December 14, 2012

Myers-Briggs: Sensing v. Intuition

The Myers-Briggs personality test is popular with Human Resources departments in the U.S. Extrapolated from the thinking of Swiss psychoanalyst Carl Jung, everybody gets lumped into one of 16 personalities based on four dichotomies:
Dichotomies
Extraversion (E) –(I) Introversion
Sensing (S) –(N) Intuition
Thinking (T) –(F) Feeling
Judging (J) –(P) Perception
I never really got the Sensing v. Intuition dichotomy, but now I've finally understood why. Here's Wikipedia's explanation:
Sensing and intuition are the information-gathering (perceiving) functions. They describe how new information is understood and interpreted. Individuals who prefer sensing are more likely to trust information that is in the present, tangible, and concrete: that is, information that can be understood by the five senses. They tend to distrust hunches, which seem to come "out of nowhere".[1]:2 They prefer to look for details and facts. For them, the meaning is in the data. On the other hand, those who prefer intuition tend to trust information that is more abstract or theoretical, that can be associated with other information (either remembered or discovered by seeking a wider context or pattern). They may be more interested in future possibilities. For them, the meaning is in the underlying theory and principles which are manifested in the data.

It finally occurs to me that I couldn't grasp this distinction before because I like all that stuff: tangible information, hunches, theories, details, facts, abstractions, wider contexts, pattern recognition, analogies, intuition ... it's all good.

But, that's also why I drive a lot of people into rages. They are at one end or the other of this scale, and they like being wherever they are. Somebody at the opposite end of the scale isn't really relevant to them. But I like both ends and flipping back and forth.

Jung tended to see hunches in rather mysty, murky terms: archetypes, collective unconscious, synchronicity, and so forth: a lattice of coincidence. I tend to see my hunches as just facts I have known but have semi-forgotten or facts I've only semi-learned. Jung didn't have Google and Wikipedia to look things up, but I do, so why not use everything at my disposal?

Anyway, even though Myers-Briggs is probably not an ideal framework, most frameworks do have uses.


69 comments:

Five Daarstens said...

How does the Overachiever vs Underachiever dichotomy fit into Myers-Briggs?

Anonymous said...

Socionics is a more consistent personality typing system. http://www.wikisocion.org/en/index.php?title=Wikisocion_home

Education Realist said...

I love MB as a way of understanding how people process information (N/S) and how they make decisions (P/J). It doesn't explain personality per se, which is why it's falsely advertised, but it's very useful for understanding differences and particularly helpful in teaching.

Soeaking as someone who is way, way, way N and way way way P, (mildly I and mildly T) you, dude, strike me as someone fairly far out there on the N side of the spectrum. But I could be wrong. People who don't see much use in MB are often people in the middle of all the spectrums.

One of the classic N/S distinctions is to pick a favorite between these two statements: "Facts are to be interpreted" or "Facts speak for themselves".

Ns like facts fine.

Anonymous said...

How ever which way you perceive information, you're a smart fellow.

Anonymous said...

easy way to remember the distinction: it is the only clear indicator of intelligence on m-b (S is for stupid obviously)

Socially Extinct said...

From my INTJ perspective, I value facts as tools which are inherently useless without intuitive assemblage of their offerings into a coherent and usable framework.

Anonymous said...

OT (or maybe not):
I sense that Barack Obama was squeaking out dry tears and affecting dramatic pauses in his speech about the Connecticut school shooting today, but I intuit that there will be dire consequences for anyone who mentions it.

Auntie Analogue said...


I have a hunch that Duane Eddy had a minor hit with "Because They're Jung."

So...facts...patterns: are punsters "sensing" or "intuitive"? Methinks you've got to be a bit of both.

Someone belts you in the kisser and the sense is that it hurts, the intuition is, "I saw it coming so I should've ducked." Sometimes it all comes down to timing.

A hunch, an intuition is a gut feeling to go on; so if tummies could walk would they need abs traction?

Where's our friend wry Whiskey when we need a shot of him?

