11–20 of 291 posts
I have seen things like "INTP-J" on friends profile. I think it's called 16 personalities.
Me and my colleagues did that test, and the suggested one for me did not fit in with me at all, and most of us thought the results were bullshit. Why anyone would follow this to make work groups, or to exclude people in their life is mind boggling.
"""Modern evidence-based methods in behavioural science adopt the ground principle that people’s behavior mainly depend on context."""
doesn't have any source to back it up and is opposed to what I have read about the introvert/extrovert divide which seems to be more genetic than context dependent for example. And those are character traits that directly shape behavior (I'd rather read a book when low on energy vs. go to a party). Maybe someone can clarify this for me. The fact that the author uses "shy" and "outgoing" also doesn't instill much faith in me. The next section even mentions the big five but I don't think these traits are "mainly dependent on context". I'm a bit confused.
Nevertheless, an interesting story/find. The color system seems so obviously ridiculous that it amazes me how popular it got. Lesson learned. People like categories and simple explanations. Coincidentally, that's also one of the main sources of (unintentional) bias.
As a swede. This is the first time I've seen this 4 colour system. I'm 30, so maybe it's more popular around younger people? I have seen things like "INTP-J" on friends profile. I think it's called 16 personalities. Me and my colleagues did that test, and the suggested one for me did not fit in with me at all, and most of us thought the results were bullshit. Why anyone would follow this to make work groups, or to ex…
> For example, consider a person who says, “now I understand why I have such negative thoughts, can’t get to sleep, and have difficulty getting going…I’ve got depression.” This person might believe that the explanation of her symptoms is depression, but in fact, the diagnosis of depression is just a categorisation of exactly these symptoms.
The diagnosis of depression usually revolves around changes in body chemistry and the functioning of the brain. It is an issue as real as diabetes is. To explain my point further, consider the following:
> For example, consider a person who says, “now I understand why I have such frequent urination, increased thirst and increased appetite. I’ve got diabetes.” This person might believe that the explanation of her symptoms is diabetes, but in fact, the diagnosis of diabetes is just a categorisation of exactly these symptoms. There is no diabetes Gremlin, either.
All this not to say that the accusations of fraud are either based or baseless.
EDIT: I know we can't test (blood etc.) for depression — yet. There's still a question of whether "it's all in your head" or "your biology is a bit off". See also [0].
And yet we still see fools in the US who actually believe that Myers-Briggs personality types like "INTJ" are somehow meaningful. It's hilarious.