you asked for one ilners so I'm going to go with this one for now out of my perceived situationality;

In the same way you can't ultimately study yourself, [human brain hitting a brick wall trying to understand itself], someone who wholly identifies with an MBTI will not be able to refute its validity.

 

[Black Rose]

OK here's your chance. In one sentence, tell us why you think MBTI is wrong or flawed.

No one on INTP forum was able to type me as a male ESFJ and there is the stereotype of how Sensors would not visit INTP forum long term.

Logically ESFJs are the best match for INTP forums

 

[Miss spelt]

Logically ESFJs are the best match for INTP forums

So true

 

[Reluctantly]

People have personalities; they might be complex and somewhat variable and contingent upon environmental factors in many cases, but there are observable temperaments that people exhibit.

But MBTI sees all that in a much narrower lense; everything gets simplified and explained as a result of a type. There are no intricacies or circumstances outside of those 16 types. All explanations must adhere to being a logical conclusion of the 16 types; it's a little absurd at times.