Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum
Colonel Rebel

Personality Types (Myer-Briggs)

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

I'm an INTJ as well. Interesting story behind that as well. I stumbled upon the test one day, took it, and the results said I was in the same category as Ayn Rand. A friend of mine had always gone on about how great her books and philosophy were, so I finally got curious enough to check it out. And lo and behold- I'm here today! :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I took it a couple of months ago and got an ISTJ. My preference scores were:

I - 5/70 or 7%

S - 9/70 or 13%

T - 61/70 or 87%

J - 31/70 or 44%

I too remember many of the questions being crap. And, to the poster who wondered earlier (if he is still around), I am an S and a "decided" atheist, unless you used the word "decided" to mean something drastically different from what I think you mean.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
what do you mean?

I'm thinking that because you see them as a false alternative...that the once you chose were rational and logical. INTJ, possibly. who knows?

one question that bothered me was (something like this) do you base decisions on

conceptual v. experiential?

for me this seemed like a false alternative becuase my concepts are built on experiences.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have taken this test several times since 1998, and I have scored alternately as an INTJ, INTP, and INFJ.

With respect to Ayn Rand being classified as an INTJ by Jung typology psychologist David R. Keirsey, Jr. (whose "Keirsey Temperament Sorter" was alluded to in the 1999 remake of The Haunting), I have not come across any evidence of Ayn Rand taking the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. I suspect that what really happened is just that Dr. Keirsey liked Ayn Rand's books and thought she and her protagonists were good examples of "NT Rationals," hence his references to Miss Rand on his website and in both editions of his book Please Understand Me.

In other words, Dr. Keirsey is probably just inferring that Ayn Rand was an INTJ. Some other MBTI expert might surmise that she was an INTP.

You may notice that Dr. Keirsey's assessment of John F. Kennedy, Sr., conflicts with that of other MBTI experts. Dr. Keirsey classifies JFK as an "ESTP" while TypeLogic.Com says he was an INTJ. That's a three-letter difference.

I suspect that one reason why people often say, "This test has accurately described me" is that it loaded with compliments and several generalities. When the test describes someone as "independent," what is the likelihood that this person will say, "No, I'm a blind conformist"?

This reminds me of an experiment that magician James Randi conducted. He told a college class to submit certain bits of information about their birthdays to an astrologer. The astrologer then made a personalized reading of each student and put each student's reading in a envelope with the individual student's name on it. Then, all in the same class session, Randi passed each student his or her envelope and had them read their personalized horoscope right then and there. Randi then said, "If this psychic reading of your personality is very accurate and specific, raise your hand." Everyone in the class did. Randi then said, "All right, now everyone pass your horoscope to the person behind you. Those of you in the back row will pass your horoscope to the person in the front row."

It turned out that everyone received the exact same horoscope reading, word-for-word. When reporter John Stossel re-did this experiment, he also revealed to the class that the "personalized reading" they received was actually done for an executed murderer.

Randi explained that everyone in the class thought the horoscope was so accurate because it spoke in terms of certain generalities, like, "You feel that you're not living up to your full potential."

I have an idea for a double-blind experiment testing the accuracy of the MBTI. I don't know much about what people have done in psychology, so I'm not sure if such a test has not already been performed.

Anyway, this is my suggestion. You have two randomly-sampled groups of people, and, in each group, each person takes the MBTI and then receives his or her personalized results. No test-taker in any group may discuss his or her results with anyone else. Anyhow, upon receiving his or her results, the test-taker must then rate the accuracy of the test on a scale from 1 to 10, 10 being "perfectly accurate."

In the control group, each test-taker receives the correct results. If you come out as an INTJ, then you will receive a description of an INTJ.

In the experimental group, however, each test-taker will receive results that have two wrong letters. If the test-taker gets an INTJ score, then he or she will get the results for an ENTP, INFP, ISTP, or ENFJ. Of course, this test-taker will be told that these are his or her actual results.