Speaking of spirits, I'd better skeddadle now before Mr. Sailer scotches this comment.

Anonymous said...

I'm sorry completely off-topic, but I didn't know North Korea made guys like him .

A well regarded North Korean orchestra performing in Paris. So the most dysfunctional country in East Asia has an orchestra better than the majority world? Who would have thought?

bjdubbs said...

Obama is probably an ENTP. Romney is an ESTJ - an ENTJ would have shown more interest in ideas (Bill Gates is an ENTJ). Clinton is probably an ESFJ. Bush Jr. might be an ESFP, although the reports that he reads tons of books have always been a little baffling. Hillary is probably an ISTJ. Reagan an ENFJ. Bush Sr. an ESTP.

Anonymous said...

Jung was probably thinking about the plate of shrimp.

I had to take the M-B when I interviewed at J&J. They shared the results and I found them only somewhat accurate and largely useless. HR itself is a system made up out of thin air so it makes sense they'd like it.

Anonymous said...

OT, again.
The NY Daily News about Adam Lanza, the Connecticut school shooter:

"A “longtime” family friend said Lanza had a condition “where he couldn’t feel pain.”

“A few years ago when he was on the baseball team, everyone had to be careful that he didn’t fall because he could get hurt and not feel it,” said the friend. “Adam had a lot of mental problems.”

I'm quite sure that this "condition" won't be explored too deeply. I bet this is the last time you'll hear about it.

Anonymous said...

LOL "I like it all" is sort of how I feel as a bisexual. Also not being "at either end of the spectrum."

I was a bit surprised a few years ago when Michael Baily, whom I have mostly heard about from your site, reported that I don't exist. This is because he only was looking at the various Chicago drag queen bars he normally recruited his subjects from.

Good news though, Baily now reports he was wrong. He was just looking in the wrong places. He found plenty of bisexual males by trolling the sites where married couples look for single men to join a manage a tois/gangbang. Which I have never done myself but sounds intriging.

The older Fruedian psychologists said bisexual males tend to narcissism and low empathy.

Anonymous said...

The questions on personality tests are so dumb that I cannot honestly answer them. The major problem is they have questions involving very ambiguous self descriptions. To the extent I had to answer, and what most people probably do, is either answer in a way that is self flattering, or randomly between the various interpretations of the questions.

The same problem is also seen in the dumb political test that started floating around the Internet in the mid 90s.

Pretty much every question asked you to choose "agree or disagree" with a long list of stupid vague and overly categorical policy statements, or choose between two extremes. The general resolt for most people was "libertarian" because of the dumb libertarian who designed it slanted the questions that way. If, like me, you don't choose the "correct" libertarian response, then you are an "authoritarian" in a quadrent that helpfully also plots your views' similarity with Mao, Lennon, and Otto van Bismark.

Socially Extinct said...

BTW, today's "tie in" is apparent.

Not in the obvious manner but I think the pattern unfolding in 2012 points to a frightening diminishing of our civil liberties.

You have people talking now about "flagging" those who might be mentally imbalanced is not such a bad idea. Each great historic and repugnant event in the US lately has been transformed into a political catalyst. Obama shedding his pussy tears today only means that the socially alienated miscreant will be called to the carpet more and more.

This is the big INTJ picture :)

DoJ said...

I currently see N as an amplifier. With the wrong axioms and/or questionable methods of inference, N will just lead to mental masturbation, but basically sound thinkers with high-N personalities can see further than their sensing-dominant counterparts.

I suspect N is more common and more adaptive in high-IQ people.

wren said...

We are all on some scale or spectrum or another, but I am starting to foresee a day when this diversity won't be celebrated, and some liberty will be taken away from some of us.

More Asperger's murders today.

It's only a matter of time.

Ed said...

I'm also pretty balanced between S and N, though I seem to lean towards the S side. I suspect that Steve's Myers-Briggs test results would be quite similar to mine, with him probably scoring less high on introversion.

