can people please stop typing - Forum

MasileinDE
International Star

MasileinDE wrote:

Pavlov wrote:

MasileinDE wrote:

Pavlov wrote:
the four letters is a shortened form of the 4 functions that makes up your personality type, in your 4 functions will be two introverted ones, and two extroverted ones, you will know what your to first two functions are by the two middle letters, and the other letters you will find out by understanding the order, and the introvertion and extrovertion of the two first functions, you should know them, just by your middle letters in the 4 letters you test as

I am getting more and more confused by the minute and that despite deciding years ago that MBTI is armchair science at best and silently judging people who make it their whole character and need to type everyone (so, yeah, basically agreeing with the og post that it's just stupid to think you can run around type-ing people based on how they show themselves to the world)

i type you as a te user

I have no clue honestly
I did the 16personalities one for fun with a friend (and I know everyone who trusts in mbti thinks that's like the worst one you could take, but I'm seriously not paying for it) and that typed me as INTJ? but in all honesty, there's like at least two other categories that fit myself just as well when I think about all the things since a lot is really situational and not necessarily a "I'm always like this" thing, so hard to say

Pavlov
International Star

Pavlov wrote:

MasileinDE wrote:

Pavlov wrote:
the four letters is a shortened form of the 4 functions that makes up your personality type, in your 4 functions will be two introverted ones, and two extroverted ones, you will know what your to first two functions are by the two middle letters, and the other letters you will find out by understanding the order, and the introvertion and extrovertion of the two first functions, you should know them, just by your middle letters in the 4 letters you test as

I am getting more and more confused by the minute and that despite deciding years ago that MBTI is armchair science at best and silently judging people who make it their whole character and need to type everyone (so, yeah, basically agreeing with the og post that it's just stupid to think you can run around type-ing people based on how they show themselves to the world)

honestly mbti is very stereotyped and im pretty sure thats not what it was originally for. its not for judging the superficial character of a person, its more a way to understand how a person works, what "cognetive functions" is a persons dominating ones, what does that person rely most on, their logic, or their values

Pavlov
International Star

Pavlov wrote:

MasileinDE wrote:

Pavlov wrote:
the four letters is a shortened form of the 4 functions that makes up your personality type, in your 4 functions will be two introverted ones, and two extroverted ones, you will know what your to first two functions are by the two middle letters, and the other letters you will find out by understanding the order, and the introvertion and extrovertion of the two first functions, you should know them, just by your middle letters in the 4 letters you test as

I am getting more and more confused by the minute and that despite deciding years ago that MBTI is armchair science at best and silently judging people who make it their whole character and need to type everyone (so, yeah, basically agreeing with the og post that it's just stupid to think you can run around type-ing people based on how they show themselves to the world)

honestly mbti is very stereotyped and im pretty sure thats not what it was originally for. its not for judging the superficial character of a person, its more a way to understand how a person works, what "cognetive functions" is a persons dominating ones, what does that person rely most on, their logic, or their values

are they a person who relies on sensory impression, or do they rely on their intuition, is that person externally focused, or are they internally focused, introspective or instinctive

MasileinDE
International Star

MasileinDE wrote:

Pavlov wrote:

MasileinDE wrote:

Pavlov wrote:
the four letters is a shortened form of the 4 functions that makes up your personality type, in your 4 functions will be two introverted ones, and two extroverted ones, you will know what your to first two functions are by the two middle letters, and the other letters you will find out by understanding the order, and the introvertion and extrovertion of the two first functions, you should know them, just by your middle letters in the 4 letters you test as

