World, Writing, Wealth discussion

I don't know whether it's science or pseudoscience and wikipedia seems undecided on the subject too, yet it gained some popularity. I remember some time ago certain employers were toying with the handwriting test before recruiting, which is probably gone by now. Maybe MBTI is just a fad or maybe it's in for a long term.
Have you encountered the requirement for the test/ taken one? Does the type describe you accurately or at least more than a zodiac sign? :)
Should be a worthy theme for the weekend.

I haven't had to take that test for a job, but I did take it at some point in the past. Probably had to do with my son's inpatient and outpatient treatment. While I looked it up, the current charge for the test online is about $50. I did a free sample type one out of curiosity. I was surprised at the results that they did give me for free.

I seem to be blended, leaning towards extravert, but pretty equal in thinking vs. feeling in my values. I use intuitive over sensing for cognition. My management of life is very strongly judging as compared perceiving (I like structure, rules, plans over whims). I didn't pay to unlock the full report, but I am sure I would find it interesting. My top 3 matches were The Teacher (ENFJ), The Commander (ENTJ), and the Provider (ESFJ).

As someone who had to hire and supervise people, I wouldn't want to use a test based on one's perceptions of one's self. I think the results can be very misleading. I would rather talk to a person and then choose to hire them or not.

I took the test and was identified as an introvert, which seems to fit. Anyone have a link to the test?

Scout wrote: "I took the test and was identified as an introvert, which seems to fit. Anyone have a link to the test?"

https://www.mbtionline.com/en-US/Prod...

Thanks, Lizzie :-) Don't know if I'm willing to pay $50, though.

Scout wrote: "Thanks, Lizzie :-) Don't know if I'm willing to pay $50, though."

I didn't. I just did the mini test for free. I created an account and did a free test somewhere recently. I think this was the place.

https://www.truity.com/test/type-find...

Another one that's supposed to be free: https://www.16personalities.com/
As far as I understand, it's only when one wants expanded results, it's a paid service.

Remember free means you and your data even email are the product.... These sites are not charities

I can already describe my personality. Annoyed. What do I need a test to tell me that because I already know?

I’ve taken the Test in different versions - I took the official test, Kiersey temperament sorted, 16 Personalities, and at least one other. I’m always an ENFP and I would be horrified if a potential employer knew my type. I love my current job and am a good fit so no worries there, but reading the write ups, I don’t feel as if some employers would look to favorably at my type.

Refresh my memory on ENFP. I'm guessing E is extrovert.

Introversion vs. Extraversion
Sensing vs. Intuition
Thinking vs. Feeling
Judging vs. Perceiving

The Champion. ENFPs are people-centered creators with a focus on possibilities and a contagious enthusiasm for new ideas, people and activities. Energetic, warm, and passionate, ENFPs love to help other people explore their creative potential

Scout wrote: "Refresh my memory on ENFP. I'm guessing E is extrovert."

Here are the descriptions of the 16 types.

https://www.truity.com/page/16-person...

I've done it twice and am quite emphatically an ENTP.

It's a kind of scientific astrology.

I took the tests posted by Nik and Lizzie. I'm told I'm an introvert, intuitive, feeling, teacher, counselor, healer. An assertive advocate, diplomat, with confident individualism. It does feel kind of like scientific astrology :-) I'd be interested in the results of others. Both tests were free.

https://www.truity.com/page/16-person...

https://www.16personalities.com/

The 16 personalities calls me a turbulent debater and that I think is very accurate.

I followed Papaphilly's lead and took the 16 personalities test. It calls me a protagonist. I think a lot of the more detailed description rings true but not all of it. V interesting.

Papaphilly wrote: "The 16 personalities calls me a turbulent debater and that I think is very accurate."

Apparently, I'm a logistician.

The description had a vague positivity which reminded me of a horoscope. A personality prone to preferring duty and order, so I have something in common with Albert Speer. If true, why do I feel such a strong hatred of autocracy?

