My first thread

[Maverick]

I'm newbie so bear with me.
Most of the posts I've been reading was posted in "INTP to ENTP project" thread.
I've been here months ago read some posts saved some pages. Couple of days ago while searching on that pile of pages, started reading posts on that thread by chance. I liked it and struggled the temptation to post and decided on keep reading. I've read most of the posts.
I decided to not post to an old bloody abandoned thread and to start a new thread instead.


I'd like discuss the points with you about typology and MBTI.

If typology is about taking sides why not stick with some vapid astrology zodiac or even phrenology?
Typology is not so much as one's ability as one's preference. We look for self-awareness 'cause it helps improve adaptibilty. towards more rounded personality.
I would be curious to be sure of my type just to not waste energy reinforcing my strong suit. (please, I want to be sure of my type, special request to Adymus).
I don't like the way some people treat Lyra.

 

[Anthile]

My first thread

Actually, it's your second thread.

I'd like discuss the points with you about typology and MBTI.

Okay.

If typology is about taking sides why not stick with some vapid astrology zodiac or even phrenology?

Taking sides? Jung's work is based on observing thousands of his patients and seeing patterns in their behavior. This was later adapted by Myers-Briggs. The validity is still debated and rightly so. A link between neuroscience and typology has yet to appear but I'm certain that such a thing exists.[/QUOTE]

Typology is not so much as one's ability as one's preference. We look for self-awareness 'cause it helps improve adaptibilty. towards more rounded personality.

MBTI is about preference. Actually, typology is neutral in its approach, just like every other science. Whatever you do with it, it is not the concern of typology.

I don't like the way some people treat Lyra.

Lurk moar.

 

[Words]

@OP

You seem to be fond of Lyra---whether that has a connection to your type is what I wonder. A Sudanese INFJ would be some coincidence. (at least, to me.)

I forgot to say, Welcome.

Well-roundedness---the ability to do *ALL* well. I agree that it is subjective. What is "good enough" social ability? What is "good enough" mental ability? What is "good enough" aesthetic ability? Or it could be that when you improve one part, it adds a bonus to another part. A building with its foundations.

We are born with strengths but should strengths be our focus? I'm inclined to say yes. And the way to achieve that is through "well-roundedness". Balance creates the sharpest pencil.

 

[CoryJames]

If typology is about taking sides why not stick with some vapid astrology zodiac or even phrenology?

It that a serious question?
...
...
...
(Let us assume yes.)
(me facepalming-ing)

Because typologies are at least somewhat based on science and reality. It has been proven that there is no true correlation between zodiac symbols and ones existence on this earth.

 

[Cognisant]

I don't like the way some people treat Lyra.

Nor does Lyra.

 

[420MuNkEy]

If typology is about taking sides why not stick with some vapid astrology zodiac or even phrenology?

From what I've read (not citing anything specifically), traits predicted by the MBTI each correlate most strongly to one group specifically (ie, types are not interchangeable for the most part). 'Astrological' zodiac signs (specifically horoscopes) accuracy on the other hand is the result of the Forer effect (the results fit everyone about the same).

Also, remember that the accuracy of the results is only as accurate as the answers given. If one misinterprets a question, lies, puts answers of how they wish they were rather than how they actually are, etc., the results will reflect that inaccurate information.

Typology is not so much as one's ability as one's preference. We look for self-awareness 'cause it helps improve adaptibilty. towards more rounded personality.
I would be curious to be sure of my type just to not waste energy reinforcing my strong suit. (please, I want to be sure of my type, special request to Adymus).
I don't like the way some people treat Lyra.

It's important to note that ones preference is different from ones choice in the sense that one is able to consciously make choices while preferences are subconscious. For example, one cannot simply choose to prefer waffles to pancakes. Specific information can often be inferred from ones preferences (for example, if you prefer the command line over a user interface, it would be reasonable for me to infer that you have knowledge of directory navigation). Because of this, I see no flaw with typology being based of ones preferences.

The MBTI isn't perfect, but it is certainly more plausible (and accurate) than astrology.

 

[Maverick]

Does limitation of using a second language affect being typed correctly?

 

[Maverick]

'cause I suffer very much from rephrasing.

 

[Maverick]

The MBTI isn't perfect, but it is certainly more plausible (and accurate) than astrology.

Astrology by no means compares to MBTI. It tries to figure out personality by identifying planets that control the person by knowing where and when s/he was born. that's ridiculous.

 

[s0nystyle]

Astrology by no means compares to MBTI. It tries to figure out personality by identifying planets that control the person by knowing where and when s/he was born. that's ridiculous.

and yet you choose to compare the two as if they were interchangable in your 1st post

<--- is ever so slightly confuzzled

 

[CoryJames]

and yet you choose to compare the two as if they were interchangable in your 1st post

<--- is ever so slightly confuzzled

Why are you confuzzled? Maverick is simply trying to cover up what he/she must realize was a very "vapid" statement. Entirely understandable behavior.

 

[Maverick]

Why are you confuzzled? Maverick is simply trying to cover up what he/she must realize was a very "vapid" statement. Entirely understandable behavior.

Ugh, I wasn't trying to cover up or something, simply I was trying to point it out 'cause it seems what I posted was a misleading sentence, judging by most of the responses.
sorry, my bad, victim of English being my second language.

 

[walfin]

sorry, my bad, victim of English being my second language.

Really.

You do use modern slang pretty well, it seems.
*raises eyebrow*

 

[CoryJames]

Ugh, I wasn't trying to cover up or something, simply I was trying to point it out 'cause it seems what I posted was a misleading sentence, judging by most of the responses.
sorry, my bad, victim of English being my second language.