I am getting more and more confused by the minute and that despite deciding years ago that MBTI is armchair science at best and silently judging people who make it their whole character and need to type everyone (so, yeah, basically agreeing with the og post that it's just stupid to think you can run around type-ing people based on how they show themselves to the world)

honestly mbti is very stereotyped and im pretty sure thats not what it was originally for. its not for judging the superficial character of a person, its more a way to understand how a person works, what "cognetive functions" is a persons dominating ones, what does that person rely most on, their logic, or their values

well, it was created by a mother-daughter duo trying to find out if the boyfriend of the daughter would fit into the family based on ... "science"
that's about it
it really gets attributed way too much importance when there is no actual science backing it up other than two people being like "this is how we'd classify people"

but like I said, I for instance function on very different ways depending in what kind of situation I'm in. Depending on the hierarchal structures of the relationship I'm entertaining with said person (be it parents, friends, acquaintances, job related, uni related) I have different ways of reacting and going at things. I don't have a default and I doubt many people who live in similar societies like I do (that puts a great value on these hierarchies and you know "proper and respectful interaction being different depending on who you interact with"

have similar experiences.
maybe you could say that in a few of those instances people go against their innate feeling out of cultural peer pressure, but if it's so engrained you basically deny yourself for it, doesn't that in the end mean, that you bow to that rule and thus live by it?

Pavlov
International Star

Pavlov wrote:

MasileinDE wrote:

Pavlov wrote:

MasileinDE wrote:
I am getting more and more confused by the minute and that despite deciding years ago that MBTI is armchair science at best and silently judging people who make it their whole character and need to type everyone (so, yeah, basically agreeing with the og post that it's just stupid to think you can run around type-ing people based on how they show themselves to the world)

honestly mbti is very stereotyped and im pretty sure thats not what it was originally for. its not for judging the superficial character of a person, its more a way to understand how a person works, what "cognetive functions" is a persons dominating ones, what does that person rely most on, their logic, or their values

well, it was created by a mother-daughter duo trying to find out if the boyfriend of the daughter would fit into the family based on ... "science"
that's about it
it really gets attributed way too much importance when there is no actual science backing it up other than two people being like "this is how we'd classify people"

but like I said, I for instance function on very different ways depending in what kind of situation I'm in. Depending on the hierarchal structures of the relationship I'm entertaining with said person (be it parents, friends, acquaintances, job related, uni related) I have different ways of reacting and going at things. I don't have a default and I doubt many people who live in similar societies like I do (that puts a great value on these hierarchies and you know "proper and respectful interaction being different depending on who you interact with"

have similar experiences.
maybe you could say that in a few of those instances people go against their innate feeling out of cultural peer pressure, but if it's so engrained you basically deny yourself for it, doesn't that in the end mean, that you bow to that rule and thus live by it?

i cant argue with you because i cant exactly disagree, i know mbti isnt real science, i just do it for fun

Pavlov
International Star

Pavlov wrote:

MasileinDE wrote:

Pavlov wrote:
honestly mbti is very stereotyped and im pretty sure thats not what it was originally for. its not for judging the superficial character of a person, its more a way to understand how a person works, what "cognetive functions" is a persons dominating ones, what does that person rely most on, their logic, or their values

well, it was created by a mother-daughter duo trying to find out if the boyfriend of the daughter would fit into the family based on ... "science"
that's about it
it really gets attributed way too much importance when there is no actual science backing it up other than two people being like "this is how we'd classify people"

but like I said, I for instance function on very different ways depending in what kind of situation I'm in. Depending on the hierarchal structures of the relationship I'm entertaining with said person (be it parents, friends, acquaintances, job related, uni related) I have different ways of reacting and going at things. I don't have a default and I doubt many people who live in similar societies like I do (that puts a great value on these hierarchies and you know "proper and respectful interaction being different depending on who you interact with"

have similar experiences.
maybe you could say that in a few of those instances people go against their innate feeling out of cultural peer pressure, but if it's so engrained you basically deny yourself for it, doesn't that in the end mean, that you bow to that rule and thus live by it?

i cant argue with you because i cant exactly disagree, i know mbti isnt real science, i just do it for fun

but i think you have misunderstood what mbti is about, everyone adapts to situations, but your preference for thinking/feeling, intuition/sensing doesnt really change, we dont have that much control over ourselves

Pavlov
International Star

Pavlov wrote:

