Dispensing with the bull

[Henry]

To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Second thoughts about the MBTI
by Ron Zemke

in Training p43(5) April 1992 v29 n4

Summary:

Growing criticism is resulting from the popularity being

enjoyed by the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI)

psychological test. Critics of the MBTI, which is taken by

between 1.5 million and 2 million people in the US and

which is most commonly used in business and industry, claim

that it has become an excuse for problems within corporate

organizations, including substandard employee performance.

Critics likewise attack the MBTI's giving birth to

'typemania,' which is causing people to exert excessive

effort to belong to the more illustrious personality types

specified by the MBTI.

Bumped into this article. Made a lot of good points.

Three common posts on here that go hand in hand with the man's overall line of argument:
1. "Its not that I'm an a self absorbed jerk with emotional problems, its that I'm an INTJ, and INTJs are very cold and rational and that's just whoo we are. No need for me to work on my inability to connect with others because thatz what MBTI says my "tertiary functions" are" followed shortly by "My ESFP daughter readz magazines and doesn't use big words. She should read big books and learn big words like me".
2. "The MBTI is the answer for everything. The best answer for anything is "INTJ"
3. "As an intj, I fit the MBTI exactly and I'm 100% the most intellectually capable of all the types"

[logan235711]

lol yes, such as these threads:
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
etc.

but this is an forum. a specific forum called INTJ Forum, where supposedly people discuss and explore this thing called MBTI INTJ and other various topica de discussa.

[Henry]

but this is an forum. a specific forum called INTJ Forum, where supposedly people discuss and explore this thing called MBTI INTJ and other various topica de discussa.

Not disputing that, nor that every post or every thread goes along those lines.

I am suggesting that the man has a point: that ignoring our weaknesses is stupid and base (even if others of a similar type have similar weaknesses), that other types have different abilities and that those should not be degraded nor their weaknesses overly harped on, that the MBTI has limits to what it can explain, and that the obsession with identifying with the "MBTI INTJ" seems a touch overdone at times.

[GOD]

Not disputing that, nor that every post or every thread goes along those lines.

I am suggesting that the man has a point: that ignoring our weaknesses is stupid and base (even if others of a similar type have similar weaknesses), that other types have different abilities and that those should not be degraded nor their weaknesses overly harped on, that the MBTI has limits to what it can explain, and that the obsession with identifying with the "MBTI INTJ" seems a touch overdone at times.

I'd say about 80% of the people on this board are not what I'd call pure INTJs.

MBTI is nothing really. To me its just a hack off Jungs work (which isn't that complicated, as its observation) and they used it to rapidly allow people to realise their orientation.

People should realise that the T/F trait is specially designed to separate Men and Women (In my opinion) which allows their real world observations to be more accurate... Its not the orientation of the mind but the real practice as observable justifying the initial hypothesis (Thats bad science).

[Paul V]

People should realise that the T/F trait is specially designed to separate Men and Women (In my opinion) which allows their real world observations to be more accurate... Its not the orientation of the mind but the real practice as observable justifying the initial hypothesis (Thats bad science).

Not the point of this thread, but I believe you're confusing the cause with the effects. You think that the separation between T and F led to separate men and women. I think that it's the other way around. Social stereotypes have existed long before Myers-Briggs, and their work merely reflected this.

On-topic: I have weaknesses and strengths, and I don't hide behind a type to justify them. I do, however, use it as a tool to explain others how I am, because I find that doing so is simpler and more efficient than doing so myself.

[Lucid]

People should realise that the T/F trait is specially designed to separate Men and Women (In my opinion) which allows their real world observations to be more accurate... Its not the orientation of the mind but the real practice as observable justifying the initial hypothesis (Thats bad science).

I think you're allowing your personal views of women to influence how you view the T/F functions and what their purpose is. I'm not going to try to convince you that women can be as rational as men (since, in my experience, those who don't already see this won't be swayed by any kind of rational argument or scientific evidence), just suggest to you that perhaps you should consider the possibility that your reasoning on this subject is clouded by some kind of gender-bias.

That is all.

To return to the topic at hand, I think that, when used by rational people MBTI can be a good way to identify our strengths and weaknesses and learn how to better function as complete individuals. My personality is not defined by my MBTI type. Unlike many INTJs (it seems) I think that obviously I'll see my type as superior. ISTJ and ENFPs probably think that their types are each far superior to the others. It's important to be able to identify and look past our biases.

