• OK, it's on.
  • Please note that many, many Email Addresses used for spam, are not accepted at registration. Select a respectable Free email.
  • Done now. Domine miserere nobis.

What is the difference between INTP and ENTP

Tannhauser

angry insecure male
Local time
Today 10:01 AM
Joined
Jul 18, 2015
Messages
1,462
-->
Yeah, I guess I'm really being quite arrogant and daydreaming when I postulate that INTPs are likely poor entrepreneurs:

View attachment 2614

Okey, so let us first note that we are using data now. Thus we apparently use data when it supports the theory, and disregard it when it doesn't.

Regardless: the table tells us nothing about the quality of an INTP entrepreneur vs any other type. Simple example: most hairdressers are women. Does it mean men are worse hairdressers than women? (I personally have had some extremely skilled male hairdressers, not so many female).

Moreover, what has this data to do with MBTI theory? We could have just as well said "people with certain traits fit better to do certain tasks". This is no different than using Big 5. Inferring why people cannot become certain things -- from the theory -- is something quite different.
 

Sinny91

Banned
Local time
Today 9:01 AM
Joined
May 16, 2015
Messages
6,299
-->
Location
Birmingham, UK
Yea, I was well on my way up the ladder in the office/business sector. I was doing so well that I had a little panick attack at the thought of being a white collar drone.

Now I'm floating in no man's land until I decide where to redirect my energy.
 

emmabobary

*snore*
Local time
Today 5:01 AM
Joined
Mar 7, 2015
Messages
397
-->
Your response doesn't make sense. You berate Bronto for taking something out of context while taking his quote out of context yourself.

Also consider toning down your downplaying "focus on theory not feelz" and overly familiar diminutive "mon cheri". You're in no position to say that and it makes you look stupidly out of place.

Dude!
I'm trying to start a fight here :cat:
:v
....insults apart I'm still right. Stop taking MBTI so seriously, people...

Also dear Blarraun, if I had to respect every 'context' then maybe I should go take a shit in the avenue right now. It would make sense...in my context. No offense, I'm just saying that if you gonna argue against a theory focus on the theory, not on details or your feelz about it, otherwise don't expect to be taken seriously.
Look at Tannhauser and Inquisitor, like always they're tangled again in the passionate dance of: "your approach is wrong, mine is right" I think they're not even talking about MBTI anymore
 

reckful

INTJ
Local time
Today 2:01 AM
Joined
Jul 6, 2013
Messages
96
-->
Hahahah
Science???
Myers Briggs Type Indicator IS NOT SCIENCE.
Context, Mon cheri!
If you want to refute a theory, focus on the theory, not on what you think or feel about it.

Contrary to what you sometimes hear, and notwithstanding that there are important distinctions to be made between "hard sciences" and "soft sciences," the four MBTI dichotomies now have decades of data in support of their validity and reliability — and a combination of meta-review and large supplemental study in 2003 concluded that the MBTI was more or less in the same category (if not on a par) with the Big Five in terms of its psychometric respectability.

Anyone who's interested can read more about that — and about several other issues often raised by people claiming to "debunk" the MBTI — in my long Another MBTI "Debunking" post (at PerC).
 

Brontosaurie

Banned
Local time
Today 10:01 AM
Joined
Dec 4, 2010
Messages
5,646
-->
Hahahah
Science???
Myers Briggs Type Indicator IS NOT SCIENCE.
Context, Mon cheri!
If you want to refute a theory, focus on the theory, not on what you think or feel about it.

This inane drivel is getting tiresome.

Try finding the position you claim that i make in my post before claiming that i make that position in my post. You will not find me positing that MBTI qualifies as scientifically valid or that its popular use resembles a good scientific process.

I am simply defending reckful's interpretation of MBTI on its own terms, and explaining to Inquisitor why his criticism is illegitimate. In case you haven't read what reckful has to say about MBTI and its merits (which, not so coincidentally, is also the case where you ought to shut up), the basic point is that MBTI has validity insofar as it deviates from, refines and expands Jung's work, and the cognitive functions framework is discarded in favor of viewing the dichotomies as an array of distinct, core personality dimensions, and furthermore that these are acknowledged as such by proponents of Big 5, the main scientifically corroborated personality model. The operative condition here is not the validity of MBTI but the validity of challenging theories internally.

I don't necessarily agree with reckful, mainly because i lack the knowledge to pass any judgment. I am simply arguing that Inquisitor cannot dismiss reckful based on the fact that reckful doesn't adhere to typological dogma. In other words, it's not true that a theory is wrong just because it modifies another original theory to better (note relative, not absolute term here) accommodate for evidence. Inquisitor might as well argue that any car after the T-Ford is invalid and that if one doesn't like the T-Ford one should invent/purchase a new kind of vehicle entirely instead of an improved, modern car. So, hopefully you understand that i'm not recommending the BMW-98160 or whatever but only saying it's okay to prefer a new car. Maybe all new cars are false, but that's an empirical question beyond the scope of this argument.

You may want to observe that you just got pwned and adjust your attitude accordingly. :D
 

Inquisitor

Well-Known Member
Local time
Today 5:01 AM
Joined
Mar 31, 2015
Messages
840
-->
Okey, so let us first note that we are using data now. Thus we apparently use data when it supports the theory, and disregard it when it doesn't.

I did it for your benefit! And you're welcome. You're not convinced if I give you my subjective impressions so I have to resort to dumping stats on you.

Regardless: the table tells us nothing about the quality of an INTP entrepreneur vs any other type. Simple example: most hairdressers are women. Does it mean men are worse hairdressers than women? (I personally have had some extremely skilled male hairdressers, not so many female).

Moreover, what has this data to do with MBTI theory? We could have just as well said "people with certain traits fit better to do certain tasks". This is no different than using Big 5. Inferring why people cannot become certain things -- from the theory -- is something quite different.