MasileinDE wrote:
well, it was created by a mother-daughter duo trying to find out if the boyfriend of the daughter would fit into the family based on ... "science"
that's about it
it really gets attributed way too much importance when there is no actual science backing it up other than two people being like "this is how we'd classify people"

but like I said, I for instance function on very different ways depending in what kind of situation I'm in. Depending on the hierarchal structures of the relationship I'm entertaining with said person (be it parents, friends, acquaintances, job related, uni related) I have different ways of reacting and going at things. I don't have a default and I doubt many people who live in similar societies like I do (that puts a great value on these hierarchies and you know "proper and respectful interaction being different depending on who you interact with"

have similar experiences.
maybe you could say that in a few of those instances people go against their innate feeling out of cultural peer pressure, but if it's so engrained you basically deny yourself for it, doesn't that in the end mean, that you bow to that rule and thus live by it?

i cant argue with you because i cant exactly disagree, i know mbti isnt real science, i just do it for fun

but i think you have misunderstood what mbti is about, everyone adapts to situations, but your preference for thinking/feeling, intuition/sensing doesnt really change, we dont have that much control over ourselves

i think u can at least give mbti the benefit of being accurate stereotyping, even if there is nothing to back it up

MasileinDE
International Star

MasileinDE wrote:

Pavlov wrote:

MasileinDE wrote:

Pavlov wrote:
honestly mbti is very stereotyped and im pretty sure thats not what it was originally for. its not for judging the superficial character of a person, its more a way to understand how a person works, what "cognetive functions" is a persons dominating ones, what does that person rely most on, their logic, or their values

well, it was created by a mother-daughter duo trying to find out if the boyfriend of the daughter would fit into the family based on ... "science"
that's about it
it really gets attributed way too much importance when there is no actual science backing it up other than two people being like "this is how we'd classify people"

but like I said, I for instance function on very different ways depending in what kind of situation I'm in. Depending on the hierarchal structures of the relationship I'm entertaining with said person (be it parents, friends, acquaintances, job related, uni related) I have different ways of reacting and going at things. I don't have a default and I doubt many people who live in similar societies like I do (that puts a great value on these hierarchies and you know "proper and respectful interaction being different depending on who you interact with"

have similar experiences.
maybe you could say that in a few of those instances people go against their innate feeling out of cultural peer pressure, but if it's so engrained you basically deny yourself for it, doesn't that in the end mean, that you bow to that rule and thus live by it?

i cant argue with you because i cant exactly disagree, i know mbti isnt real science, i just do it for fun

honestly, I can absolutely respect that, it's just fun, it's like finding your spirit animal or your soul colour (way to make a bunch of people mad at you Carmen), it's emotions and just finding joy in something
the moment I start to have a problem with is when people get so obsessed over it and start to command their whole lives around it and force others to participate, since it's such a big keystone to human nature, like ... no, you're just having an outlet for boredom, interest and maybe your emotions with it, that's about as deep as it gets

Pavlov
International Star

Pavlov wrote:

MasileinDE wrote:

Pavlov wrote:

MasileinDE wrote:
I am getting more and more confused by the minute and that despite deciding years ago that MBTI is armchair science at best and silently judging people who make it their whole character and need to type everyone (so, yeah, basically agreeing with the og post that it's just stupid to think you can run around type-ing people based on how they show themselves to the world)

i type you as a te user

I have no clue honestly
I did the 16personalities one for fun with a friend (and I know everyone who trusts in mbti thinks that's like the worst one you could take, but I'm seriously not paying for it) and that typed me as INTJ? but in all honesty, there's like at least two other categories that fit myself just as well when I think about all the things since a lot is really situational and not necessarily a "I'm always like this" thing, so hard to say

honestly i wouldnt even doubt you being an intj

Pavlov
International Star

Pavlov wrote:

MasileinDE wrote:

Pavlov wrote:
i type you as a te user

I have no clue honestly
I did the 16personalities one for fun with a friend (and I know everyone who trusts in mbti thinks that's like the worst one you could take, but I'm seriously not paying for it) and that typed me as INTJ? but in all honesty, there's like at least two other categories that fit myself just as well when I think about all the things since a lot is really situational and not necessarily a "I'm always like this" thing, so hard to say

honestly i wouldnt even doubt you being an intj

i take that back i dont conclude things this fast you might still be an isfp with a well developed te

