thisintegrated

MBTI Compatibility Theory ..Accurate!?????

159 posts in this topic

Fun fact: Jordan Peterson (and some other person) co-authored that paper with DeYoung, which produced the 10 facets. The dude has made big historical contributions to personality psychology.


Intrinsic joy is revealed in the marriage of meaning and being.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

On 6/11/2022 at 3:18 PM, Carl-Richard said:

Get up to date on the facets ;)

BigFivePersonalityTraits_v2.jpg

 

 

Nice table but dumb arrows.

I don't believe that if someone is intelligent and open minded, they would not want to look better and take more action. Or having high intellect make you dream bigger (better fantasy)

Edited by hyruga

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

2 hours ago, Carl-Richard said:

Fun fact: Jordan Peterson (and some other person) co-authored that paper with DeYoung, which produced the 10 facets. The dude has made big historical contributions to personality psychology.

It doesn't matter who made the model or contributed to it. See: Argument From Authority.

I'm not saying that you are necessarily making an argument in this comment, but just to be aware.

Also, seriously, JP? Is he like the most developed thinker you know? Lol.

Edited by Gesundheit2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, Gesundheit2 said:

It doesn't matter who made the model or contributed to it. See: Argument From Authority.

I'm not saying that you are necessarily making an argument in this comment, but just to be aware.

Also, seriously, JP? Is he like the most developed thinker you know? Lol.

I just mentioned a fun fact lol. If anything, my point is that JP is a bigger deal than most people think. Not many people know he used to be a scientist working on Big 5.


Intrinsic joy is revealed in the marriage of meaning and being.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, hyruga said:

Nice table but dumb arrows.

I don't believe that if someone is intelligent and open minded, they would not want to look better and take more action. Or having high intellect make you dream bigger (better fantasy)

They're not mutually exclusive lol. They just don't correlate as much as the others.

...wait, did you think that all the sub-facets are each their own personality type? Please no, I'm going to lose my shit ?


Intrinsic joy is revealed in the marriage of meaning and being.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

14 hours ago, Carl-Richard said:

It's the leading model in personality theory, so by definition, it isn't. If you had actually read about how the model was made, you would think it was pretty genius (the Lexical hypothesis). I think the Lexical hypothesis is a big reason why the self-assessment tests are so accurate, because the 5 traits were actually found using data from self-assessment tests.

Leading in what way? According to whom?

It's literally so bad I don't even use it.  I consider the Hogwarts House model much more useful than your Big 5.

btw, maybe look up the "Barnum Effect".  Big 5 suffers the most from this.  Any of the Big 5 traits could apply to absolutely anyone, whereas if someone's a sensor or not is black and white—obvious.

 

Stop relying on your "it's the leading", "it's the widely recognized", it's the widely respected", etc. arguments.  They mean nothing.  It's almost funny how fiercely you reject the fact you're a Te-user, while literally being the Te-user archetype.

 

 

Edit: lmao just noticed..

9 hours ago, Carl-Richard said:

The dude has made big historical contributions to personality psychology.

5 hours ago, Carl-Richard said:

Not many people know he used to be a scientist working on Big 5.

It's like you're trying your hardest to prove you're a Te/Fi, and to validate MBTI and its predictive power.  MBTI has predicted every single one your responses.  What did the Big 5 predict?

 

Edited by thisintegrated

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, thisintegrated said:

Leading in what way? According to whom?

388f29_4900168.jpg

?

 

6 minutes ago, thisintegrated said:

It's literally so bad I don't even use it.  I consider the Hogwarts House model much more useful than your Big 5.

That's a nice opinion.

 

6 minutes ago, thisintegrated said:

btw, maybe look up the "Barnum Effect".  Big 5 suffers the most from this.  Any of the Big 5 traits could apply to absolutely anyone, whereas if someone's a sensor or not is black and white—obvious.

It's almost like you read straight from the Criticism section on the MBTI wiki ?:

Quote

Terminology

The terminology of the MBTI has been criticized as being very "vague and general", so as to allow any kind of behavior to fit any personality type, which may result in the Barnum effect, where people give a high rating to a positive description that supposedly applies specifically to them.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myers–Briggs_Type_Indicator#Criticism

 

8 minutes ago, thisintegrated said:

Stop relying on your "it's the leading", "it's the widely recognized", it's the widely respected", etc. arguments.  They mean nothing.

There is a general consensus among the experts in the field (you know, scientists – people who do science). I've quoted David R. Buss' books in the past, but I'll try something different this time:

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/people-are-strange/201910/five-big-reasons-embrace-the-big-five-personality-traits


Intrinsic joy is revealed in the marriage of meaning and being.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Carl-Richard said:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myers–Briggs_Type_Indicator#Criticism

There is a general consensus among the experts in the field (you know, scientists – people who do science). I've quoted David R. Buss' books in the past, but I'll try something different this time:

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/people-are-strange/201910/five-big-reasons-embrace-the-big-five-personality-traits

It's like you lack any self-awareness

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Carl-Richard said:

They're not mutually exclusive lol. They just don't correlate as much as the others.

...wait, did you think that all the sub-facets are each their own personality type? Please no, I'm going to lose my shit ?

No. I didn't say all the sub-facets are each their own personality type.

***

The correlation was not proven at all. Where's the proof that one traits lead to another? There's no proof or survey done. Not rigorous.