The table makes it pretty clear that INTPs are approximately 3X less numerous as executives than are found in the general population. What more do you want? You want to try your hand as entrepreneur? Go ahead. Compare that to software engineering where I saw one study that showed they are 2.5X more numerous. Quite possibly that number is higher.

It's not at all apt to compare this stat with male and female hairdressers either. The way you should read that statistic is that very rarely are INTPs attracted to positions of leadership. In fact, it's not a stretch to argue that they apparently shy away from it...either that or they try it, hate it, and switch to something else. Since they don't seem to like this kind of job very much, it's also not a stretch to conclude that there are not many INTPs out there that are successful leaders. Are you honestly going to argue that even though INTPs don't like being the head honcho, secretly they're actually probably very good at it? If you're good at something, you'll enjoy it and want to do it. End of story.

And lastly, as you just saw from my discussion with reckful, there is no MBTI theory! There is only Jung and his theories, and Isabel Myers and her test and dichotomies. She didn't invent any new theory at all.

I could give you my interpretation of why INTPs are not suited to becoming entrepreneurs using the functions...but I think it's pretty clear by now you don't care about that, so I'm not going to bother.
 

OmoInisa

Active Member
Local time
Today 9:01 AM
Joined
Jan 3, 2014
Messages
207
-->
Location
London, UK
Well this is a good tussle. Funny how we tend to be blinded to the value of one another's insights when engaged in heated contest. I certainly see the merits of both Inquisitor's and Reckful's arguments.
Neither is complete and flawless, but both are important and useful.

As someone who's found himself hopping back and forth in the past (and still do to a certain extent) between preferring a function-centric lens and opting for a dichotomy-centric one, I've found that the question misses the point.
Just as with our two protagonists here, both approaches have their unique insights. Shutting off one in the dogmatic embrace of the other limits our perception of the underlying essenses that the study of type (which for me includes Jung's archetypes, mbti refinements from the various authors, socionics, enneagram) aims to capture.

Even though I have little time for astrology, I don't shut myself off even from that. Obviously one can and will prefer one or a number of approaches to others (it would be fruitless not to), the more 'lenses' one has, the more powerfully one sees.
This being an iNtp forum, it surprises me sometimes how little appreciation of this principle there is.

While I think Inquisitor makes the most provocative point in suggesting that the implacable nature of their contest actually originates from their differing attitudes a la Jung, Reckful offers the most meaningful argument as he seems to indicate that it is the convergence of different approaches that leads us closest to the truth.
 

Tannhauser

angry insecure male
Local time
Today 10:01 AM
Joined
Jul 18, 2015
Messages
1,462
-->
The table makes it pretty clear that INTPs are approximately 3X less numerous as executives than are found in the general population. What more do you want? You want to try your hand as entrepreneur? Go ahead. Compare that to software engineering where I saw one study that showed they are 2.5X more numerous. Quite possibly that number is higher.

It's not at all apt to compare this stat with male and female hairdressers either. The way you should read that statistic is that very rarely are INTPs attracted to positions of leadership. In fact, it's not a stretch to argue that they apparently shy away from it...either that or they try it, hate it, and switch to something else. Since they don't seem to like this kind of job very much, it's also not a stretch to conclude that there are not many INTPs out there that are successful leaders. Are you honestly going to argue that even though INTPs don't like being the head honcho, secretly they're actually probably very good at it? If you're good at something, you'll enjoy it and want to do it. End of story.

I'll give you this though: from the table, doing some quick math, the conditional probability of becoming exec given that you are INTJ is about 20x the probability conditioned on you being INTP.

This is certainly interesting because it shows, for example, that it is more to MBTI than just grouping people in terms of introverts/extroverts -- it finds very useful distinctions within these groups as well.
 

emmabobary

*snore*
Local time
Today 5:01 AM
Joined
Mar 7, 2015
Messages
397
-->
Dear Reckful:
that's a lot of debate on the MBTI
But honestly, Myers Briggs indicator isn't that important in psychology. There are: 16FP (16 personality factors) or the MMPI 2 (Minnesota multiphasic personality inventory) if we actually need to give a valid, serious measure of the personality. And this is because, not even the APA counts Myers Briggs into the recommended psychometric tests. Could it be because it needs more time and studies to become reliable, could it be the credibility, or the massive critiques it gets.
But again, honestly, characterological tests are never that useful. Why? Because trying to fit every human peculiarity into a reduced number of labels, patterns of behavior (and I'm not even sure about this one, because mbti doesn't compare behavioural groups to determine a pattern of behavior typical of a certain type) or stigmatic features will never help us to give a real diagnosis (where the test is just a picture of the client in the take time) that help us to treat the issue (if we find pathology), or to improve the client's abilities (always looking for his/her wellbeing), labeling a person is not psychologists biggest concern. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Characterology

Now, on reliability: from 75 to 90% of the re-tests among 1 week and 2 years are consistent with the first take (however T and F are the least reliable).
I dont know what the point of having an immovable type is, so even if the test is reliable I'm happen to be doomed to be an INTP for the rest of my life. Which leads me to validity: therefore this test is not very useful for psychology. Even if the four dichotomies and the 16 types are real, the applications given to it have to be very vague and open wide in order to not fall into wrong diagnosis or too shaped profiles that only restrict the client's options.
http://mbtitoday.org/applications-of-type/
http://scholar.google.com.bo/schola...=0CBwQgAMoADAAahUKEwjXttKfsbXIAhVHGh4KHR-ICvg

Finally, you have to admit that even the way it was created is at least anecdotal. Two housewives give their own interpretation of Jung's theory of types and come with a questionnaire the daughter herself wrote with no basis on take groups to build the test...

MBTI is not science, it's fundaments are not unquestionable, it is not accurate, on the contrary it has to be very vaguely used to be helpful. It doesn't give a deep, consistent and useful explanation or view of the personality structure, as for example Roscharch would do.
Stop taking it too seriously, people!
 

