The Myers-Briggs Personality Test

[Chukchi Husky]

EI: 14 out of 17
Extrovert |-------------------------------------------------| Introvert
|
82%
SN: 9 out of 17
Sensation |-------------------------------------------------| iNtuition
|
52%
TF: 14 out of 17
Thinking |-------------------------------------------------| Feeling
|
82%
JP: 10 out of 17
Judging |-------------------------------------------------| Perceiving
|
58%

 

[Till]

Here is the last thread. I just retook the test and ended up with ISFJ again.
Still don't agree with the description at all.

 

[Grisu]

I got INFP too

 

[IglooDame]

ISTJ for me, 82% "I" and ~40% each STJ.

 

[Azash]

ENTP, hovering around the 50, except for the last which was 80%.

 

[The Last Conformist]

Cool, I was almost that. But when forced to choose between reason and emotion I went with reason cause I figure emotion is just a tool of reason (not in a bad way, actually it's an excellent motavator, kind of like sex or being sleepy).

I've always rather seen reason as a tool for fulfilling emotional needs.

 

[Sidhe]

I've always rather seen reason as a tool for fulfilling emotional needs.

That's where your going wrong, reason is a tool to acquire needs without resorting to emotion. Thus their oposition on the chart. Unless you mean being manipulating situations into meeting an emotional need, usually people let emotion rule when doing that. So I might cry to get attention, or I might angrily yell to provoke a reaction. I could however tell someone that I need a big hug, thus avoiding the need to cry at all or you could just say I am wrong I'm sorry(yes people it is actually possible to admit your wrong and still maintain the higher moral ground ) Thus avoiding the need to argue in the first place and thus avoiding the resultant emotion. I hope that makes sense because I've just confused myself

Anyway I think the point is that if your highly emotional then your not being reasonable, which is something you can most often find in an argument with a woman(and to some extent men) if it's not to controversial once someone loses there cool, then reason takes a back seat.

 

[kingjoshi]

I can't even answer the first three questions.

1. Are you more satisfied
    * with a public role
    * working "behind-the-scenes" 
2. Do you tend to
    * rely on past experiences
    * trust your hunches 
3. In social situations you
    * find it easy to communicate
    * are more of a listener than a speaker

Doesn't it depend upon the situation? I don't know how to answer them. I'm a screwed up individual..

 

[The Last Conformist]

That's where your going wrong, reason is a tool to acquire needs without resorting to emotion. Thus their oposition on the chart. Unless you mean being manipulating situations into meeting an emotional need, usually people let emotion rule when doing that. So I might cry to get attention, or I might angrily yell to provoke a reaction. I could however tell someone that I need a big hug, thus avoiding the need to cry at all or you could just say I am wrong I'm sorry(yes people it is actually possible to admit your wrong and still maintain the higher moral ground ) Thus avoiding the need to argue in the first place and thus avoiding the resultant emotion. I hope that makes sense because I've just confused myself

You lost me at the first sentence. A tool to acquire needs? I don't need to think to need food, security, company, etc.

Anyway I think the point is that if your highly emotional then your not being reasonable, which is something you can most often find in an argument with a woman(and to some extent men) if it's not to controversial once someone loses there cool, then reason takes a back seat.

Whatever I am, I'm not a highly emotional person. Not that I see what this has to do with what I said.

 

[Sidhe]

You lost me at the first sentence. A tool to acquire needs? I don't need to think to need food, security, company, etc.

Whatever I am, I'm not a highly emotional person. Not that I see what this has to do with what I said.

Well if you have emotional needs the unfortunate thing is that emotion actually clouds your ability to reason, and reason reduces your reliance on emotion. that's why they are opposed, it means the questions are asking what sort of person you are and not your opinion, if your using logic to answer a question like that and are not basing it on personal experience, your missing the point of the question. If I reason away out of a dangerous situation I will feal less scared. If I panic I will do something completely without reason which also might work. Reason is emotion bane and vise a versa. And so if it is a tool to fullfill your emotional needs your talking only in a long term context because when you actually have those emotional needs I.e you strongly crave attention, it effects your reason, thus the original point and the point you replied too are pretty irrlevant really I think. I've forgotten what I was thinking about when I first read the post. Oh yeah ? i remember now. K

In your case I would imagine you mean you preempt emotional needs using reason, but then that's kind of beside the point.

 

[The Last Conformist]

Well if you have emotional needs the unfortunate thing is that emotion actually clouds your ability to reason, and reason reduces your reliance on emotion. that's why they are opposed, it means the questions are asking what sort of person you are and not your opinion, if your using logic to answer a question like that and are not basing it on personal experience, your missing the point of the question.

I'm not discussing the test, I'm saying that reason is the servant of emotion, not the other way round as Narz implied.

If I reason away out of a dangerous situation I will feal less scared.

That's a textbook case of using reason to fulfill an emotional need.


The basic point is this; emotions give us motivations - goals we strive for, needs to be fulfilled. Reason is merely one of the available tools to pursue these emotional motives, not a separate source of motivation.

 

[Mirc]

I usually don't believe in such tests.

 

[Sidhe]

I'm not discussing the test, I'm saying that reason is the servant of emotion, not the other way round as Narz implied.
That's a textbook case of using reason to fulfill an emotional need.


The basic point is this; emotions give us motivations - goals we strive for, needs to be fulfilled. Reason is merely one of the available tools to pursue these emotional motives, not a separate source of motivation.

well that's the point he was discussing the test and you turned it around with something that went off at a tangent, that's why it appeared odd? that's all.

I usually don't believe in such tests.