The sensing side of me gets impatient with the wooliness and conclusion leaping that often passes for commentary in the media. However, the N side doesn't like getting bogged down in details, though I love data. Compared to most people, I prefer to get straight to the point.

wren said...

I'd like to note that Socially Extinct's post was not visible to me when I made my post.

The writing is on the wall, by either sensing or intuition.



Anonymous said...

“A few years ago when he was on the baseball team, everyone had to be careful that he didn’t fall because he could get hurt and not feel it,” said the ___________________________________

Anyone know of such a medical condition?

Anonymous said...

i also agree that the russian socionics is a much better constructed Jung typology system. MBTI leads to people relying on superficial understanding too much because it's dumbed down to simple dichotomies and buzzwords.

Anonymous said...

I had to take the M-B when I interviewed at J&J.

Jack and Jill ice cream trucks? They had you take a test to drive an ice cream truck?

Silver said...

I'm glad to see I'm not the only one perplexed by a "bit of both" reaction to personality questions.

Another example. A few years ago (I've calmed down since) I would have been the kind that would get into a fistfight over a parking space (if I was in the right). And yet I wouldn't dream of complaining about the food at a restaurant, no matter how bad (I'd just never go there again). Does that make me aggressive or timid, extroverted or introverted? I have no idea.

The Wobbly Guy said...

One way of looking at the various splits is this: you can use the other mode, but you're just not comfortable with it, or you do it after using your primary mode.

For Steve, I suspect he's borderline Intuition, able to easily shift to Sensing because of his ability to spot overall patterns first, and then burrow into the details to back up the big picture.

A more extreme Intuitive fellow will still be able to shift into Sensing mode, but he'll be much more easily irritable, or only resorts to it when he has no other choice, e.g. explaining his intuitive guesses to others who are not so inclined.

Same for Sensing people. They focus on details but only go to Intuition when they need to, and then they'll get all prissy and impatient.

I've seen both types at work in my students, and it's fun when I point it out to them, and the light bulb comes on in their eyes.

Kylie said...

"I'm sorry completely off-topic, but I didn't know North Korea made guys like him .

A well regarded North Korean orchestra performing in Paris. So the most dysfunctional country in East Asia has an orchestra better than the majority world? Who would have thought?"


I would have. Koreans, North and South, really get Western classical music.

Ain Yoon Chopin Waltz, Op.70, no.2

Bupyeong Methodist Church Choir Beethoven Hallelujah from Mount of Olives

These are the best interpretations of these pieces I've heard.

Anonymous said...

The girls who talk about how they are NTJN or LMNOP on their daring profiles seen to be middlebrow intellects who will go on long self-absorbed rambles. It strikes me as the psychobabble self help version of talking about astrological signs.

Business self help books are also psychobabble but butched up a bit compared to Oprah-endorsed self help books. It thus does not surprise me that business consultants and lecturers are into Myers Briggs.

Brett_McS said...

Once you understand the categories it is easy to match each question on an MB test with one of the four. It is thus straight-forward to balance the answers to get equal numbers of the opposite tendencies in each category so that the result is a dot in the middle of the chart. The perfectly balanced personality.

That's what I do whenever HR bring out this stupid test. The other thing I do is suggest they look up "Forer effect".

Anonymous said...

I wonder if any of those school kids looked like Obama's son.

SFG said...

"I was a bit surprised a few years ago when Michael Baily, whom I have mostly heard about from your site, reported that I don't exist. This is because he only was looking at the various Chicago drag queen bars he normally recruited his subjects from.

Good news though, Baily now reports he was wrong. He was just looking in the wrong places. He found plenty of bisexual males by trolling the sites where married couples look for single men to join a manage a tois/gangbang. Which I have never done myself but sounds intriging. "

Not my speed, but I have to say this Bailey fellow seems to be enjoying his academic career a lot more than most. Can I get a grant to study pickup methods?

Ed said...

