Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

In Defense of Myers Briggs (2020)

dynomight.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 352 posts

Re: In Defense of Myers Briggs (2020)

#221

Post by cb321 »

mewpmewp2 wrote: post #215
cb321 wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are all psychometricians INTx's, then? This sounds like exactly the kind of over-conclusion that bothers people about personality testing and its applications. ;-)

Of course not. It's all probabilistic. I feel like the people who think MBTI and personality tests don't make sense are themselves the ones making those over conclusions and they can only think in binary, black and white way, when it really could be something like INTx is likely to be overrepresented in psychometricians fields by 4x, ESFJ might be underrepresented by 5x, etc. So for instance maybe there's 6% INTXs in…

Or it could be these tests literally do not even discriminate 99% of the population if the measurement error is near the size of the mode width. See my other comment. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26292915

Re: In Defense of Myers Briggs (2020)

#222

Post by foxhop »

Learning your MBTI type helps you learn what you work on. I'm currently exploring Carl Jung and performing my own red book style adventures to try to heAl and learn.

Have a growth mindset. Understand your defaults are just your defaults. Just like you have a dominant hand, you can still use your "weaker" hand, just takes practice. Utilize Love, Truth, and Freedom to drive thoughts and actions.

Re: In Defense of Myers Briggs (2020)

#223

Post by graup »

dyno-might wrote: post #173

Hi, I'm the author of this post. Any way we can change the link to here: https://dynomight.net/in-defense-of-myers-briggs.html ? This is a slightly updated version of the post (new links, slightly less unhinged language, and a link to this MBTI quiz that I made to promote non-binary axes: https://dynomight.net/mbti )

Thanks, the test was very refreshing. I really like the simplicity. As an anecdote, my result came out very close to the one from 16personalities.

Re: In Defense of Myers Briggs (2020)

#224

Post by ncmncm »

Smaug123 wrote: post #190
ncmncm wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you do not see it how it would be useful, my recommendation is do not buy it . I have not bought it, but I have used it. I justify using it because it is useful to me: It helps me understand how people very different from myself interact with their world. These other people are not wrong, just different. Remarkably often, the differences are quite comprehensible. It helps to organize those differences. The precise…

If the purpose is merely to understand how people different from you view the world, then why take the test at all, rather than just reading about the ~sixteen personality types MBTI distinguishes between? The MBTI consultant who administered the test to me couldn't answer that question.

Consultants are a whole other animal: astrologers willing to give HR directors kickbacks. What they say, or can't, is not informative.

If just reading the descriptions is enough for you, do that. Most people seem to need more structure.

Re: In Defense of Myers Briggs (2020)

#225

Post by iso1210 »

paulie_a wrote: post #52
dang wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would you please stop posting shallow dismissals and calling names in HN comments? Posts like this and https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26289644 are not what this site is for. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html Edit: we've had to ask you this sort of thing a ton of times. Eventually we ban such accounts. If you wouldn't mind reviewing the guidelines and taking the intended spirit of the site more to…

"we've had to ask you this sort of thing a ton of times. Eventually we ban such accounts" No you haven't. What's wrong with calling out bad products for what they are?

You'd get better response if you gave reasons for your statement. You may be right that this test is complete trash, I suspect many people here would agree.

The top comment on this thread says that Myers Briggs is complete trash

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26291262

The difference is they defend their assertion, and that post led to a very interesting discussion from both sides.

The article and the comments generally lead me to believe that there is correlation between MB and "Big 5", there is little from the tests that is actionable, but that's because of argued points one way or another, not be stating it's "complete trash"

Likewise, if you think rackspace is overpriced, or the customer service is lacking, perhaps some examples would get a better response. Why even post the statement if you aren't going to defend it? Is it to try to persuade people that rackspace is awful? You won't persuade anyone without a reason.

Something like "Rackspace is overpriced trash as they charge $500 for a 1U colo and my server had frequent outages, where BobRackInc charge $100 and has never had downtime" would, despite being an anecdote, at least open up the conversation.

Re: In Defense of Myers Briggs (2020)

#226

Post by fsloth »

mewpmewp2 wrote: post #168
Twisol wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not particularly having a horse in this race, if a theory can't reliably make useful predictions, it's not a very useful theory. There's certainly something to be said about identifying correlations, but it isn't yet clear to me whether we can draw inferences based on those correlations to make useful predictions. In the SSC example, I wouldn't be especially shocked if there are no useful inferences in either directi…

There are tons of correlations, for example INTP/INTJ subreddits on Reddit being most popular while these types generally are one of the rarest. There's tons of things you can predict with this. INTPs are often going to face similar challenges and obstacles in life, there's similar things that will help them grow as a person that would not help other types.

