It's funny how defensive hn and other parts of the internet are about being put in made-up 'no-evidence' /psuedoscience boxes....
yet everyone here completely understands the dozens of archetypes and human personality portraits invoked by hundreds of ever changing memes and meme-speak...
"don't be that guy" "tell me youre x without telling me ..." ms-paint wojacks, etc
I think people who's pattern recognition works great on classifying others in the private (read:petty) freedom of their own mind are also the exact brittle, neurotically vulnerable hypocrites bristling about other's pattern recognition seeing them... (I'm all the latter but embrace it lol)
The same crowd that loves quantified self and concrete "evidence" would hate to be seen as they are by actual tally of what they do and how their time is spent, or especially to have their most common interpersonal reactions categorized into a dozen buckets, of gut-reactions, core values, status stuff, etc.
Any whiff that someone has figured you out and hark, all of a sudden you contain multitudes! Meanwhile, developing advertising software to build ever more accurate portraits of consumer types...
MBTI is as useful as you make it, as are harry potter groups, memes, vibes, DSM-mental illness groups, shakespeare's tragedies, etc.
They work great if you put them to work, shrug. It's just a word-substrate to better deal with the intuitions you already have going on about people subconsciously.
meh, I guess I'd just much rather know exactly what stereotypes / impressions I invoke in others with my looks/identity markers (age sex race etc), behaviors, class mannerisms, aesthetics, posture etc.... and then take it from there if I don't like what I see in the mirror.
(seeing people seeing us is always a mirror i think)
Myers-Briggs provides 4 bits of information. If Myers-Briggs was astrology, then it should not be possible to build a classifier that could predict the results of a Myers-Briggs test based upon attributes of a person that are not self-reported. I highly doubt this is the case. And though you could argue that self-selection is involved, at the tech company I work at, a large informal poll revealed ~70% of engineers to be INTJ and ~20% INTP. Whether people like it or not, MBTI is at least predictive of something. Whether that something is useful for some other purpose is a different debate, but the types are certainly not uniformly randomly distributed.
yet everyone here completely understands the dozens of archetypes and human personality portraits invoked by hundreds of ever changing memes and meme-speak...
"don't be that guy" "tell me youre x without telling me ..." ms-paint wojacks, etc
I think people who's pattern recognition works great on classifying others in the private (read:petty) freedom of their own mind are also the exact brittle, neurotically vulnerable hypocrites bristling about other's pattern recognition seeing them... (I'm all the latter but embrace it lol)
The same crowd that loves quantified self and concrete "evidence" would hate to be seen as they are by actual tally of what they do and how their time is spent, or especially to have their most common interpersonal reactions categorized into a dozen buckets, of gut-reactions, core values, status stuff, etc.
Any whiff that someone has figured you out and hark, all of a sudden you contain multitudes! Meanwhile, developing advertising software to build ever more accurate portraits of consumer types...
MBTI is as useful as you make it, as are harry potter groups, memes, vibes, DSM-mental illness groups, shakespeare's tragedies, etc.
They work great if you put them to work, shrug. It's just a word-substrate to better deal with the intuitions you already have going on about people subconsciously.
meh, I guess I'd just much rather know exactly what stereotypes / impressions I invoke in others with my looks/identity markers (age sex race etc), behaviors, class mannerisms, aesthetics, posture etc.... and then take it from there if I don't like what I see in the mirror.
(seeing people seeing us is always a mirror i think)