| menu |
Boyinaband
YouTube
| e | i |
| n | s |
| f | t |
| p | j |
| function | ennea | variant | socio | psycho | ||
|
|
| 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 1 |
| h |
| e |
| x |
| a |
| c |
| o |
| public myers-briggs votes | (20/07/22 22:42) tch: NP |
| public function votes |
| public enneagram votes | (19/10/04 09:56) Tman: 4w3 |
| public instinctual variant votes | (19/10/09 21:31) Tman: sp/sx |
| public tritype® votes |
| public sociotype votes |
| public psychosophy votes |
| public hexaco votes |
phsc  There is much more than the tests themselves, of course a ton of tests are bad and in general suck, but the form of a test is not that bad, something like Straw's tests are pretty damn good, but I would say that there are three bigger problems, the form tests are made, the general interpretation of tests and how people view themselves.A big problem is that most tests limit people to a situation of A vs B with a scale or absolute choices, which does not take into consideration if someone fits both options very well, or barely fits any of them, but I don't think this is the biggest problem in the form tests are mostly made, the biggest is the fact most are situation based, and the fact that people might do things that are not related to their personality in some situations, this is because of the second big problem, interpreting the test, people have different definitions for words and all the experience they relate to them is slighty different and all I think you all know the deal, that affects typology and at times that does affect tests, even the best of them, mostly if there is a different language barrier in my experience, but then we get to the biggest problem, not of only tests but typology, self-awareness, people and how they see themselves, a lot of people are really bad at measuring themselves objectively, at times putting their ideal versions of themselves as what they type or over-considering the past and other things, as much as such traits do indicate their type within some systems, that is not considered and it is extremely hard to be measured, in my experience taking tests with other people that know you around is the way to go to be accurate, but it has to be someone who will call you out on bullshit, or try to be objective about yourself but some people are really bad when it comes to that, another big problem I do not think is very related to tests is people who misunderstand or define things in different ways, then think tests are shit or thinks other people's view of them are also shit, when in reality they are just living in a mystical distant land, kind of like what happens on tumblr, this is of course more common for those who do not think about typology (I mean it is very bad in general, read straw's articles if you do not believe that, mostly cognitive functions), but there is a difference in quality and how much the different systems makes sense, this also gets to another problem which fits pretty much all areas, the fact that people do not actually think about things and/or learn more about them, typology is better than many but some communities are so fucking bad when it comes to that and all the things I mentioned... Also how would you go about typing people without empiricism? how do you a priori know people? when personality is not a static concept that constantly changes and you get more info based on the information of the people you are trying to type? it is extremely a posteriori, unless you idealize someone and add a bunch of traits to them but then... what would be the point? typology is by definition a posteriori and you can have... a posteriori ideas??? what were you thinking? analytical a posteriori is a thing yno? and typology + the scientific method is kind of a joke, you cannot experiment when it comes to people exactly because there is no way to check for a thing again, it makes it extremely bizarre, considering that people are always changing even if slighty, unlike measuring the gravitational force in a place which can be pretty damn objective and static (can change but within the theory), personality just... changes and there is no real pattern to that other than the experiences the person is receiving but within that it is extremely personal and basically impossible to measure, for at least now, another problem is that even within someone's personality people are up to behavioral changes, based on the more scientific stuff like hormones and/or neurotransmitters, even if supposedly them in a normal state are not like that.  1
2020-07-22 11:51:55pm (post #8393) |
Vindicator Phoenix INFJ 9w1 so/sx EII-Ne That's a good point, Tman. Tests are unreliable, though I wasn't previously aware of their empirical failings. I decided to share the video, since by an unusual coincidence, Boyinaband took an MBTI test. I figured it'd provoke some thought, particularly in how his answers might elucidate some of his behavioral tendencies.Nonetheless, I'll hand you the checkmate on this one. I've even found the tests, I've taken, shaky and prone to giving desultory results, depending on the: test, time of taking, mood, and life circumstances. Tests have mistyped me as ENFP, INFP, INTP, INTJ, and ISFJ, over the years. Thanks for your answer. :) 1
2020-07-22 09:42:21pm (post #8392) |
Jacobus INFJ 4w5 EIE well yeah that's pretty much the basis of Berkeley's empiricism as well 0
2020-07-22 07:30:19pm (post #8391) |
Tman INTP 5w4/1w9/4w5 Sp/Sx ILI In this case, your trying to measure something none physical, personality, so this objection isn't really relevant. By, "empirically" I just meant using the scientific method of hypothesis, experiment with control, and conclusion. Even if the physical world doesn't exist, which is a hypothesis I see no reason to accept, I would argue that measuring the way physical objects behave could still tell us things about the nature of reality, like with Kant's Transcendental Idealism. 1
2020-07-22 04:55:33pm (post #8389) |
|
Jacobus INFJ 4w5 EIE bro how can anything be proven empirically when all matter is just the reflection of ideas 0
2020-07-22 04:18:46pm (post #8388) |
|
Tman INTP 5w4/1w9/4w5 Sp/Sx ILI *MBTI tests I mean. 0
2020-07-22 12:22:35pm (post #8386) |
|
Tman INTP 5w4/1w9/4w5 Sp/Sx ILI It has been Empirically Proven that MBTI doesn't work. 0
2020-07-22 12:22:12pm (post #8385) |
|
Vindicator Phoenix INFJ 9w1 so/sx EII-Ne He took an MBTI test, during a YouTube video, and got ENTJ: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rt2tIMUQ_Fg An interesting watch, perhaps? 0
2020-07-22 09:38:55am (post #8384) |
| related entries |