Using type as an excuse for bad behavior is counterproductive. It also happens with mental illness, economic hardship, etc.

I think some of the threads that Logan listed are better described as INTJs wishing to understand their type and determine how much of their personality and strengths or weaknesses can be attributed to type. There are many posts in many forums where people similarly describe weaknesses and ask if it's a type trait. Kind of saying, "Hey, I (enter experience, personality attribute or other anecdote here). Does this happen to anyone else??"

Having said all that, I also believe many people take it waaaaay too seriously. I think one of the most amusing things I've seen on MBTI-related forums is the, "You don't agree with or think exactly like I do, therefore you are not an INTJ, but some other, inferior type!" argument. Which is ridiculous.

[The Many]

To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.



Bumped into this article. Made a lot of good points.

Three common posts on here that go hand in hand with the man's overall line of argument:
1. "Its not that I'm an a self absorbed jerk with emotional problems, its that I'm an INTJ, and INTJs are very cold and rational and that's just whoo we are. No need for me to work on my inability to connect with others because thatz what MBTI says my "tertiary functions" are" followed shortly by "My ESFP daughter readz magazines and doesn't use big words. She should read big books and learn big words like me".
2. "The MBTI is the answer for everything. The best answer for anything is "INTJ"
3. "As an intj, I fit the MBTI exactly and I'm 100% the most intellectually capable of all the types"

Well written and I fully agree. When people form their identities on these types rather than on themselves they are limiting themselves in a way that also limits them from life in general.

[ps646566]

There is pressure to conform to a 'favoured corporate' personality type regardless of MBTI. All MBTI has done is attempt to categorise and it. Corporations and organisations harp on these days about 'diversity', but what they don't want is diversity of thought. Their model employee at the lower levels is probably ESFJ, and at the higher levels ENFJ (individuals are expected to somehow achieve that fundamental personality change as they climb up the ladder). The present day obsession with 'teamwork' and 'emotional intelligence' means that overt 'I' and 'T' types will tend to be treated with some suspicion, especially in middle and higher management echelons. It's all very unhealthy from the point of view of business and economic success. But corporations/organisations are not really run for the benefit of their stockholders/stakeholders, or of their employees. They are primarily run for the benefit of their senior management. From their point of view a workforce of essentially loyal, cheerful, unquestioning, compliant, hard-working individuals represents an easier life, and their 'comfort zone'.

[banzai]

The INTJ classification aside, you assume that some people aren't already familiar with their own personality as well as that the sub-optimal aspects of it in some situations are weaknesses.

[ps646566]

The INTJ classification aside, you assume that some people aren't already familiar with their own personality as well as that the sub-optimal aspects of it in some situations are weaknesses.

Weakness in what context ? Differences and distinctions should not always be interpreted as weaknesses. Most people are shaped pegs, whereby there is a shaped hole somewhere into which they will neatly and comfortably fit. The trouble is that employers in general are notoriously bad at finding the right matches.

[banzai]

Weakness in what context ? Differences and distinctions should not always be interpreted as weaknesses. Most people are shaped pegs, whereby there is a shaped hole somewhere into which they will neatly and comfortably fit.

Let me truncate my previous message to make a bit more sense...

you assume that ... the sub-optimal aspects of it in some situations are weaknesses.

[mielikki]

And which would be "the more illustrious personality types"?

[ps646566]

Let me truncate my previous message to make a bit more sense...Quote:
Originally Posted by Grayscale View Post
you assume that ... the sub-optimal aspects of it in some situations are weaknesses.

I assume that the so-called sub-optimal aspects of it in some situations are considered by employers to be weaknesses.

This of course begs the questions : what does sub-optimal mean ? what does weakness mean ?