Inquisitor

Well-Known Member
Local time
Today 5:01 AM
Joined
Mar 31, 2015
Messages
840
-->
I'll give you this though: from the table, doing some quick math, the conditional probability of becoming exec given that you are INTJ is about 20x the probability conditioned on you being INTP.

This is certainly interesting because it shows, for example, that it is more to MBTI than just grouping people in terms of introverts/extroverts -- it finds very useful distinctions within these groups as well.

Yes, exactly. It's not a stretch to assert that INTJs are going to have better careers than INTPs for exactly that reason. The most interesting part of that table though, is INTJs are even more likely than ENTJs to be executives despite the fact that ENTJs are extraverted. One would think that extraversion would lend itself to leadership more than introversion, but apparently this is not the case.

I think the trick is to refine our understanding of what it means to be an "executive" in our day and age. It doesn't necessarily involve lots of interaction with other people. In fact, I would venture that smart executives know how to delegate so well that they don't have to micromanage and leave that to the managers. Seen in this context, it's not really a surprise that INTJs are so numerous b/c from all descriptions I've read, as well my personal experience, they excel at strategy/tactics.

See this interesting paper concerning the military. The result holds true there as well:

Leadership: The Personality Factor


See Appendix B.

The results in this paper indicate that ENTJs are actually more numerous than INTJs, despite the fact that the table I referenced earlier indicates that ENTJs are much less commonly found in the general population than INTJs. I tend to place greater faith in the numbers in that table than I do in this table.

So in the military at least, it would seem that extraversion is more favorable when it comes to command.
 

The Gopher

President
Local time
Today 8:01 PM
Joined
Aug 26, 2010
Messages
4,671
-->
MMPI 2 (Minnesota multiphasic personality inventory)

Just gonna put this out there it takes like four hours to translate the results into something meaningful if you haven't done it before. Interesting results though.
 

onesteptwostep

Junior Hegelian
Local time
Today 6:01 PM
Joined
Dec 7, 2014
Messages
4,253
-->
I took an abridged version of the test after one of my psychosis episodes.

The thing about the test is that it's a written response. How the result is derived is.. well I probably shouldn't say it. Let's just say the test brings out the humanity in you.

I wouldn't say it's a personality test either, it's more to find out if you have a personality disorder or some type of mental disorder/abnormality.
 

reckful

INTJ
Local time
Today 2:01 AM
Joined
Jul 6, 2013
Messages
96
-->
Finally, you have to admit that even the way it was created is at least anecdotal. Two housewives give their own interpretation of Jung's theory of types and come with a questionnaire the daughter herself wrote with no basis on take groups to build the test...

MBTI is not science, it's fundaments are not unquestionable, it is not accurate, on the contrary it has to be very vaguely used to be helpful. It doesn't give a deep, consistent and useful explanation or view of the personality structure, as for example Roscharch would do.

It sounds like you can't have read that Another MBTI "Debunking" post that I already linked you to. Jung's original typology was largely based on "anecdotal" experiences, but the MBTI was what happened to Jung when Myers put his ideas to the test — in accordance with the psychometric standards applicable to the modern science of personality — and discovered (based on thousands of test results and a lot of correlational studies) which of the many relatively hardwired aspects of personality Jung had described really cluster together.

To recycle an excerpt from that linked post:

There are hard sciences, soft sciences and pseudosciences and, unlike astrology, temperament psychology in any of its better-established varieties (including both the Big Five and the MBTI) belongs in the "soft science" category. ...

What's more, the MBTI really doesn't belong in a substantially different category than the Big Five when it comes to reliability (as already discussed) and validity. The 2003 Bess/Harvey/Swartz study I also link to in that last linked post summed up the MBTI's relative standing in the personality type field this way:

[I see I already included the Bess/Harvey/Swartz quotes in post 62, so I won't repeat those here.]​
 

Hadoblado

think again losers
Local time
Today 6:31 PM
Joined
Mar 17, 2011
Messages
6,614
-->
Moved the text wall battle to its own thread. The conversation looked good, but there's no way the original thread will be serviced by that big an elephant in the room. Go forth and fight!

If there's anything I missed just tell me, I only skimmed it because I ain't got time to actually read that sort of monolith.
 

Inquisitor

Well-Known Member
Local time
Today 5:01 AM
Joined
Mar 31, 2015
Messages
840
-->
Moved the text wall battle to its own thread. The conversation looked good, but there's no way the original thread will be serviced by that big an elephant in the room. Go forth and fight!

If there's anything I missed just tell me, I only skimmed it because I ain't got time to actually read that sort of monolith.

Yeah...I got carried away...but the discussion is very interesting so far...don't know if it will continue though. I am behaving myself, and I have refrained from any type labeling.
 

Hadoblado

think again losers
Local time
Today 6:31 PM
Joined
Mar 17, 2011
Messages
6,614
-->
Goodgood :)

To be clear, this was not punitive. Once a derail like that starts, and you're engaged, making a new thread is sort of disorienting unless you can take all your posts with you. You did nothing wrong.

I would encourage you to try to make new threads for discussing a new thing, but no harm no fowel :storks:
 

Sinny91

Banned
Local time
Today 9:01 AM
Joined
May 16, 2015
Messages
6,299
-->
Location
Birmingham, UK
Foul*
 

cheese

Prolific Member
Local time
Today 8:01 PM
Joined
Aug 24, 2008
Messages
3,194
-->
Location
internet/pubs
^"Fowel" is actually middle english for 'bird'. Fun fact. :storks:
 
Local time
Today 9:01 AM
Joined
Jun 25, 2013
Messages
1,783
-->
i thought fowel was hadblob's kewl spelling of foul.

anyway, when did they* start letting any old tom, dick or sinny with consistently terrible grammar become grammar nazis? hmmm?

*just who are they exactly?
 

scorpiomover

The little professor
Local time
Today 9:01 AM
Joined
May 3, 2011
Messages
3,073
-->
When I read an ENTP profile description, I cannot shake the feeling that there is really no difference between an INTP and ENTP.
Profiles are not people. Hang out with an INTP, and hang out with an ENTP. The sorts of behaviours that ENTPs do regularly, an INTP would be extremely unlikely to do most of the time, and vice versa.