The population of people who get an INTP result might have quite many asperger spectrum non-neurotypicals among them. If MB contains an accidental asperger scoring system within itself it does not make it relevant in the _general case_ for other personality types.

That said if INTP can be used as a lodestar for creating asperger communities and peer-support groups it's not a bad thing. But it does not really validate MB in any way as a general purpose psychometric tool.

I personally filled an online MB questionnaire or two in adolescence and certainly found the INTP score as something that helped me acknowledge a few things about myself. But it was not really something I would call fundamentally important.

Re: In Defense of Myers Briggs (2020)

#227

Post by willismichael »

Spivak wrote: post #47
rntksi wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

on question (1), there have been scientific researches that shows if you identify as "introvert" or "extrovert", it can be explained by your body's "efficiency" in releasing dopamine [1] [1] https://news.cornell.edu/stories/2013/07/brain-chemistry-pla...

One fun intersection of this idea was my inattentive ADHD brain’s response to stimulants. I had identified as an introvert for basically my entire life until I got tested and treated. Suddenly I enjoyed going out, talking to people, and it didn’t drain me to the point of physical pain to interact with people for more than brief periods. Made me realize a lot clearer that what makes me “me” is my brain and body chemis…

I think I can kind of relate to the existential crisis, but I have decided that the other side of that coin is that you can intentionally build your own reality. Of course there is still plenty of things about life that you can't control, but you aren't necessarily stuck with some set of fixed personality traits and you can't decide to make something different out of yourself.

Re: In Defense of Myers Briggs (2020)

#228

Post by foxhop »

jplr8922 wrote: post #217
pdamoc wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I now understand it as a gateway to Jung ideas, which I find helpful during my current period of professional questionning. Jung's ideas are quite attractive, I'll give you that. We all love a good story, especially if feels so full of meaning. That being said, I would point out that there are stories and good research that might be a lot more helpful. I would suggest: Chris Argyris work on management, especially h…

Hi pdamoc! First of all I want to thank you for sharing modern authors. I was aware of Carol Dweck's older theories and Toyota management model. I do plan to learn from your suggestions. Have they been helpful in your career? One of the fist thing I've noticed after I started Zen meditation training 5 years ago was that I had recurrent daydreams about killing my bosses. I switched position 3 times until I found mysel…

You are on the similar path as me. I'm happy you are finding help through Jung's work. The unconscious is vast and deep (both singular and plural). I've only scratched the surface but have learned so much.

The bit about the accomplishment letter as a catalyst for action is great. FIRE movement is also great because you are buying your Freedom.

The three words I focus on in my healing and exploration is Love, Freedom, and Truth. Meditate on those words (the true versions of the words) and see if they integrate with your systems.

For people into using science to describe these topics, look at "Depth Psychology".

Re: In Defense of Myers Briggs (2020)

#229

Post by dfn43589 »

IndySun wrote: post #127
smokey_circles wrote: post #75

I don't know how/why people defend this test. 1. It's inaccurate. And that's not just "technically true", it's very rare that the test reproduces results. 2. Jung's theories (the ones used in the test) aren't just "controversial". They're wrong. He says it himself, in the same document they used to create the test. It is just a cash cow now. The _biggest_ problem with the test is it is harmful, not helpful. People be…

Agree, the test has been dismissed enough times. People are far too complex. It has recently been renamed and represented by Jordan Peterson. Unfortunately, the JP readers I've met who mention his version were unaware of the MB version. The critical history of MB should serve as a warning. They are not eureka moments, but smaller steps.

>It has recently been renamed and represented by Jordan Peterson.

You've been downvoted because the OCEAN/Big Five model is not Myers Briggs.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Five_personality_traits

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myers-Briggs_Type_Indicator

Re: In Defense of Myers Briggs (2020)

#230

Post by Isinlor »

Smaug123 wrote: post #188
xvector wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Same here. I have taken the test multiple times throughout my life and I get INTP every single time. The description is completely accurate too, down to the individual nuances describing an INTP. It’s frighteningly accurate. I wonder if less common MBTI types are more accurately defined.

You are aware of the Barnum effect, I presume? ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barnum_effect )

I'm aware of this effect and I never cared for horoscopes, Harry Potter houses and what not.

But INTP description is very specific.

> Chief among Logicians’ interests is exploring and building models for underlying principles and ideas, even going so far as to find these concepts, in their own way, beautiful – this makes them natural mathematicians, systems analysts, and career scientists, especially in more abstract fields such as physics.

Maybe 5% of population would identify with this?

> Logicians are known for their brilliant theories and unrelenting logic – in fact, they are considered the most logically precise of all the personality types. They love patterns, and spotting discrepancies between statements could almost be described as a hobby, making it a bad idea to lie to a Logician.

Maybe 20% of population would identify with this?

[0] https://www.16personalities.com/intp-personality

Post reply on HN