If the MBTI is reliable in measuring your personality, then the control group should noticeably be ranking its results, on average, as more reliable than the experimental group's.

Of course, even then, a criticism of the MBTI can be made on the grounds that the test is merely "telling" you what you have already told the test.

As woolcutt, also an Oo.net member, observed to me, many of the test questions are like this:

"Are you:

"(1) A synonym for Introverted?

"(2) A synonym for Extroverted?"

If you often pick answers that are a synonym for "Introvert," should it be surprising that that MBTI ends up telling you that you're an introvert?

What do you think?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've taken the test on different sites many times and gotten different results, INTJ being the most common and most accurate (I know myself better than they do). Curiously enough, I got my best friend to take it on every site that I did and his results varied too, albiet in the coolest way. On every site we both got results that told us we're very very compatible as friends, even with the switching types. I think this is the only accurate part of that test.

I couldn't take it again now, every single question seems to be a false dichotomy and it would kill me to answer one or the other.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I too have taken this a few times. When I was younger I was an Architect INTP but after I got older and got in to Objectivism I seem to be an INTJ. Most recent score:

I=33

N=62

T=75

J=78

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I taken various versions of the test at times when I was bored, and always end up with a score of INTP or INTJ.

Edited by EC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nobody likes my idea from Post #54 of this thread proposing a double-blind experiment to test the veracity of the Myers-Briggs Type Indictator? ;)
The experiment would tell us if the Indicator is making explicit what the subject is thinking about himself or if it is like an "astrology" prediction where any prediction fits anyone. Right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The experiment would tell us if the Indicator is making explicit what the subject is thinking about himself or if it is like an "astrology" prediction where any prediction fits anyone. Right?

That's correct. If, in a double-blind study, I rate as an INTJ but am unknowingly given the results for an ESTJ and find them just as accurate, then human resources-types are probably mistaken in believing that this test tells them much about anyone's personality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ENFP....but then, I'm not Objectivist. Also, I took this test about a week before signing up for this account. I had to dig through my LJ to find it.

At any rate, most people look at this test the entirely wrong way. It's based on Carl Jung's archetypes, this is true, however when Jung speaks about Archetypes it is not the same as "Personality Type". Archetypes are stable, people are not. What the test is really measuring is a state of being in the moment you are taking the test. You probably won't jump from INTP to ENFJ every five minutes unless you're very emotionally unstable, but your "result" is likely to change over time.

Also, the descriptions of each "type" vary from site to site.

I see all the proof I need to know there is some validity to the test right here. All of you had a form of NT personality...or, almost all (and mostly rather similar). This is not surprising because Rand dictates a certain brand of psychology and philosophy...and since you all, or almost all, buy into her ideas your perspectives will be similar. Especially if you are focusing on them while taking the test. Though, as there is some validity I would NEVER suggest using it to hire people. Jung's idea of archetypes doesn't exactly match employers' ideas of how to hire.

The test questions are intentionally vague, by the way, in order to force you to choose instinctively. Letting your unconsious mind do the work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a topic that has intrigued me for a long time. Especially because I am a very strong "F", who through objectivism, lives a life in the "T" zone.

I am very much an objectivist, but despite the common MBPT for Objectivists, I am an INFP....

I have done elaborate research in the Myers-Briggs personality tests, and find them fascinating and accurate. I love "people-watching" and trying to guess what people's types are. No, I agree, you can't always pigeon-hole people into a certain personality, but some of these traits are so obvious in SOME people, it's hard to ignore.(I am one of those people that you can't deny the description, as I am such an extreme INFP on all accounts, yet I am an objectivist with a heart, as I like to say.)

The idealistic side of me wants to find a way to help other people "see the light" to Objectivism, but at the same time, my "F" peers think I am cold and callous for adopting my views. Meanwhile, those same traits make it hard for me to identify with many objectivists, because I have a hard time articulating my thoughts, because they have become co-mingled with my "F"eelings.