It seems almost like an INTP as simply the ENTP with a character flaw -- a slightly less sociable version.
There was a thread here by Architect about how INTPs are becoming obsolete, and being employed in IT is now all about having a well-stuffed Github account. The world is all about productivity these days, making lots of things very quickly, not sitting and thinking about things very deeply. In the eyes of the world these days, people just don't see the benefits of what INTPs do regularly.

Or that INTPs and ENTPs are simply one type in different modes, and that one can be one or the other dependent on one's mood, circumstances, recent experiences.
I see that sort of thing very often. But it's usually INTJs sometimes expressing themselves more like ENTPs. An introverted N-dom with T-aux can sometimes act as an extroverted N-dom with T-aux.
 

scorpiomover

The little professor
Local time
Today 9:01 AM
Joined
May 3, 2011
Messages
3,073
-->
Yeah, I guess I'm really being quite arrogant and daydreaming when I postulate that INTPs are likely poor entrepreneurs:

View attachment 2614
We're #7 out of 16. So we're hardly "poor" at it.

Also, if you look at the stats in order, ISTJs and ESTJs are 32% and 28% respectively. INTJs come at half of that, at 15.8%. ISTJs are supposed to be your typical accountant types. ESTJs are quite open that they don't mind not leading, and letting others take the lead. They're supposed to be the non-leaders, and it's INTJs and ENTJs who are supposed to be the leader types and executive types. But if we can see anything from this, it's that STJs are the leaders, and NTJs don't even manage half of their respective types.

Of course my personal experience and those of other INTPs are also probably worthless to you so I won't even mention that.
I've had similar experiences. But, looking at your data, I am forced to say that it cannot be a natural result of type.

Part of it is that we like to absorb knowledge that others need, but rarely understand in the depth required. This gives us an edge in a company. We don't need to become executives to have influence over decisions. Executives rely on their experts to make decisions for then, the people who know the things that they need to know to make decisions, but don't. As a result, executives rely on us. At the same time, we don't carry the accountability that they do, because we're not in charge. This also means that we aren't tied in and can walk any time we want. So execs usually feel like they HAVE to keep us happy, because otherwise, we could go somewhere else. It also means that we get the prestige of being an expert, without having to make the hard decisions and take the big risks. So we get a lot of the benefits that executives get, but without the disadvantages.
 

Inquisitor

Well-Known Member
Local time
Today 5:01 AM
Joined
Mar 31, 2015
Messages
840
-->
Profiles are not people. Hang out with an INTP, and hang out with an ENTP. The sorts of behaviours that ENTPs do regularly, an INTP would be extremely unlikely to do most of the time, and vice versa.

There was a thread here by Architect about how INTPs are becoming obsolete, and being employed in IT is now all about having a well-stuffed Github account. The world is all about productivity these days, making lots of things very quickly, not sitting and thinking about things very deeply. In the eyes of the world these days, people just don't see the benefits of what INTPs do regularly.

I'm actually going to recant my statement about INTPs being poor "entrepreneurs." Doesn't seem to be supported by the research. See below.**

Incidentally, the true strength of an INTP seems to be in "innovation." Now whether you do that by starting a company or simply coming up with new projects within a larger company ("intrapreneur"), I think that's where they're likely to have the greatest impact. And so I would actually disagree that the world is "all about productivity." Both hardware and software are advancing so quickly that the world is more desperate than ever for new ideas to harness all this power. Not very many companies can afford to just accept "business as usual" it seems...Well maybe only some companies.

I see that sort of thing very often. But it's usually INTJs sometimes expressing themselves more like ENTPs. An introverted N-dom with T-aux can sometimes act as an extroverted N-dom with T-aux.

Must say I've never seen this. I would describe the INTJs I've met as "dweeby" and the ENTPs as "zany" or "all over the map." INTJs even when they're being playful focus on making one point at a time, even if it's in humor. ENTPs leap from one thing to the other, conversation is usually rapid and expansive. Least that's my impression thus far.

We're #7 out of 16. So we're hardly "poor" at it.

Also, if you look at the stats in order, ISTJs and ESTJs are 32% and 28% respectively. INTJs come at half of that, at 15.8%. ISTJs are supposed to be your typical accountant types. ESTJs are quite open that they don't mind not leading, and letting others take the lead. They're supposed to be the non-leaders, and it's INTJs and ENTJs who are supposed to be the leader types and executive types. But if we can see anything from this, it's that STJs are the leaders, and NTJs don't even manage half of their respective types.

You're free to disagree, but I don't think that's the correct way to view this data. It's the so-called "Selection Ratio Index" that counts: you divide the percentage of executives (or any other occupation for that matter) with a given type by the percentage of the total population that has that type. Seen in this light, here's what the table actually looks like:

INTJ: 7.52
ENTJ: 5.22
ESTJ: 3.22
ISTJ: 2.77
ENTP: 1.66
ISTP: .46
INTP: .39
ENFJ: .28
ESTP: .23
INFJ: .13
ESFP: .11
ENFP: .10
INFP: .09
ESFJ: .07
ISFJ: .04
ISFP: .01

I've had similar experiences. But, looking at your data, I am forced to say that it cannot be a natural result of type.

If we use the selection ratio index, and that's one of the things that gets a lot of focus in MBTI studies, it's pretty clear that TJ types are only 24% of the population, yet comprise 85% of all executives. The other military study I referenced said that commanders were "95% T types." When I saw this table, I was blown away. I mean intuitively it makes sense, but to have the data confirm it so overwhelmingly is pretty incredible, and it gave me newfound respect for the MBTI.

INTJs are far more overrepresented among executives than ISTJs, nearly 3X more actually. They are also found at the highest levels much more than ISTJs. The surprising aspect as I discussed above was that INTJs selection ratio index even outnumbered that of ENTJs.