I wonder if the test is unable to differentiate between personality traits and imposed behaviors. Could my use of Stoicism and Kantian Deontology as filters for my decisions be acting as a mask?

+1 for a reference to Stoicism and Kantian Deontology.

Graeme wrote: "+1 for a reference to Stoicism and Kantian Deontology."

It is often an education being part of this group.

I come out as "adventurer" and part of the description seems accurate, while another - not very. Anyhow - amusing :)

J. wrote: "Could my use of Stoicism and Kantian Deontology as filters for my decisions be acting as a mask?..."

I guess people often attempt to override some instincts or predisposition by imposing a different behavior. One can act bravely, while being terrified inside. Does it make one brave or cowardly? Not a psychologist, but a mask probably forms part of a persona.
Reminded me visiting Kant's grave in Kaliningrad sometime in eighties :)

Scout wrote: "I took the tests posted by Nik and Lizzie. I'm told I'm an introvert, intuitive, feeling, teacher, counselor, healer. An assertive advocate, diplomat, with confident individualism. It does feel kin..."

Well, that was fun. Having taken the MB eval years ago for my profession, it was interesting to learn nothing had changed, and the other eval offered additional insight, but pretty much the same conclusion. Learning aspects of my personality traits helped me better understand others. I used to think that everyone around me thought the same way I did, or should. But as a 'commander/ mastermind/ supervisor' type I realize it was my personality type that caused me to erroneously conclude such. Since learning more about my own personality traits, it has become easier to understand and appreciate others. My hubby and I are opposites, but we have learned to rely on one another's strengths. He is the detail person (scientist) and I am the big-picture person (economics). Learning to appreciate all types is integral to putting everyone to use at what they do best whether it be a workforce, marriage, or friendship.

Susan wrote: "My hubby and I are opposites, but we have learned to rely on one another's strengths. He is the detail person (scientist) and I am the big-picture person (economics)...."

Sounds like a perfect symbiosis of personalities!

Nik wrote: "Susan wrote: "My hubby and I are opposites, but we have learned to rely on one another's strengths. He is the detail person (scientist) and I am the big-picture person (economics)...."

Sounds like..."

Well... that didn't come about easily, but, yes, after a few years we eventually turned ourselves into a well-functioning unit that accomplishes far more than either of us would or could without the other. We've also learned to really appreciate the other's strengths relative to our own weakness.

I took it again tonight. The percentages change a little but essentially the first 2 were the same (teacher and commander) but the 3rd one they offered is now counselor instead of provider.

Nik wrote: "J. wrote: "Could my use of Stoicism and Kantian Deontology as filters for my decisions be acting as a mask?..."

I guess people often attempt to override some instincts or predisposition by imposin..."

While taking the tests, I sometimes found it difficult to answer definitively. Are you more or less assertive, empathetic, logical, emotional? It all depends on the circumstances, and they're nuanced. A yes or no or something in between doesn't say it all, so the test results are an approximation, not definitive. I don't guess they pretend to be.

Scout wrote: "Nik wrote: "J. wrote: "Could my use of Stoicism and Kantian Deontology as filters for my decisions be acting as a mask?..."

I guess people often attempt to override some instincts or predispositio..."

I go through this all the time. Everything is so in the moment.

I’ve taken a few different tests over the years, solely for fun, and always get ESTJ (Executive) or ISTJ (Inspector). That just shows that I’m an ambivert.

I can say they’re accurate trait-wise, but I can relate to at least three or four other letter combinations as well. To describe the whole population by giving them four traits is ridiculous.

Furthermore, the “relationship” articles and forums surrounding the whole MBTI business are quite outrageous. I met someone a few years back who told me she didn’t date men who had a MBTI type that her’s ‘didn’t get along with well’ according to a website she used. What nonsense is that?