"Obama is probably an ENTP. Romney is an ESTJ - an ENTJ would have shown more interest in ideas (Bill Gates is an ENTJ). Clinton is probably an ESFJ. Bush Jr. might be an ESFP, although the reports that he reads tons of books have always been a little baffling. Hillary is probably an ISTJ. Reagan an ENFJ. Bush Sr. an ESTP. "

Its fun to do this as a parlor game. However, there has been a ton of material posted by Steve indicating that Obama is introverted. One of the few things you can tell about the last few presidents is that Obama seems mostly introverted and Clinton is definitely an extrovert. Most politicians are extrovert (the job has a big sales component), though it seems that Reagan was also introverted.

With the rest its hard to tel. The last few presidents were all "T" types, except for GW Bush who I agree is more likely an "F".

Despite the fact that the President is supposed to make decisions, I suspect that among politicians "P" is more the norm than "J", with again GW Bush being the most likely exception.

My guesses are INTP for Obama, ESFJ for GW Bush, ESTP for Clinton, its hard to get a read on GHW Bush or Reagan.

Anonymous said...

O.T.: Lack of Intelligence and Delinquency.

Anonymous said...

I've always heavily identified worth the intuitive type. I spend most of my inner thought thinking about possibilities and get kinda depressed when the possibilities seem to narrow and happiest when the future seems wide open. I've been pretty depressed lately as the future seems to be bearing down.

Anthony said...

Anonymous at 11:05: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congenital_insensitivity_to_pain . May also be type 5 (or 4) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hereditary_sensory_and_autonomic_neuropathy

But that's straying from the post.

Vlang said...

The stereotypical African American is an ENFP

http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=fvwp&v=rdsmuElafSY

Anonymous said...

According to Myers-Briggs, the Ideal individual is one whose scores demonstrate a balance of all functions. A person who leans excessively this way or that has glaring blind spots in the way they go about mentally doing the world.

Here's an example. Bobby Kennedy is supposed to have said, "Some people see things as they are and ask why. I dream things that never were and ask, why not?".

Liberals tend to think the Bobby Kennedy way. It's classic intuition--what could be, but isn't. Hopeful "optimism". Many conservatives fall into this camp as well. Ideologically driven, they seek to reform the world in the likeness of their private Idol.

But don't we first have to see things as they are before we can remake them? Don't we need numbers in statistical aggregates to gain an accurate picture? Can the merely hopeful lead us to a better future? Or will they just pave the road to Hell with their good intentions.

I guess when push comes to shove, I'll go with the navigator who understands how to use a compass and sextant and knows the star chart rather than the guy with a vague sense of direction and a hunch.

Anonymous said...

The I-S Dichotomy along with the other 3 "opposite" personality traits seem very limiting to me. It seems to me that most people or at least I either use all of the traits and these traits tend to be situation dependent.

When I am at work and using excel to get to a make a decision, of course data (sensing) is going to be the main perceiving function. Yet, a few minutes later in a meeting I may switch to more of an intuitive/abstract/theoretical mindset when making decisions with co-workers.

I also remember when I was younger and even to this day, whenever I participate in group sports my 'executive' side comes out, once the game is over, I tend to go back to the 'non executive' personality traits.

It would be quite a boring and drag world if the personalities of people were limited to the 16 MBTI categories. Another attempt of the hyper rational post enlightenment world "trying to figure us out", instead of letting the world be as it is.








Anonymous said...

LOL "I like it all" is sort of how I feel as a bisexual. Also not being "at either end of the spectrum."
......etc, etc


Gross.

nsam said...

MB and related scales appear to be conversation starters. And that's not necessarily a bad thing. Steve's intuition that he is high on both sensing and intuition indicates that the supposed trade-off on this dimension doesn't even have face validity. I think the reason that MB isn't used in academics is because there are no open source versions floating around (or are there?) For a collection of royalty free personality scales check ipip.org

nsam said...

the link should be http://ipip.ori.org/

Truth said...

Steve, I think you misunderstand the difference between a sensate and an intuitive.

A sensate processes information, in methods through his 5 senses. The things that he finds interesting and worthy of discussion are those he can feel, see, taste, smell or hear. An intuitive is intrigued by things that lie beyond the sensory world and infringe upon that which must be ruminated and processed for an outcome.