I have always thought it would be cool to use my "F" ness (that's my feeling side) to help connect to other "F"s to help recruit objectivism. But perhaps it is a hopeless cause. But then again, I was converted from being a radical lefty, to objectivism myself...sigh....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have done elaborate research in the Myers-Briggs personality tests, and find them fascinating and accurate. I love "people-watching" and trying to guess what people's types are. No, I agree, you can't always pigeon-hole people into a certain personality, but some of these traits are so obvious in SOME people, it's hard to ignore.(I am one of those people that you can't deny the description, as I am such an extreme INFP on all accounts, yet I am an objectivist with a heart, as I like to say.

Interestingly, the people in my family that I've asked to take the test have found it to be pretty accurate. I got Keirsey's book Please Understand Me II where it goes into greater depth on the subject. The book says that my girlfriend and I are a great match personality wise. She's an ENFJ and I'm INTJ - the book was great because it makes me understand my benefits and shortfalls in our relationship as well as hers. For instance, INTJs tend to be colder in relationships and ENFJs seek warmth; I wouldn't have figured out on my own that this was one of our problems six months into the relationship. Identifing the issue at hand has led to a better, stronger relationship.

My parents took the online test as well and it matches them to a tee. They thought it was scary, LoL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm an INTJ also.

I really don't see much of a problem with the test's dichotomies. As I undertood it, they are meant to be viewed in the "more this then that" way rather then "either this or that". Over the course of a large enough group of questions phrased in slightly different ways it is more likely to be accurate representation of you. If I remember right in 'please understand me' he even recommends taking the test among several people who know you well to avoid answering based on how you feel right then as opposed to how you behave generally.

My first hand experience with it has been that it is useful in learning how to deal with different sorts of folk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

INTJ, like most.

Interestingly, I took a business course in ellicitation techniques a few years ago. The instructor was ex-intelligence (CIA, or military, I believe). He told us that the military has looked at many different types of personality profiles, and found only one to be a priori predicitive of a person's behavior (i.e. given someones type, one can make somewhat accurately predictions about how they might react in future situations).

This doesn't make the system fundamentally correct, but empirically useful. Up until then I had though these mostly parlor games, but that was an interesting comment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
INTJ, like most.

Interestingly, I took a business course in ellicitation techniques a few years ago. The instructor was ex-intelligence (CIA, or military, I believe). He told us that the military has looked at many different types of personality profiles, and found only one to be a priori predicitive of a person's behavior (i.e. given someones type, one can make somewhat accurately predictions about how they might react in future situations).

This doesn't make the system fundamentally correct, but empirically useful. Up until then I had though these mostly parlor games, but that was an interesting comment.

I don't follow exactly...was meyers briggs what the military favors or some other test?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't follow exactly...was meyers briggs what the military favors or some other test?

Woops, didn't tell you did I. Yes, it was Myers-Briggs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok here is an interesting one. I am a "P."

Or you could call me an ELSNTFP. I scores straight down the middel on EL, SN, and TF.

The test actually accounts for these ties. It says, whatever the average is for society, you get the opposite. As a result I am an ENTP.

I think its funny when people talk about these tests and say "I am xxxx" (like I just did). That negates the entire point of the test.

The MBTI Type Self-Assessment test only tells you what your "preference" is when there is basically no external stimuli. It does nto say what you will do in any particular situation. In other words, if you have to think on your feet or do something that is not part of your "type" you will do it as the situation dictates, not as your "type" dictates.

In other words. You have a "Tendency" to be xxxx, but in any given situation, you can adapt and go the other way.

Oh yeah, when you take the test in person, they tell you "The test points you in a direction. You decide if it makes sense for you or not." In other words, sometimes it works, sometimes it doesnt.

I also recognized many contradictions in the test. I can't recall any now though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...