Part of it is that we like to absorb knowledge that others need, but rarely understand in the depth required. This gives us an edge in a company. We don't need to become executives to have influence over decisions. Executives rely on their experts to make decisions for then, the people who know the things that they need to know to make decisions, but don't. As a result, executives rely on us. At the same time, we don't carry the accountability that they do, because we're not in charge. This also means that we aren't tied in and can walk any time we want. So execs usually feel like they HAVE to keep us happy, because otherwise, we could go somewhere else. It also means that we get the prestige of being an expert, without having to make the hard decisions and take the big risks. So we get a lot of the benefits that executives get, but without the disadvantages.

I've never enjoyed having to be the decision maker at work. I don't mind organizing a classroom, but I'd much rather let someone else take care of the managerial responsibilities.

**I found this excellent paper by one of reckful's all time favorites, James Reynierse, that indicates that INTPs are very highly represented among entrepreneurs. Now, the definition of an "entrepreneur" is a bit shaky, but I think it's fair to conclude that INTPs are a big fan of starting their own "small businesses." This makes intuitive sense to me, but at the same time, what I was saying earlier is that I would really struggle with having to hire and manage others. I'd much rather be in my own corner and not have anybody bothering me. You can interpret that paper however you like, but I couldn't tell from reading it exactly what kind of small businesses these INTPs started...would be useful information.
 

redbaron

irony based lifeform
Local time
Today 8:01 PM
Joined
Jun 10, 2012
Messages
7,253
-->
Location
69S 69E
Your argument has literally become: "INTPs aren't bad entrepeneurs, but I really hate the idea and I'm an INTP so therefore INTPs are bad entrepeneurs. Interesting."

At some point you should probably stop using yourself as a baseline measurement of what other INTPs are like, because not every member of the same type is alike.
 

emmabobary

*snore*
Local time
Today 5:01 AM
Joined
Mar 7, 2015
Messages
397
-->
It sounds like you can't have read that Another MBTI "Debunking" post that I already linked you to. Jung's original typology was largely based on "anecdotal" experiences, but the MBTI was what happened to Jung when Myers put his ideas to the test — in accordance with the psychometric standards applicable to the modern science of personality — and discovered (based on thousands of test results and a lot of correlational studies) which of the many relatively hardwired aspects of personality Jung had described really cluster together.

To recycle an excerpt from that linked post:

There are hard sciences, soft sciences and pseudosciences and, unlike astrology, temperament psychology in any of its better-established varieties (including both the Big Five and the MBTI) belongs in the "soft science" category. ...

What's more, the MBTI really doesn't belong in a substantially different category than the Big Five when it comes to reliability (as already discussed) and validity. The 2003 Bess/Harvey/Swartz study I also link to in that last linked post summed up the MBTI's relative standing in the personality type field this way:

[I see I already included the Bess/Harvey/Swartz quotes in post 62, so I won't repeat those here.]​

Dear Reckful:
Oh! I read all of your answers to mbti debunking, that's why I said there's a lot of debate on it.
I'll be direct.
No, the MBTI is not the first option, not even in it's field; where it has been left behind by the MMPI2, the 16FP and the big five.
Personally, as a psychologist I would feel embarrassed if I had to apply the MBTI in a rigorous way. I mean, there are better tools for testing persons for proffesional development, group dynamics or conjugal counseling.

http://www.piworldwide.com/top-5-alternatives-to-the-myers-briggs-test/

It has bad reputation, it's a fact. But who knows, it might rise one day. Look at the Roscharch!
 

emmabobary

*snore*
Local time
Today 5:01 AM
Joined
Mar 7, 2015
Messages
397
-->
I took an abridged version of the test after one of my psychosis episodes.

The thing about the test is that it's a written response. How the result is derived is.. well I probably shouldn't say it. Let's just say the test brings out the humanity in you.

I wouldn't say it's a personality test either, it's more to find out if you have a personality disorder or some type of mental disorder/abnormality.

Ehmm...
It's still a personality test ;)
It's deeper though.
What it actually does is compare your results to a normative group of study. And it really doesn't tell if you're normal or abnormal, it tells the probabilities one has to develop or not a disorder.
Now, it depends on what is the use you give to this tool, it's widely employed , from psychiatric diagnosis to conjugal counseling, peritage, etc. Whatever requires a reliable measurement of personality.
 

Inquisitor

Well-Known Member
Local time
Today 5:01 AM
Joined
Mar 31, 2015
Messages
840
-->
Your argument has literally become: "INTPs aren't bad entrepeneurs, but I really hate the idea and I'm an INTP so therefore INTPs are bad entrepeneurs. Interesting."

At some point you should probably stop using yourself as a baseline measurement of what other INTPs are like, because not every member of the same type is alike.

And you should read my post, which you clearly didn't.
 

Teax

huh?
Local time
Today 10:01 AM
Joined
Oct 17, 2014
Messages
392
-->
Location
in orbit of a friendly star <3
Profiles are not people. Hang out with an INTP, and hang out with an ENTP. The sorts of behaviours that ENTPs do regularly, an INTP would be extremely unlikely to do most of the time, and vice versa.
What exactly? Please elaborate and consider me an interested listener. :^^:, I assume you're talking from real life exposure, not MBTI based conjecture?
 