Friendships and partnerships can work out many ways and the people in them can be as similar or different as can be, yet be perfect for each other or at each other’s throats. People have many more layers than “introverted” and “extroverted, “judging” or “perceiving,” etc. I’m sure there are thousands of people who get the same result yet are completely different from one another in real life.

I also find it interesting how my supposed ‘perfect match’ is the standard ESFP, also referred to as the ‘dreamer’ or ‘entertainer.’ I’m not saying I’m proud of it, but I could never last in a long-term relationship with a ‘free-spirited, vibrant’ person, whether friend or partner. I have little tolerance for my polar-opposites.

So with all of that, these tests may be fun to take (or complain about in my instance), but don’t look too far into them. There are more than sixteen personalities on this planet.

I just read an article on how people select partners who look like them. But there was also the idea that people grow to look like their partners over time. What do you think?

Madeline wrote: "I also find it interesting how my supposed ‘perfect match’ is the standard ESFP, also referred to as the ‘dreamer’ or ‘entertainer.’ I’m not saying I’m proud of it, but I could never last in a long-term relationship with a ‘free-spirited, vibrant’ person, whether friend or partner. I have little tolerance for my polar-opposites. ..."

Once you find the one, it'll be interesting to have this person take a test, if you'd like to share :)

Scout wrote: "... there was also the idea that people grow to look like their partners over time. What do you think?"

Yes, many of us are more clay than basalt and prone to adapt even in likelihood to the immediate near

Nik wrote: "Madeline wrote: "I also find it interesting how my supposed ‘perfect match’ is the standard ESFP, also referred to as the ‘dreamer’ or ‘entertainer.’ I’m not saying I’m proud of it, but I could nev..."

Haha, my fiancé took it and he got ISFJ, so I believe that will be the answer.

Scout wrote: "I just read an article on how people select partners who look like them. But there was also the idea that people grow to look like their partners over time. What do you think?"

Hmm, I find that interesting. I do believe the first part of that may be accurate for some. The main evidence being race. Over 90% of current marriages in the US are between those of the same race. Now whether that’s from individuals attraction or societal influence, I’m not sure.

Not sure about the second part. I’d be curious to see the evidence within that. I know there was a study a few years ago about how pets tend to look like their owners... Not sure how that would work but who knows.

Not sure about "look like" - especially their pets. My cat still looks very cat-like :-)

More generally, with behaviour I think partners have to grow together or a break-up is inevitable. Of course there will be differences, but each has to learn to tolerate the other.

After some of these discussions, I looked more into compatibility in relationships.

Overall what I found is that opposites don’t (tend to) attract. People with similar personalities tend to get along better with each other.
-https://www.gsb.stanford.edu/insights...
-https://www.businessinsider.com/why-o...


And as for the ‘look-alike’ studies, here’s what I’ve found:
-https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/bl...
-https://meetology.com/attracted-peopl...

I also found it interesting how most of these studies go interchangeably for friends and partners.

Couples tend to look alike because one member is doing the clothes shopping for both of them.

If you want to see something weird and sad, watch the underwear aisle at a clothing store. There's a good chance that you'll find a confused man looking at different packages of jockey shorts. This guy hasn't bought his own clothes in years. Consequently he doesn't know what size he wears. He's debating whether to check the pair that he's wearing.

J. wrote: "Couples tend to look alike because one member is doing the clothes shopping for both of them.

If you want to see something weird and sad, watch the underwear aisle at a clothing store. There's a g..."

In my case, Claire (my wife) did a lot of clothes shopping because she worked out how to get discounts for bulk buying, but I do know my waste size :-) I was quite happy with underclothes, etc because I hated shopping, but I needed to get my own outer clothes.

Madeline, thanks for those links about "look-alike" studies. They're saying what I read, that we're attracted to people who look like us or a close family member - and that people who are together for a long time may begin to look similar. I'm reminded of a practice in the Old South in which cousins would marry. Ashley Wilkes in Gone With the Wind married his distant cousin Melanie.