[Solaris]

Very interesting. I see in various places on the internet, that people are suspicious of others and will, at times, almost go into some weird frenzy when a person question his/her type, or shows traits not generally linked to their claimed type. I've been through a string of types, trying to type myself. ENTJ is the closest fit, but general NT is probably even better. However, few people (including myself) would be satisfied with that. I strive to understand myself, my strengths and weaknesses. To me, this means understanding which preferences I use in which manner. I use Ti and Te with equal ease, depending on the situation. I am still working out whether I use Ni or Ne better, as that seems to be the hardest to really define. I am rather highly opinionated, prone to planning, and usually quick to judge (but open to correcting myself when shown I need to) -- like a J. But I see many possibilities in so many situations, it's very P-like sometimes, it seems.

I disagree very greatly that T and F was intended to separate men and women. I believe that stereotypes and societal gender roles have been a cause for that "F is for women" and "T is for men" type of attitude. Clearly, this forum is full of T-based women (myself included). Since I tend to think things out (extraverting my judging preference in almost all situations), and then react, does that make me less of a woman? Is that what you are implying? I will, however, agree that type descriptions and "best types for relationships" are overly influenced by stereotyping MBTI types within genders.

I've read tons of ENTJ material that implies an ENTJ would love an ISFP for the support and dedication. Well, if the ENTJ is a male, then perhaps. Women (for perhaps biological, perhaps nurtured by society...hard to say) tend to want a man at least as strong as she is mentally and physically. As a very capable (mentally and physically) woman, who has been with an ISFP male, I can say that it's not a good idea at all. Granted, this is my opinion, based on my experience. However, I think that most NT women do not want a man they can just easily control and mow down.

I'm pretty sure I'm To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. off topic now, so I'm just going to go finish my Christmas cards now.

[banzai]

I assume that the so-called sub-optimal aspects of it in some situations are considered by employers to be weaknesses.

This of course begs the questions : what does sub-optimal mean ? what does weakness mean ?

I think I lost you here... you do know my first post was in response to the original post, not you, right?

[Max T]

I am suggesting that the man has a point: that ignoring our weaknesses is stupid and base (even if others of a similar type have similar weaknesses), that other types have different abilities and that those should not be degraded nor their weaknesses overly harped on, that the MBTI has limits to what it can explain, and that the obsession with identifying with the "MBTI INTJ" seems a touch overdone at times.
Perhaps 2 drivers to this:
- We all want to belong to an understanding place as we’re sometimes at odds with the world. This ‘belonging’ becomes groupthink (hell I’m doing it now with % allocation to INTJ under the avatar!).
- For many, INTJ is a little personal revelation- the first step is to recognise the traits (as Lucid suggests), the second step should be to improve ourselves by addressing weaknesses and figuring how to harness strengths. The first step occurs predominantly online here, the second mainly offline and in own personal lives.


By suggesting why this self-adoration occurs, I’m certainly not supporting it:
Well written and I fully agree. When people form their identities on these types rather than on themselves they are limiting themselves in a way that also limits them from life in general.
Agree. It could be taken further to say that some individuals’ efforts in this forum to legitimise their weaknesses as being INTJ can be very counterproductive, as it results in no long-term personal development but instead actively upholding their weaknesses.

Others proudly self-professing their cold-heartedness, arrogance, intelligence and other INTJ issues in this forum have certainly made me wince on occasion.

[ps646566]

I think I lost you here... you do know my first post was in response to the original post, not you, right?

I wasn't completely clear on that point, but thanks for clarifying it now.


Others proudly self-professing their cold-heartedness, arrogance, intelligence and other INTJ issues in this forum have certainly made me wince on occasion.

I know what you mean, but I think that a lot of that is bravado, and I suspect predominantly from younger posters who have not yet learned on which side their bread is buttered, as it were.

Intelligence of course is not a weakness, any more than good looks, athletic prowess, or musical talent are. Cold-heartedness and arrogance may be weaknesses under some circumstances. It depends how they manifest themselves and to what extent they enhance or inhibit achievement of particular objectives.

The INTJ personality type, and some of its close relatives, are not particularly common. They do not therefore represent the mainstream nor the "conventional wisdom" regarding optimal human behaviour in industrialised western societies. People in these categories have three options : (i) make no attempt to modify behaviour and 'tough it out' (the bravado syndrome), (ii) modify behaviour to the extent possible in order to achieve an easier life, but without stepping completely outside the personality-driven comfort zone, or (iii) agonise and attempt to overcome all perceived 'weaknesses'.

Each person makes their own choices. But age and experience tends to bring one increasingly towards option (ii) over time.