There is a rebel in the "Myers-Briggs community by the name of Jonathan Niednagel who processes the information primarily in the field of sports and makes millions of dollars, he has changed all of the letters on the grounds that the original ones are archaic and do not quite fit the purpose(he's right). For example, instead of "sensing-intuitive" he uses "emperical-conceptual." For instance, HBD is a concept it is not processable through sensory manor on a simple basis although you may say to yourself; "geez, those blacks sure are dumb", this is not the same as saying "water is wet."

You are certainly an "n" brain type, as am I, Whiskey, Svigor, Mr. Anon, and the overwhelming portion of your readership, because "S" people, generally speaking would simply not be interested in this material. They do however have a much more relevant presence on a blog like Stormfront in which Socratic discussion is discouraged in favor of overt "we're the best" jingoism (as opposed to the much more covert version here.)

I would say the chances of you being an INTJ are probably majority, with a possibility of you being an INTP or the remote chance of an INFJ. I would say the chance of you being any of the other 13 types is so low as to be statistical noise.

BTW; I am a certified Myers-Briggs practitioner, and know more about the field than many of the so-called "experts."

David F. said...

Thanks, Steve. Finally you explained that difference to me.

Now I see why I sometimes grimace and have to force myself to read your column when you go on one of you enthusiastic number-crunching binges.

Far from getting enraged, I'm very grateful that you will go to the effort to get all the ducks in a row. On the other hand, the minutia is often overwhelming for me. I prefer to interpret data as a collection of rules of thumb and general trends and narratives--any of which may be thrown out or modified if it ceases to fit my perceptions.

Fortunately I can rely on number-crunchers such as yourself to challenge my intuitions, even if I don't incline naturally towards that sort of thinking.

David F. said...

@Anonymous:
"The questions on personality tests are so dumb that I cannot honestly answer them. The major problem is they have questions involving very ambiguous self descriptions. To the extent I had to answer, and what most people probably do, is either answer in a way that is self flattering, or randomly between the various interpretations of the questions."

Probably the questions make a distinction that does not clearly exist in your own thinking, such as Steve's case of N vs. S.

Ideally, the test can identify when two types are equally expressed, but who wants to describe themselves as an I??J?

Kylie said...

" A few years ago (I've calmed down since) I would have been the kind that would get into a fistfight over a parking space (if I was in the right). And yet I wouldn't dream of complaining about the food at a restaurant, no matter how bad (I'd just never go there again). Does that make me aggressive or timid, extroverted or introverted? I have no idea."

Seems to me that your two different responses were cued into your two different perceptions of time. You were willing, even eager, to take action in the present but didn't get nearly so energized at the thought of acting at some point in the future.

I'm kind of the same. I avoid verbal confrontation like the plague but have more than once refused to back down from a physical confrontation, even though I knew it meant I was going to get my lights punched out.

bjdubbs said...

Here is a description of an ENTP that fits OBama:

The ENTP personality type is sometimes referred to the "Lawyer" type. The ENTP "lawyer" quickly and accurately understands a situation, and objectively and logically acts upon the situation. Their Thinking side makes their actions and decisions based on an objective list of rules or laws. If the ENTP was defending someone who had actually committed a crime, they are likely to take advantage of quirks in the law that will get their client off the hook. If they were to actually win the case, they would see their actions as completely fair and proper to the situation, because their actions were lawful. The guilt or innocence of their client would not be as relevant. If this type of reasoning goes uncompletely unchecked by the ENTP, it could result in a character that is perceived by others as unethical or even dishonest. The ENTP, who does not naturally consider the more personal or human element in decision making, should take care to notice the subjective, personal side of situations. This is a potential problem are for ENTPs. Although their logical abilities lend strength and purpose to the ENTP, they may also isolate them from their feelings and from other people.

Mark said...

Truth actually posted something constructive; I'm numb with shock.

Bone Daddy Dawg said...