I never believe in any of the tests, the mere thought that a test can get any sort of insight into the complexity of the human mind or it's behaviour, when the whole human mind is a complete mystery is by far the most preposterous invention of the 20th century. Tests are fun nothing more nothing less, they give a shallow indication of your general outlook or intelligence or artistic talent or whatever. It would take years to come up with a complete psychological profile of someone(it's called friendship by the way ) and even then it's pretty dynamic and pretty innacurate. If you want psychological insight go study psychology or get someone to study you(a shrink)

 

[Mirc]

Yes, you are perfectly right.

 

[Dr. Yoshi]

INTP here:

INTPs lack follow-through and this can isolate their ideas from practical examination. Their notions become over-intellectualized and too abstract to be of practical benefit. With their sharp critical thinking and analytical abilities, INTPs tend to nit-pick, hair-split, and generally overdo simple issues. Their desire for accuracy and precision exacerbates any error they may perceive in themselves or in others — they are, in other words, highly self-critical. Wanting to be competent and know everything, their standards grow increasingly higher. When fear of failing becomes overly pronounced, INTPs are quick to feel unintelligent, slow, and powerless.

If stress continues, the INTP's mind seems to freeze and block out the vital information it has worked so hard to accumulate. Their creative juices stop flowing and they suffer from stage fright, writers block, and a general inhibition of their ingenious thinking and fluent language skills. Preoccupied with performance failure, INTPs become self-consciously distracted in anticipation of their failure. If the stress becomes too overwhelming, the fear of blanking out prevents them from taking risks in areas they desire to succeed in. Attempting to avoid incompetence, they fail to gain the expertise and mastery they so desperately need.
Careers

This lists represent careers and jobs people of your type tend to enjoy doing. The job requirements are similar to the personality tendencies of your personality type. It is important to remember that this is not a list of all the jobs possible. And it is very important to remember that people can, and frequently do, fill jobs that are dissimilar to their personality... this happens all the time...and sometimes works out quite well.

strategic planning
writer
staff development
lawyer
architect
software designer
financial analyst
college professor
photographer
logician
artist
systems analyst
neurologist
physicist
psychologist
research/development...specialist
computer programmer
data base manager
chemist
biologist
investigator

 

[kingjoshi]

I'm not going to speak on the veracity of this test, but it's foolish to go to the extreme of undervaluing the worth of psychology tests. Statistics show the value of random sampling 1K people to determine the thoughts of 300M. If you don't agree with the math of statistics, feel free to study the topic and disprove what's been done.

We don't know all about the brain, but there is A LOT you can infer with bits of data. You're using your ignorance on this topic to support a foolish belief system.

 

[Sidhe]

I'm not going to speak on the veracity of this test, but it's foolish to go to the extreme of undervaluing the worth of psychology tests. Statistics show the value of random sampling 1K people to determine the thoughts of 300M. If you don't agree with the math of statistics, feel free to study the topic and disprove what's been done.

We don't know all about the brain, but there is A LOT you can infer with bits of data. You're using your ignorance on this topic to support a foolish belief system.

I'm not talking about statisitics I'm talking about a psychological or emotional or intelectual evaluation of a single person, it's popycock, can't be done with a test. If it could then Psychologists would be out of buisness. Using a small sample to represent a big one is not in any way what I was talking about.

 

[Heretic_Cata]

Personality type results

EI: 15 out of 17
Extrovert |-------------------------------------------------| Introvert
|
88%
SN: 11 out of 17
Sensation |-------------------------------------------------| iNtuition
|
64%
TF: 8 out of 17
Thinking |-------------------------------------------------| Feeling
|
47%
JP: 6 out of 17
Judging |-------------------------------------------------| Perceiving
|
35%
Your Personality type is INTJ

To this i agree. (but why didn't the copy paste work properly those indicators don't point corectly)

INTJ: "Scientist". Most self-confident and pragmatic of all the types. Decisions come very easily. These are the most independent of all types. They love logic and ideas and are drawn to scientific research. They can be rather single-minded, though.. 1% of the total population.

But this is just bu** **it - "self-confident" yea...right. "Descisions come very easily"????? What a waste of time.

 

[kingjoshi]

I'm not talking about statisitics I'm talking about a psychological or emotional or intelectual evaluation of a single person, it's popycock, can't be done with a test. If it could then Psychologists would be out of buisness. Using a small sample to represent a big one is not in any way what I was talking about.

A test doesn't have to be completely accurate to have worth. If it is right on most of the questions in regards to most of the people that take the test, then it has a lot of value.

Yes, there are exceptions. When someone takes an IQ, test, they could just feel pressured, not have gotten enough sleep, etc. But IQ tests have been mostly consistent for decades. If someone takes it at age 2, 10, 20 and 40, there is minimal variation. The test has shown that consistency. It does a good job of evaluating visual, spatial and logical intellectual capabilities.

Of course the complexity of our intelligence is more than we can measure. Much less figure out how to enhance or even use that knowledge of the person's strengths and weaknesses wisely.

There have been other tests devised to learn about other factors. Just because we can't "fix" people or whatever doesn't mean we can't figure out a lot of information about them.

Using a good random sampling (the questions on the test) can be indicative of how that person will feel when the questions are extrapolated. Sure, we can't capture the full complexity of the person or life, but that doesn't eliminate the value of the test. Beyond entertainment.

 

[kingjoshi]

To this i agree. (but why didn't the copy paste work properly those indicators don't point corectly)

HTML doesn't recognize multiple spaces. You have to put the "code" tags to recognizes spaces.

But this is just bu** **it - "self-confident" yea...right. "Descisions come very easily"????? What a waste of time.

You seem pretty confident about that disagreement. And you came to that conclusion fairly quickly I assume. Maybe they're right more then you are willing to admit