ENTP lurker

Usually useless
Local time
Today 9:01 AM
Joined
Nov 20, 2013
Messages
228
-->
Location
Pluto, solar system
Don't worry if you look at socionics you'll notice that both types are socially retarded. ENTP even more than INTP.
ENTP ISFJ duality (according to an ESTP):
ILE/SEI:
ILE: I'm a spazzy social cripple who constantly spews out all this awkward bullshit. I also need someone to feed me. Help!
SEI: Hahahahaha, hi there!!1 I'll give you some of my breastmilk and tell you everything you should say around people, as long as you tell me that I'm smart all the time (even if I'm a dumbfuck)! Sounds good>>!>!>!?!!?! :D
ILE: It's a deal! Now dress me in a diaper and I'll get you a chilled beverage. We can have sex with both objects
ESFJ INTP duality:
LII/ESE:
LII: I'm a really ugly nerd, and I am completely oblivious to my surroundings. Also, I cry whenever someone tells me that I need to move because I'm blocking their way. What can I do about this particular issue?
ESE: YOU JUST NEED ME TO TALK TALK TALK TO EVERYONE THAT GETS IN YOUR WAY!!!!!!!!!!! I'LL BORE THEM TO DEATH (LITERALLY) AND THEN YOU'LL BE FREEEEEEEEEEEEE! BUT ONE THING CAN YOU PLEASE HELP ME NOT FREAK OUT AT EVERY LITTLE THING THAT DOESN'T GO TO PLAN?!?!?!?!?!
LII: Sure, I will help you organize your day so you don't accidentally kill off good people with your boring talk. Cool.

http://personalitycafe.com/socionics-forum/121289-short-way-find-your-type.html
 

onesteptwostep

Junior Hegelian
Local time
Today 6:01 PM
Joined
Dec 7, 2014
Messages
4,253
-->
Ehmm...
It's still a personality test ;)
It's deeper though.
What it actually does is compare your results to a normative group of study. And it really doesn't tell if you're normal or abnormal, it tells the probabilities one has to develop or not a disorder.
Now, it depends on what is the use you give to this tool, it's widely employed , from psychiatric diagnosis to conjugal counseling, peritage, etc. Whatever requires a reliable measurement of personality.

I would have to flat out say it's not a personality test. It's first and foremost a tool to diagnose mental disorder. The test I took did not compare results to a normative group either.
 

emmabobary

*snore*
Local time
Today 5:01 AM
Joined
Mar 7, 2015
Messages
397
-->
:facepalm:

Minnesota
Multiphasic
Personality
Inventory

It is a questionnaire of 567 questions of true or false, scored after in 5 different kinds of scales. Clinical, validity, psychoathological (PSY5), reestructurated and supplemental.

It's designed to give a profile and to detect a possible disorder. When I said it compares your results to a normative group of study it is because it was created so, empirically!. Contrasting groups of study, which is done frequently to adjust the data to the scales.


I don't know what your idea of personality test is...:confused:
 

onesteptwostep

Junior Hegelian
Local time
Today 6:01 PM
Joined
Dec 7, 2014
Messages
4,253
-->
There are different versions of the test which are not listed in the wikipedia.

A disorder is not a personality. You can't argue definitions.
 

emmabobary

*snore*
Local time
Today 5:01 AM
Joined
Mar 7, 2015
Messages
397
-->
I really think you don't know what you're talking about.
MMPI-2 with 338 questions is the last version of it, but the version with 567 questios is widely and better employed for psychologists.

It doesn't even give you a detailed diagnosis of any disorder, it just points out the probability of the client suffering a disorder. And it not only gives a score for pathology.
It gives a PROFILE of personality.
The fact that you took it doesn't make you an expert on it.:ahh:
I've studied the test, I know how to punctuate and translate it. It's not a joke coughs*like the MBTI*coughs* it's based on real data and has a well earned validity and reliability.

Where do you get the idea that it's a condemning tool, from?
Roscharch is a condemning tool! It's the guillotine of psychological tests :D
Have you ever took a roscharch?
 

onesteptwostep

Junior Hegelian
Local time
Today 6:01 PM
Joined
Dec 7, 2014
Messages
4,253
-->
I see. Well the one I took in the hospital was a written response one, meaning that there would be no way to 'compare' answers since the written responses would be all different. I'm no way an expert.

I would still say it's a test to find out disorder. I don't think people take it to find out what their personality is. People come into a clinic and take the test to see if there's a problem with their psychological health, not to find out what personality they have.
 

emmabobary

*snore*
Local time
Today 5:01 AM
Joined
Mar 7, 2015
Messages
397
-->
Mmmm explain the first paragraph, I'm not sure what do you mean by 'compare'.

Sure it's employed in hospitals and in psychiatric institutions!
But it's also well employed in personal selection, marital counseling, adult and adolescents therapy (there's a version for adolescents as well ^_^)
I took one before postulating for my career in college. It's a requirement, aside of some other projective tests. :)
 

Inquisitor

Well-Known Member
Local time
Today 5:01 AM
Joined
Mar 31, 2015
Messages
840
-->
Mmmm explain the first paragraph, I'm not sure what do you mean by 'compare'.

Sure it's employed in hospitals and in psychiatric institutions!
But it's also well employed in personal selection, marital counseling, adult and adolescents therapy (there's a version for adolescents as well ^_^)
I took one before postulating for my career in college. It's a requirement, amongst some other projective tests. :)

Does the MMPI help with career selection? Is there a large dataset that correlates MMPI scores with career selection and satisfaction?
 

emmabobary

*snore*
Local time
Today 5:01 AM
Joined
Mar 7, 2015
Messages
397
-->
Nope, MMPI is not a test of vocational orientation. It doesn't predict behavior. (or satisfaction, if that's predictable. :v)
Think of it as a complex picture of the current situation of the client.

It is employed in selection of personal to answer the question: is this candidate appropriate for the position?
In this way the MMPI has necessarily another interpretation than in the clinic. The results from the test have to be orientated to answer this question. It's subject to fulfill the required profile. Also there's a variation of punctuation on the validity scale and the clinical scale. And in very sporadic cases, if the scores are too odd or concerning it can expose sociophatic behavior or the probability of psychosis.

But in general clinical and validity scales are modified in their punctuation to get a description of personality in function of the position profile
 

Brontosaurie

Banned
Local time
Today 10:01 AM
Joined
Dec 4, 2010
Messages
5,646
-->
Mmmm explain the first paragraph, I'm not sure what do you mean by 'compare'.