Steve--you absolutely _scream_ NTP (either INTP or ENTP--have not read enough to be certain here) which makes your Oswald-Shot-JFK claim such a mystery. You're NOT that bad at seeing obvious patterns as to seriously claim such a thing.

Bone Daddy Dawg said...

>>Obama is probably an ENTP. Romney is an ESTJ - an ENTJ would have shown more interest in ideas (Bill Gates is an ENTJ). Clinton is probably an ESFJ. Bush Jr. might be an ESFP, although the reports that he reads tons of books have always been a little baffling. Hillary is probably an ISTJ. Reagan an ENFJ. Bush Sr. an ESTP.<<

Obama=INFJ
Mittens=ISTJ
HR Clinton=INTJ
Reagan=ENFJ
Bill Gates=INTP

Anonymous said...

Silver makes a good point. As much as i despise Asian culture the concept of face is one that Americans should become more acquainted with. Trying to steal a parkinf place from someone is a type of affront a bad meal isn't. its like how people get mad at people with flat tires for holding traffic up rather than saying there but for the grace of god. Nobleas oblige is seen as a purely upper class phenomenon, but it seems to me there was some real trickle down effects to it that we have lost.


o a certain extent it shows what a threadbare impact the therapeutic culture had when you move from analyzing self esteem (which has leaped bounds) to analyzing empathy which should be a byproduct of the TC. There America has became far more eager to criticize each other.

SFG said...

"Seems to me that your two different responses were cued into your two different perceptions of time. You were willing, even eager, to take action in the present but didn't get nearly so energized at the thought of acting at some point in the future.

I'm kind of the same. I avoid verbal confrontation like the plague but have more than once refused to back down from a physical confrontation, even though I knew it meant I was going to get my lights punched out."

Actually, I'm the opposite. I avoid physical confrontations (because I know I'll lose), but I'm always up for an argument.

Culture of critique?

Luke Lea said...

Right, each of these opposites needs to be on a scale. One's personality would be a point (blur?) in five dimensional space.

Luke Lea said...

re: one's point in five dimensional space -- should be possible to measure the "distance" between any two individuals.

Cail Corishev said...

As a question-based test, the M-B suffers from the fact that, if you have any idea what the test is looking for, it could cloud your answers. If you think of yourself as an introvert, for instance, and you like that image of yourself, you're going to answer all the "at a party, do you prefer to be the center of attention or talk in a small group" type of questions in the I way, whether it's objectively true or not. If you don't like being an introvert (though you are), maybe you skew the answers toward E. It's only as accurate as your self-awareness and your ability to be honest about yourself.

It's probably more useful as a sort of shorthand when dealing with other people who know the lingo. If I tell you I'm an ISTJ and you tell me you're an ESTP, that quickly gives us both a general idea where we might be compatible and where we might conflict. It's vague, but a useful starting point.

Also, as others said, each of the pairs is really a score on a range. So you're not really an I or an E; you're a score somewhere between -100 (I) and +100 (E), with 0 being right in the middle. (I don't remember how the numbers worked; that's just an example.) An ISTJ with scores near the middle might be more similar to an ENFP who's also near the middle than to a fellow ISTJ with extreme scores.

Theoretically, someone could be 50/50 on each pair, and probably be the most boring person in the world.

The Wobbly Guy said...

Another way to explain the Introvert vs Extrovert part is that Introverts CAN socialise, but it drains their energy and after a while, they need to withdraw back into isolation to recharge. Come to think of it, that seems to describe Obama almost perfectly.

Extroverts, on the other hand, GAIN energy from being around other people, and can just go on and on. The extreme example is the all night party goer.

Assistant Village Idiot said...

MBTI is just crap. Yes it can be useful in general and in the right hands, but so can half a dozen parlor games.

The PAI is the unofficial successor to the MMPI - which is also good for uncovering pathology, BTW - and is drawing rave reviews from the people who use it.

http://www4.parinc.com/Products/Product.aspx?ProductID=PAI

Silver said...

You were willing, even eager, to take action in the present but didn't get nearly so energized at the thought of acting at some point in the future.