MasileinDE
International Star

MasileinDE wrote:

Pavlov wrote:

Pavlov wrote:
i cant argue with you because i cant exactly disagree, i know mbti isnt real science, i just do it for fun

but i think you have misunderstood what mbti is about, everyone adapts to situations, but your preference for thinking/feeling, intuition/sensing doesnt really change, we dont have that much control over ourselves

i think u can at least give mbti the benefit of being accurate stereotyping, even if there is nothing to back it up

okay, that actually makes a bit of sense, but it also makes like 99% of all tests utter bullshit then

because the way those tests are constructed really doesn't reflect that
and I agree that it's a way of typeing people
but so would be classifying them by whether they are a cat or a dog person and I doubt it would have a deeper meaning than that
maybe I'm just decidedly too much anti-label at this point that that's where my main issues come from

like I get they can help to feel like you belong to a group of like-minded people and all, but the pressure to find a label that fits 100% when most of the labels are open to personal interpretation and don't mean the same for everyone who even uses the same label ... this is basically the beginning into my "why I don't like sexual orientation labels, let people just be themselves and it'll sort itself out" rant

MasileinDE
International Star

MasileinDE wrote:

Pavlov wrote:

MasileinDE wrote:
I have no clue honestly
I did the 16personalities one for fun with a friend (and I know everyone who trusts in mbti thinks that's like the worst one you could take, but I'm seriously not paying for it) and that typed me as INTJ? but in all honesty, there's like at least two other categories that fit myself just as well when I think about all the things since a lot is really situational and not necessarily a "I'm always like this" thing, so hard to say

honestly i wouldnt even doubt you being an intj

i take that back i dont conclude things this fast you might still be an isfp with a well developed te

I accept both at this point, like ... I don't think I'll ever put enough thought into it to really care what fits me best and what doesn't

Pavlov
International Star

Pavlov wrote:

MasileinDE wrote:

Pavlov wrote:

Pavlov wrote:
honestly i wouldnt even doubt you being an intj

i take that back i dont conclude things this fast you might still be an isfp with a well developed te

I accept both at this point, like ... I don't think I'll ever put enough thought into it to really care what fits me best and what doesn't

maybe this is the reason why there are so few people typed as intj, they just dont care

MasileinDE
International Star

MasileinDE wrote:

Pavlov wrote:

MasileinDE wrote:

Pavlov wrote:
i take that back i dont conclude things this fast you might still be an isfp with a well developed te

I accept both at this point, like ... I don't think I'll ever put enough thought into it to really care what fits me best and what doesn't

maybe this is the reason why there are so few people typed as intj, they just dont care

I've seen so many people type themselves intj though, so I don't know?
sometimes I feel like there's also a big hype around certain types, like a desirable type to achieve and then people just try to "be that", you know?
like as if one type of characteristics is better than the other, it's what you make out of it that decides if you're a good person or not or if you're fun to be around or not

Pavlov
International Star

Pavlov wrote:

MasileinDE wrote:

Pavlov wrote:

MasileinDE wrote:
I accept both at this point, like ... I don't think I'll ever put enough thought into it to really care what fits me best and what doesn't

maybe this is the reason why there are so few people typed as intj, they just dont care

I've seen so many people type themselves intj though, so I don't know?
sometimes I feel like there's also a big hype around certain types, like a desirable type to achieve and then people just try to "be that", you know?
like as if one type of characteristics is better than the other, it's what you make out of it that decides if you're a good person or not or if you're fun to be around or not

yes, intj, infj and infp seems to be very popular, i think something is wrong with the tests, and people generally just seem to like throwing around these types when theyre typing their favorite celebrities. oh well, but you seem pretty smart, its very much possible. you being critical of something because its not able to be proven with concrete evidence, over wanting to have your identity validated, would point to te being above fi. im still not concluding anything, but im curious now