Sure it's employed in hospitals and in psychiatric institutions!
But it's also well employed in personal selection, marital counseling, adult and adolescents therapy (there's a version for adolescents as well ^_^)
I took one before postulating for my career in college. It's a requirement, aside of some other projective tests. :)

What did your test score/result indicate, if i may ask?
 

Inquisitor

Well-Known Member
Local time
Today 5:01 AM
Joined
Mar 31, 2015
Messages
840
-->
Nope, MMPI is not a test of vocational orientation. It doesn't predict behavior. (or satisfaction, if that's predictable. :v)
Think of it as a complex picture of the current situation of the client.

It is employed in selection of personal to answer the question: is this candidate appropriate for the position?
In this way the MMPI has necessarily another interpretation than in the clinic. The results from the test have to be orientated to answer this question. It's subject to fulfill the required profile. Also there's a variation of punctuation on the validity scale and the clinical scale. And in very sporadic cases, if the scores are too odd or concerning it can expose sociophatic behavior or the probability of psychosis.

But in general clinical and validity scales are modified in their punctuation to get a description of personality in function of the position profile

How about 16 PF? Does it help in career selection?
 

emmabobary

*snore*
Local time
Today 5:01 AM
Joined
Mar 7, 2015
Messages
397
-->
Yeap, the 16 PF is the most reliable and flexible test with no score for pathology, I know. It measures the 16 traits of Catell's theorie, subject to another 4 main traits.
It can predict patterns of behavior based in the results and it's indicated from 16 years old and on. So it gives general scores of the personality and the tester has to fit them into determined profile(s)
Also as most of the personality and projective tests, this one is nothing but a picture of the current situation of the client, much more open to interpretation than the MMPI.
 

emmabobary

*snore*
Local time
Today 5:01 AM
Joined
Mar 7, 2015
Messages
397
-->
What did your test score/result indicate, if i may ask?

Mmmm I don't really remember, after a take period of 2 days of the tests, if the department of psychological services would find something suspicious, they would call you to a psychological interview to accurate a diagnosis. I suppose you didn't get to enter the career then.
They never called me, so... I guess there was nothing suspicious with me :D

But I remember taking another battery that included the MMPI for my therapy. My diagnosis was dysthymia.
Basically the tendency to neglect my emotions, and to let them drive me down.

The thing with testing in a clinical environment is that as a professional you are not allowed to show the client the process of punctuation and translation of the tests. So the results shown in the report are very general.
 

onesteptwostep

Junior Hegelian
Local time
Today 6:01 PM
Joined
Dec 7, 2014
Messages
4,253
-->
Mmmm explain the first paragraph, I'm not sure what do you mean by 'compare'.

Sure it's employed in hospitals and in psychiatric institutions!
But it's also well employed in personal selection, marital counseling, adult and adolescents therapy (there's a version for adolescents as well ^_^)
I took one before postulating for my career in college. It's a requirement, aside of some other projective tests. :)

Well what I mean is, how can you compare answers if all the answers are different? The one I took was a written response, meaning all the answers given by the respondents would be different.

I think we should ask Yellow on what her take is..

'I took one before postulating for my career in college.'

Yeah I'm guessing that was for a psy-related class, not a test for finding out what personality you had.
 

Russ

Member
Local time
Today 4:01 AM
Joined
Oct 18, 2015
Messages
25
-->
Location
Wisconsin
But all in all I think NTs in general seem to overlap with each other, I mean that's why there are percentages in typology testings rather than "You are 100% Introvert" or "You are 100% Extravert" or "You are 100% Sensing" and so on. I mean open my spoilers in my signature, the percentages do seem to allude to the idea that some people could delve into another type sometimes, since they tend to fluctuate.

I get the idea that one person only must have one base type, but developmentally speaking, I think people go through and take on other types, either consciously or subconsciously. As to say whether he or she's going through some 'oh you're not being yourself' phase is another issue altogether though, I think.
I like this.
I believe that as humans we are constantly in a state of development. Every new experience is added to our mental database. Relying on logic may be the foundation of intuitive thinker but empathetic skills are accumulated through living amongst "real people". The same goes for the other elements. I have become better at socialization but it still feels like work for me. I’m don’t think that there is an exact science for human personality.

As far as E and I it look at it this way, E's in general are more comfortable dealing with people. Making plans, organizing events that kind of thing. I's feel better about working with product or objects.

I find the contrast between Sensing and Intuition to be much more puzzling/interesting.
 

emmabobary

*snore*
Local time
Today 5:01 AM
Joined
Mar 7, 2015
Messages
397
-->
Well what I mean is, how can you compare answers if all the answers are different? The one I took was a written response, meaning all the answers given by the respondents would be different.

I think we should ask Yellow on what her take is..

'I took one before postulating for my career in college.'

Yeah I'm guessing that was for a psy-related class, not a test for finding out what personality you had.

Actually the tests we took (because it's like an admission thing) were adiviced to be a selection tool, so no person with concerning disorders would enter the career. So it was pretty much to find out our personality, and more than that, our personality disorders. :phear:
 

Inquisitor

Well-Known Member
Local time
Today 5:01 AM
Joined
Mar 31, 2015
Messages
840
-->
I like this.
I believe that as humans we are constantly in a state of development. Every new experience is added to our mental database. Relying on logic may be the foundation of intuitive thinker but empathetic skills are accumulated through living amongst "real people". The same goes for the other elements. I have become better at socialization but it still feels like work for me. I’m don’t think that there is an exact science for human personality.

Yes. Personality can and does change, but type does not.

I wonder what Jung means when he says psychic energy.

You and me both. It's not easy to put into words, and others have tried.

I'm also skeptical on whether it's the conflicts that define a person a certain type.. shouldn't it be more of the functioning order? Like others have noted, people share a lot of dichotomy conflicts. I think it could be a bit of a "standing on thin ice" if one were to type oneself based on his or her 'most appearing/relevant conflict'. I mean sure, it could be a possible way to pinpoint your type, but I'm skeptical as to how that would be the defining method.