Assuming I believe you, then what was your "intended" point?

 

[Words]

Really.

You do use modern slang pretty well, it seems.
*raises eyebrow*

Hah! I agree. (I find it interesting that the message is delivered to include a mix of both compliment and skepticism).

Disregarding the topic at hand, there is no "wrong" in being inaccurate. (Ironically)

 

[CoryJames]

Disregarding the topic at hand, there is no "wrong" in being inaccurate. (Ironically)

What about during surgery?
*raises eyebrow*
*then raises other eyebrow*
*does a weird eyebrow wave for several seconds*

 

[Words]

What about during surgery?
*raises eyebrow*
*then raises other eyebrow*
*does a weird eyebrow wave for several seconds*

Hahaha, I do those eyebrow waves a lot too.


Failure in surgeries depends on several factors, what is "good", however, is dependent on whether the surgeon chose to do "good". It is not "wrong" to make mistakes.

 

[Kuu]

Really.

You do use modern slang pretty well, it seems.
*raises eyebrow*

People that know english as a second language can't use slang?

Spoiler

 

[Maverick]

People that know english as a second language can't use slang?

On the contrary I tend to use slang, sometimes complex words or even terminology, whatever I found 'cause I lack those simple precise meaningful words.
In fact I talk like a book 'cause that type of language "text material" are what I'm familiar with (or may I say exposed to 'if it's right') more than everyday language.

So I keep searching in that poor pool for a word or a chunk of words to get around the situation.

 

[CoryJames]

Regardless, it was not imprecise wording that made your claim stupid, but rather the claim itself. Not wrong, or bad, but simply inaccurate and, well, stupid. You tried to compare grouping people based on the astronomical cycle of their birth to typing someone based on specific aspects of their personality and cognitive functions. The similarities of people in specific typologies are quantifiable in each member.

 

[Maverick]

Regardless, it was not imprecise wording that made your claim stupid, but rather the claim itself. Not wrong, or bad, but simply inaccurate and, well, stupid. You tried to compare grouping people based on the astronomical cycle of their birth to typing someone based on specific aspects of their personality and cognitive functions. The similarities of people in specific typologies are quantifiable in each member.

what are you trying to prove here?
being rude? you don't have to.

you could simply discuss the ideas without acting up. you should know, everything is debatable except rudeness.

 

[420MuNkEy]

Languages differ from each other in many ways. It's perfectly understandable that something will not be clearly translated. For example, people who's native tongue is Hindi often come off as very direct (even assholish at times) in English. Regardless, it's kind of absurd we're still discussing a simple misunderstanding rather than the original topic.

 

[CoryJames]

Languages differ from each other in many ways. It's perfectly understandable that something will not be clearly translated. For example, people who's native tongue is Hindi often come off as very direct (even assholish at times) in English. Regardless, it's kind of absurd we're still discussing a simple misunderstanding rather than the original topic.

The original topic was why don't we just exchange Jungian Typologies for Zodiac Signs. I was discussing why we don't do that. No need to call me absurd sir.

 

[Dormouse]

Actually, I think what he was trying to say that the reason typology was superior to astrology was that it's less rigid, allowing for variances within the personality types and a certain ability to explain the changes a personality experiences as the person grows and adapts to the world.

Or something.

I also detected some strain of 'so can our personalities change', but that's probably my reading between the lines.

 

[CoryJames]

Actually, I think what he was trying to say that the reason typology was superior to astrology was that it's less rigid, allowing for variances within the personality types and a certain ability to explain the changes a personality experiences as the person grows and adapts to the world.

Or something.

I also detected some strain of 'so can our personalities change', but that's probably my reading between the lines.

Yes, our personalities can change, and we can retake the test and see what we have changed into.

Can you climb back into a vagina, hide out for a few months, and come back out when you reach a zodiac cycle of which the apparent qualities better fit your personality?

 

[Dormouse]

What I'm trying to say is that he used the comparison to outline MBTI's strengths...

 

[420MuNkEy]

The original topic was why don't we just exchange Jungian Typologies for Zodiac Signs. I was discussing why we don't do that.

I suggest you re-read the first post, because even if it isn't clear, what is clear is that you don't have a good idea of what's written there.

For example:

Regardless, it was not imprecise wording that made your claim stupid, but rather the claim itself. Not wrong, or bad, but simply inaccurate and, well, stupid.

No such claim was made. A reference to astrology was made in an inquiry, that's it. Ironically, this text I have quoted of you applies more to itself than the original post.

No need to call me absurd sir.

Absurd? No sir, you are a douchebag. Every single one of your posts in this thread has been extremely condescending almost to the point of mockery.

 

[Saeros]

Ugh, I wasn't trying to cover up or something, simply I was trying to point it out 'cause it seems what I posted was a misleading sentence, judging by most of the responses.
sorry, my bad, victim of English being my second language.

Sorry for dragging this thread even further off course, but i must say that you speak english very well. how long have you been learning english? I bow before you're greatness. So do you have any tips for studying language?

Anyway, back on topic. The problem I have with astrology is that what they say is so vague that it's essentially useless. It's not necessarily right, but it can't even be wrong; there are no specific, falsifiable claims in astrology. How this compares with MBTI, I have neither the intelligence nor the patience to go into

Also, maybe i'm missing something, but who's Lyra?

 

[Maverick]

thanks to 420MuNkEy
Saeros
and
Dormouse
for using your 'Ne' to get a deep insight into what being discussed and not just drifted by the words