A child can just drop an arrow from one to another and he might still be right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 15.6.2022 at 0:49 AM, thisintegrated said:

It's like you lack any self-awareness

You asked me "how does it not add up when you apply statistical methods?", and "according to whom is it the leading model in personality theory?". Tell me, how exactly am I supposed to answer those questions without appealing to external factual information?

Do you even care about the scientific method? How do you think quantitative social science should be done?


Intrinsic joy is revealed in the marriage of meaning and being.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, hyruga said:

The correlation was not proven at all. Where's the proof that one traits lead to another? There's no proof or survey done. Not rigorous.

A child can just drop an arrow from one to another and he might still be right.

Have you read the paper you're criticizing?


Intrinsic joy is revealed in the marriage of meaning and being.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Is the MBTi not declared as scientifically unvalid in some areas? I like the MBTI model. I generally find my experience conincides with compatability charts of the mbti model. I don't find it useful even after contemplating cognitive stacks and shadow functions for a while for all types and how they interact with each other. I find the Enneagram suprsingly more truthful especially in combination with the mbti model you can come to absurd conclusions how people will interact. Also the big 5 model is useful to sort of gauge the others persons temperament it's not that cognitively focused as the mbti. Where it's mostly about types and how they think without diving into cognitive stacks and FI v.s FE how they express and feel their emotions, preferences, tendencies etc. Same with SI v.s SE for example. 

Just to add to the experience. I dated an ENFP and one INFJ and INTJ and others also, who I'd rather type with other models. I find intutives as an INFJ the best to deal with, yet only using the MBTI does not account for the complexity of the other person most of the time. For example dating the INFj girl as an INFJ there was less connection then I expected etc. You can argue it's because of how FE functions in INFJ's because they express their feelings outwardly etc. In comparison the ENFP girl was way more grounded in her emotional reality. Then it seems so unaccessible to me when I don't reveal what I feel my experience with FE vs FI interaction both as 2'tier function or w/e. Or second order w/e. In this cogntive stack model idea thingy.

It's for sure interesting, yet when I think oh the ENFP girl is a 9w8 or 9w1 the whole experience changes and the dynamic of the interaction. I find the Ennea lense sort of has more depth also the compatability charts that exist within the Ennea model also conincides with my experience mostly, after some time.I like both models, they also both have neuroscience, it's kinda weird to think about that then when interacting with others lol.

What about this HEXACO-Model that has 6 instead of 5 traits and is an expansion sort of the big-5 model? Is that model valid IIRC it measures honesty or sort of has some moral/ethics trait listed.

Edited by ValiantSalvatore

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Carl-Richard said:

Have you read the paper you're criticizing?

@lmfao is right on this occasion, I'm afraid, @Carl-Richard.  The uselessness of the Big 5 can not be overstated.

 

@lmfao Fi users are statistically much more likely to be misogynists, and INTXs are actually the ones known for being history nerds.  I see tiktok has already taken its toll.. but maybe it's a better place for you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, thisintegrated said:

Fi users are statistically much more likely to be misogynists, and INTXs are actually the ones known for being history nerds.

Not history specifically, combat. I know an ENTP that collects military memorabilia, like old helmets and a jacket with a bullet hole and some blood, and who's memorized a lot of different conflicts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Hydreigon360 said:

I don't think you've met the edgelord ENTPs online. More racist and homophobic than I could ever aspire to be.

Hmm, I do hate most ENTPs I see online.  But immature INTJs are definitely worse.

 

7 hours ago, Hydreigon360 said:

You've got a point about Fi though. Ti-Fe axis is more "democratic", universalistic and fair-minded than Te-Fi axis. Ti looks for universal principles. Fe tends to believe that all people are essentially equal or are cut from the same cloth, whereas Te or Fi users will be more tentative on that assertion. A Te stereotype would be fascistic governments which put humans into hierarchies based on their usefulness to society. 

I'm surprised you understand this much.  That's all correct.

 

7 hours ago, Hydreigon360 said:

Believe it or not but I'm not INTJ. My starting point in life has always been INTP. I later found my ENTJ unconscious and ISFP demon. There are different layers and sides to people which get shown in different situations 

Wait.. that's so weird.. I knew you were an INTP, but somehow forgot and ended up assuming you're an INTJ?

In my "Leo isn't an INTP" thread I even used you as an example of how INTPs are "informative", while INTJs, like Leo, are "direct AF".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 16.6.2022 at 4:12 AM, thisintegrated said:

Fi users are statistically much more likely to be misogynists,

...wait, did you just invoke statistics, i.e. a spectrum from 0-100%? Where are the misogynist types? 😛


Intrinsic joy is revealed in the marriage of meaning and being.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 17/06/2022 at 10:22 AM, Carl-Richard said:

...wait, did you just invoke statistics, i.e. a spectrum from 0-100%? Where are the misogynist types? 😛

Fe user can't really be misogynist.

Fi users can be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, thisintegrated said:

Fe user can't really be misogynist.

Fi users can be.

Does this apply cross-culturally?


Intrinsic joy is revealed in the marriage of meaning and being.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

2 hours ago, Carl-Richard said:

Does this apply cross-culturally?

Of course.  Even if your culture hated women, if you were an Fe user you'd eventually end up talking to women and realize they're not so bad.

It's impossible to hide truth from Fe/Ti users.

 

Edit:  Did @Leo Gura seriously remove my emojis?!?!?!?😨😨😨😨😨

I've just come back from vacation and am shocked to learn of what's taken place in my absence🤦🏻🤦🏻

INTJ confirmed.

Edited by thisintegrated

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now