No, I think the other poster nailed it. The parking place is an obvious affront, but I couldn't imagine any chef purposely preparing a bad meal.

The reasons I am loath to complain are:

(1) I am the furthest thing from a gourmet so I am insecure about my evaluation. Even if I truly don't like the food, what if I'm 'wrong' and it would actually be rated 'very good' by those who know these things? Then I'll look like an idiot. Not that they'd tell me that to my face, but they'd crack jokes about it after I left. Shouldn't bother me, but ah, it does.

(2) I get these visions of the staff giving me stern looks of disapproval for my complaints. I don't believe there is any serious likelihood of this happening, but the mind plays tricks and it 'feels' like a real possibility. That would be quite upsetting if it occurred so I avoid it.

(3) I don't want to make the chef feel bad.

Silver said...

Cail Corishev,

Those are good points. It's fairly easy to tell what the test is looking for and skew your answers appropiately. The best tests rate you as strong/mild/weak (or give you a percentage) across the various traits, so it's best to answer the question as specifically as possible, even if you know what the question is getting at. If the test has a broad enough array of contexts/scenarios then if you answer as specifically as you can (you refuse to skew) you'll get the most accurate reading.

The last MB test I did (yesterday) gave me a 'slight preference' for introversion (11% I think it was), overwhelming inclinations towards N and T, and a slight preference for J over P. That seems about right.

Silver said...

Wobbly Guy,
Wouldn't how 'draining' it is depend on the sort of feedback one gets from it? It seems to me that if the interactions are pleasurable -- they affirm the worth of the individual, say -- it would be much less draining than if the interactions 'confirmed' to the individual how useless and hopeless he is in social situations, and that people are right to want nothing to do with him.

Also, I've found for myself (and I bet this holds true for othes) that the background mood I'm in can be decisive in how I socially 'perform.' Five or so years ago when I first began reading and thinking serously about HBD, it felt like a constant stream of bad news (it's the dismal science) and I fell into a bit of depressive funk for a while. I was certainly no fun to be around in those days. My introversion became far more pronounced. Lately, I have found a ton of reasons to feel positive about the future and I have been on a hot streak socially.

Hobart said...

"Truth said...
BTW; I am a certified Myers-Briggs practitioner, and know more about the field than many of the so-called "experts.""

-So, Truth peddles pseudoscience for a living. Explains a lot.

Nero Sand said...

"Truth said...

...For instance, HBD is a concept it is not processable through sensory manor on a simple basis although you may say to yourself; "geez, those blacks sure are dumb", this is not the same as saying "water is wet.""


The hell it's not, you can see, hear, and smell that on display near practically any gathering of blacks. And if you get too close, you'll feel it, too.



"... I would say the chances of you being an INTJ are probably majority, with a possibility of you being an INTP or the remote chance of an INFJ. I would say the chance of you being any of the other 13 types is so low as to be statistical noise.”



INTJ! Along with Hitler, Marx, and Ted Kaczynski. Hurray!

Truth said...

"INTJ! Along with Hitler, Marx, and Ted Kaczynski. Hurray!"

The upshot being that they all focused their lives on a single cause celebré and worked at it day and night until they had, on some level achieved it. Similar to the way Sailer after working a few years decided to devote his career and life, to the discussion of HBD.

helene edwards said...

INTJ! Along with Hitler, Marx, and Ted Kaczynski. Hurray!

And Krugman.

eh said...

I though this was pretty funny.


http://wikka.moreawesomethanyou.com/index.php?title=Myers-Briggs_Type_Indicator

Vendikar said...

There is nothing wrong with devoting your whole life to one thing as long as it is a good thing. It is better to do one thing than nothing, which is what 99.999% of humans on earth ever did to change anything in a material way.

Anonymous said...

You do realise ,don't you ,that you have lost a lot of credibility when you start talking about the MBTI

It belongs in what used to be called "womens magazines "

Anonymous said...

This thread is dead, but I would like to point out that I don't think Jung referred to these things as personality types. He referred to them as functions of consciousness, they were different ways to get information, and that people leaned on some ways more than others.