Perhaps "conflict" is too combative a word. "Opposition" may be better. But, no, it's not the function order that matters most. The brilliance of the theory is that it latches onto a fundamental principle: If T is conscious, then F must necessarily be repressed, and the same goes for S and N. I and E can be best be thought of as directionality of thought: Out --> In --> Out for extraverts and In --> Out --> In for introverts. While identifying this opposition of forces in an individual is not the only way to type someone, it certainly is useful.

But all in all I think NTs in general seem to overlap with each other, I mean that's why there are percentages in typology testings rather than "You are 100% Introvert" or "You are 100% Extravert" or "You are 100% Sensing" and so on. I mean open my spoilers in my signature, the percentages do seem to allude to the idea that some people could delve into another type sometimes, since they tend to fluctuate.

There are similarities between NTs, and behavior/traits may seem similar, but the underlying type will always be distinct. You can have INTPs acting like ENTPs and vice versa, but their brains are wired much differently.

I think it's important not to lose sight of that, and it becomes a major problem when you take a purely empirical view of this whole business. The data from psychological tests indicates that personality appears to lie on a curve, and so you get led into believing that the underlying types must also kind of blend with one another. But that contradicts the theory, because the conscious and repressed aspects are actually much different between types. In other words, and this is why I had such a long debate with reckful on this, you can't be a pure adherent of MBTI and not reject the theory in some way. Similarly, if you believe in the theory, then you have to assert that the MBTI doesn't give a complete picture (only an analogous one).

The issue is far from settled. When we finally have high-resolution brain-scanning capabilities (down to individual neuronal pathways), I'm convinced we'll have definitive data showing that despite having similar scores on personality tests (INTP vs ENTP for instance), two subjects will have vastly different brain architectures. That will settle the issue once and for all.

I get the idea that one person only must have one base type, but developmentally speaking, I think people go through and take on other types, either consciously or subconsciously. As to say whether he or she's going through some 'oh you're not being yourself' phase is another issue altogether though, I think.

Again, if you adhere to the test data, then yes, you would be right. But the theory is quite clear that type does not change, and that's because, as I said above, type is a reflection of a certain kind of brain architecture, and although the brain does undergo rewiring to a certain degree (INTPs can become more social, or ENTPs can become more introspective), it never gets rewired to such an extent that INTPs ever develop Ne such that the corresponding neural networks have equal or higher efficiency (in terms of information processing vs. glucose/oxygen requirements) than Ti.

Incidentally, the theory is clear that if N is more conscious than S, then a "lifting up" of N must correspond to an equal "repression" of S. So you end having to make N more efficient, and also make S correspondingly less efficient. This never happens. What we actually see in real life is that when the dominant is used to excess, the inferior becomes overly repressed and actually "rebels" against the dominant through various psychological diseases like neuroses, hysteria, obsessive-compulsive behavior and so on.

Taking introverts as an example, Jung describes this process as the energy of introversion forcing elements of the unconscious to the surface. Basically, if an introvert does too much introspection, then the unconscious is imbued with enough energy to become conscious, and when this happens, it's never a good thing (unless you're doing it on purpose for therapeutic benefits under the proper guidance).
 

ZenRaiden

One atom of me
Local time
Today 9:01 AM
Joined
Jul 27, 2013
Messages
4,397
-->
Location
Between concrete walls
Dear Reckful:
Oh! I read all of your answers to mbti debunking, that's why I said there's a lot of debate on it.
I'll be direct.
No, the MBTI is not the first option, not even in it's field; where it has been left behind by the MMPI2, the 16FP and the big five.
Personally, as a psychologist I would feel embarrassed if I had to apply the MBTI in a rigorous way. I mean, there are better tools for testing persons for proffesional development, group dynamics or conjugal counseling.

http://www.piworldwide.com/top-5-alternatives-to-the-myers-briggs-test/

It has bad reputation, it's a fact. But who knows, it might rise one day. Look at the Roscharch!

I dont know about using MBTI for diagnosing people. I think MBTI wasnt used or even inteded to be used as diagnostic tool and thus is of no use for people who want to spend their life diagnosing people. MBTI is system that is misunderstood mainly because its take way too seriously by some people like yourself. I think for some reason people are expecting results from MBTI that MBTI cant and never will give. There is absolutly no reason to correlate mental disorders with MBTI. For practical purpose of diagnosing people psychologist use different tools. But you should realize that diagnosing people and telling them whats wrong with them is not whole of psychology. Jung covered topics about life and spirituality.

The problem is that its Doctors job to help people live a healthy life not just cure disease. The same way psychologist is there to help people reach full potential not just diagnose them and cure the mental illness.
Its probably due to western style of education and wester style of values and culture that we focus on the negative side of the job and dont focus on the other parts of human life. Like the positive side of life. Not realizing that the positive side of life is just as important. I realize that most psychologist go to school to learn to diagnose people and help them overcome illness much the same way a doctor learns to cure cancer and common cold.

There is no reason to compare MBTI with diagnostic tools in psychology and call it useless simply because it doesnt cover the basis of diagnostic tools.
 

Crux_Cheetah

QuirkyNerd
Local time
Today 9:01 AM
Joined
Aug 17, 2016
Messages
24
-->
ENTPs tend to be overconfident when stressed.
INTPs get stuck in self-doubt.
ENTPs can relate to most everyhing.
INTPs are more comfortable relating to what they know.
ENTPs are more social.
INTPs are more socially anxious.
ENTPs can't stand routine even for a minute.
INTPs can deal with it, even if they don't prefer it.
ENTPs can adapt better.
INTPs can be stubborn.
When stress arises, ENTPs begin to become argumentative and when it becomes uncontrollable they feel stuck because of past mistakes and unpleasant memories.
On the other hand when INTPs first become stressed they become more self-critical and get triggered by self-doubt, when this becomes uncontrollable, they have explosive outbursts of intense emotions, crying and shouting etc.
ENTPs are more confident than INTPs.
INTPs appear more modest.
 
Top Bottom