MBTI type descriptions - Accurazy

[ohsnap]

Hi people So, just talking about the profile descriptions of MBTI types.

I dislike the descriptions for the personality types, well or at least my types' . After reading ENFP overviews and seeing how bubbly and awesome we're 'supposed' to be, I feel like I've dropped the standard or something. And of course I'm not implying that everyone else isn't awesome, just that (in my case) some profiles make ENFPs seem so.... well, just awesome in general!

ie. from Personality Page's 'Portrait of an ENFP' :
'ENFPs are charming, ingenuous, risk-taking, sensitive, people-oriented individuals with capabilities ranging across a broad spectrum.'

How does it go for you others out there? How accurately do you fit into your supposed characteristics, flaws and capabilities? How reliable is MBTI?

Note:Apologies if there's another thread like this. I'm too lazy to go and search everywhere.

 

[Inappropriate Behavior]

Most type descriptions on places like Personality Page tend to be more flattering and don't highlight (or even mention often) a type's general flaws. That said, most people can perhaps identify with about 60% of those descriptions (pure guess). Perhaps an elevated self esteem might lead one to see so many positives in themselves.

 

[shadowdrums4]

Check around different pages. I identify with a lot of the INTP description, but I've identified with some descriptions of ENTP/ENFP and INFP before.

For example INFPs readily develop imaginary friends. I had lots of imaginary friends throughout life. ENFPs have a "silly switch" that turns them from serious one second to silly the next. Hmm I do that. ENTPs see how everything can be improved. I do that too. Adymus broke it down for me and helped me understand that I had a developed Ne but a dominant Ti and that meant INTP.

Functions work much better than descriptions.

As for how reliable it is, the test isn't reliable because it doesn't account for certain factors. The descriptions are only the functions in developed form. Once it's really understood though, it's pretty reliable if not taken too seriously.

 

[Fukyo]

Hi people So, just talking about the profile descriptions of MBTI types.

I dislike the descriptions for the personality types, well or at least my types' . After reading ENFP overviews and seeing how bubbly and awesome we're 'supposed' to be, I feel like I've dropped the standard or something. And of course I'm not implying that everyone else isn't awesome, just that (in my case) some profiles make ENFPs seem so.... well, just awesome in general!

ie. from Personality Page's 'Portrait of an ENFP' :
'ENFPs are charming, ingenuous, risk-taking, sensitive, people-oriented individuals with capabilities ranging across a broad spectrum.'

How does it go for you others out there? How accurately do you fit into your supposed characteristics, flaws and capabilities? How reliable is MBTI?

Note:Apologies if there's another thread like this. I'm too lazy to go and search everywhere.

Well, the type descriptions do suck for many reasons.(overgeneralized, don't account for variability within a type, just plain simplistic, etc) That's old news.
If you want a more in-depth ENFP profile, you might want to check this out. Be warned, it's very long, requires knowledge of cog.functions and takes some time to digest. Also, whatever you do, stay away from Keirsey. *shudder*