Opinion of the Myers–Briggs Type Indicator

[they don't love you like i love you]

It's amazing how frequently I see this cited here.

This system and any associated tests are COMPLETE bullsh!t. It has no scientific basis whatsoever. Myers and Briggs were a mother/daughter pair who had no scientific education of any type and were only known for...writing murder mysteries. They found a paper from influential psychologist Carl Jung that divided people into 8 personality types, except Jung himself even wrote that this was NOT a scientific analysis and just his own personal musings...despite that they decided to expand on it and doubled the categories to 16, trying to fit everyone they knew in those 16 categories...and somehow it was picked up.

It's basically the 40s equivalent of a Buzzfeed quiz. It has ZERO scientific merit.

[Mr. Morden]

It's not really relevant to me whether it's scientific or not, since I'm not using it to do science.  The INTP description offers a pretty good description of how I think, so it's a useful shorthand to be able to give to other people who are familiar with Myers-Briggs types, if I want to offer a brief sketch of my personality to someone.  Is that so wrong? 

[This account no longer in use.]

I never thought I'd agree with BTRD, but here we are

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

It's not really relevant to me whether it's scientific or not, since I'm not using it to do science.  The INTP ISTJ description offers a pretty good description of how I think, so it's a useful shorthand to be able to give to other people who are familiar with Myers-Briggs types, if I want to offer a brief sketch of my personality to someone.  Is that so wrong? 

[Santander]

Buzzfeed quizzes? Are you living in 2013?

But of course they are total bs. The descriptions are written like romcom screenplays - they're just vague enough to be relatable to everyone and just personal enough so you see yourself in it.

Like a romcom, it can be a bit of fun, but that's about all it's good for.

[RFayette]

I mean, it's not something you should take too seriously, but it does provide a decent descriptor of what basic qualities can be.  We all know what "INTJ" is talking about, even if the way the classifications were determined is based on shoddy methodology. 

[parochial boy]

Yeah, it's absolute trash, it just feeds into people's obsessive desires to classify themselves in every way possible - even when said classification is completely meaningless.

See the way the people's PM scores are taken so, so seriously on this site.

[Goldwater]

An amusing waste of time, like most things in life, though most things in life aren't really amusing I suppose...

[SWE]

BRTD do you by any chance watch Adam Ruins Everything?

[Unapologetic Chinaperson]

I never thought I'd agree with BTRD, but here we are

[Mr. Smith]

Buzzfeed quizzes? Are you living in 2013?

But of course they are total bs. The descriptions are written like romcom screenplays - they're just vague enough to be relatable to everyone and just personal enough so you see yourself in it.

Like a romcom, it can be a bit of fun, but that's about all it's good for.

[Xing]

Very problematic, since personality is not fixed, and can't be defined using four pairs of descriptors. Sure, some people might tend towards introversion, but how introverted they are in a given moment will likely depend on many different factors. Also, many people really are somewhere in the middle.

[they don't love you like i love you]

BRTD do you by any chance watch Adam Ruins Everything?

Yes. I also read Vox.

[publicunofficial]

I think it's fun in the same way astrology is fun.