Anonymous said...

isteve is a strong N-type, probably on the order of 90%+N. the problem with most personality typing is that the convoluted explanations and descriptions make it almost impossible to develop a real understanding of the critical concept. (it's possible that elite academics in psychology created an atmosphere of impenetrable abstruseness, the better to disguise certain realities and selectively promote falsehoods, establishing an implicit assumption/frame about psychology discourse that was then embraced by that "next class down", with the result that the S/N distinction, while absolutely critical to an understanding of people, is somehow not entirely clear to many smart people who have studied Myers-Briggs, even at this late date). The S/N difference is the most important Myers-Briggs distinction, being omnipresent and unappreciated.

The basic S/N difference is that the S-type is experience-driven, while the N-type is a theorist. The N-type mental universe is filled with underlying factors linked by theory to predicted outcomes. The S-type universe has very little of this in favor of a set of learned procedures, inherited wisdom, and especially observations about what worked and didn't work in the past (when I swung my stick at a slightly different angle, I got a better sound off the cymbal; during Clinton's second term, the economy improved). S-types are 75% of the population.

The S mental world emphasizes tools and procedures, and ideas for creative use of tools and adjustments to procedures. Jazz musicians, by and large, are procedures-executing S types (variety seeking ones), which may explain why they evolve technique persistently over time, revisiting the same standards over and over, but struggling to compose new works or even explain their work from a compositional standpoint. Ss love to relive experiences such as acting out favorite movie scenes (a dead giveaway of S nature). As an N, you will just shrug, "yeah, that Jon Stewart bit was pretty funny", but you won't feel it with the same bonding intensity of Ss sharing the experience and re-recording it to their hardrives. A strong N and a strong S cannot be close friends, and many other relationships may seem off due to an inability to bridge the S/N chasm.

S-types are reluctant to act against experience, so there's not much point in trotting out predictive theories about the future when they deviate from past experience. S-types make terrible investors, since investing rewards contrarian ideas and unobvious theories, and Ss will choose stocks or managers primarily on the basis of past experience and performance. (N: "I know internet shares have continued appreciating, but they're selling for 10x revenue, 40x tangible investment with no competitive advantage and the fed is pulling the liquidity plug to avoid misallocation of resources. " S: (prior to riding his portfolio value down 70%) [blank stare].

The media serves an S-type eager to know what happened and record that experience, and doesn't discuss very coherently how today's factors predict tomorrow's good and bad realities.

Ss in general don't embrace the Myers-Briggs, which is a set of theories about psychology that Ns embrace easily. The S/N distinction is used prominently by e-harmony, and psychological typing along Myers Briggs has been used by some companies going back into at least the mid-80s; I have never seen the 5 personality factors used anywhere. It's possible that elite psychologists decided to reject Myers Briggs because the typing made people seem convincingly different, rather than the same, while at the same time the framework resulted from a threateningly democratic idea development process.

Samson J. said...

Mittens=ISTJ

No wonder I liked him!

@Truth:

You are certainly an "n" brain type, as am I, Whiskey, Svigor, Mr. Anon, and the overwhelming portion of your readership, because "S" people, generally speaking would simply not be interested in this material.

I have heard this before, and it always seems that the sites I enjoy are populated heavily by INTJs - and yet, I *always* score ISTJ, which theoretically is supposed to mean that I should not be "interested" in these types of discussions. I don't think my test results are wrong - the way everyone describes "intuiting" always seems to me like an utterly foreign way to think - so I don't know why I am such an oddball ISTJ.

Anonymous said...

What's up to every body, it's my fіrst gо to ѕее of this wеbpage; this blog contains aweѕome anԁ genuinely fine stuff in support of visіtors.
Here is my page ... iphonefix

TreeGoddess said...

I have the same problem... nice to find out I'm not the only one.... everytime I take the test I am either an ISTP or an INTP always leaning only 1% either way. I see a lot of both personalities in me... positive and negative, and I too drive people nut trying to understand me