|
|
| Whats your personality type (MB) |
|
superstar4410
Member #926
January 2001
|
Good see to we at back to the OP. Wow my friend u got an extremely high score on the introverted part. Your sensing score was pretty high too. A detailed expliantion for those looking at their scores (source wikipedia) Functions: Sensing (S)/Intuition (N) and Thinking (T)/Feeling (F) Jung identified two pairs of psychological functions: Sensing and intuition are the information-gathering (perceiving) functions. They describe how new information is understood and interpreted. Individuals who prefer sensing are more likely to trust information that is in the present, tangible and concrete: that is, information that can be understood by the five senses. They tend to distrust hunches, which seem to come "out of nowhere."[1]:2 They prefer to look for details and facts. For them, the meaning is in the data. On the other hand, those who prefer intuition tend to trust information that is more abstract or theoretical, that can be associated with other information (either remembered or discovered by seeking a wider context or pattern). They may be more interested in future possibilities. They tend to trust those flashes of insight that seem to bubble up from the unconscious mind. The meaning is in how the data relates to the pattern or theory. Thinking and feeling are the decision-making (judging) functions. The thinking and feeling functions are both used to make rational decisions, based on the data received from their information-gathering functions (sensing or intuition). Those who prefer thinking tend to decide things from a more detached standpoint, measuring the decision by what seems reasonable, logical, causal, consistent and matching a given set of rules. Those who prefer feeling tend to come to decisions by associating or empathizing with the situation, looking at it 'from the inside' and weighing the situation to achieve, on balance, the greatest harmony, consensus and fit, considering the needs of the people involved. As noted already, people who prefer thinking do not necessarily, in the everyday sense, "think better" than their feeling counterparts; the opposite preference is considered an equally rational way of coming to decisions (and, in any case, the MBTI assessment is a measure of preference, not ability). Similarly, those who prefer feeling do not necessarily have "better" emotional reactions than their thinking counterparts. Dominant Function According to Myers and Briggs, people use all four cognitive functions. However, one function is generally used in a more conscious and confident way. This dominant function is supported by the secondary (auxiliary) function, and to a lesser degree the tertiary function. The fourth and least conscious function is always the opposite of the dominant function. Myers called this inferior function the shadow.[1]:84 The four functions operate in conjunction with the attitudes (extraversion and introversion). Each function is used in either an extraverted or introverted way. A person whose dominant function is extraverted intuition, for example, uses intuition very differently from someone whose dominant function is introverted intuition. Lifestyle: Judgment (J)/Perception (P) Myers and Briggs held that types with a preference for judgment show the world their preferred judging function (thinking or feeling). So TJ types tend to appear to the world as logical, and FJ types as empathetic. According to Myers,[1]:75 judging types like to "have matters settled." Those types who prefer perception show the world their preferred perceiving function (sensing or intuition). So SP types tend to appear to the world as concrete and NP types as abstract. According to Myers,[1]:75 perceptive types prefer to "keep decisions open." ************************************************* Don't take yourself too seriously, but do take your responsibilities very seriously. |
|
van_houtte
Member #11,605
January 2010
|
Your Type is ----- Sometimes you may have to send 3-4 messages |
|
superstar4410
Member #926
January 2001
|
Thanks for sharing Van, your numbers are pretty low which seems to be very good. Don't take yourself too seriously, but do take your responsibilities very seriously. |
|
Bob Keane
Member #7,342
June 2006
|
Superstar4410 said: Your sensing score was pretty high too. I'm not sensitive! ML, Superstar4410 is making fun of me! Make him stop. The introverted part is what I expected, maybe a little low, but the sensitivity part is a surprise. By reading this sig, I, the reader, agree to render my soul to Bob Keane. I, the reader, understand this is a legally binding contract and freely render my soul. |
|
superstar4410
Member #926
January 2001
|
Making fun of you?? Nah, ask Bam, if I was you would see the L , O, Lss Don't take yourself too seriously, but do take your responsibilities very seriously. |
|
Johan Halmén
Member #1,550
September 2001
|
I'd love if the test page would try to guess my astrologic sign, too. According to modern astrology, I'm a Scorpio, but I feel more like a Libra. And Libra I would be, if the astrologists really care where on the sky Sun actually were when I was born. But they don't. But that's off topic. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Years of thorough research have revealed that what people find beautiful about the Mandelbrot set is not the set itself, but all the rest. |
|
m c
Member #5,337
December 2004
|
INTJ, like most im guessing? (\ /) |
|
Arthur Kalliokoski
Second in Command
February 2005
|
Johan Halmén said: I'd love if the test page would try to guess my astrologic sign, too. According to modern astrology, I'm a Scorpio, but I feel more like a Libra. And Libra I would be, if the astrologists really care where on the sky Sun actually were when I was born. But they don't. But that's off topic. http://science.slashdot.org/story/11/01/15/1623259/Stars-Remain-In-Their-Usual-Places-People-Panic They all watch too much MSNBC... they get ideas. |
|
Tobias Dammers
Member #2,604
August 2002
|
Johan Halmén said: I'd love if the test page would try to guess my astrologic sign, too. According to modern astrology, I'm a Scorpio, but I feel more like a Libra. And Libra I would be, if the astrologists really care where on the sky Sun actually were when I was born. But they don't. But that's off topic. Astrology is never modern. It is (or was) a branch of science made obsolete by the lack of evidence for its very basis, the assumption that the movements of the "stars" somehow affects our personal fates in any meaningful way. What's sold as "astrology" today is a mixture of outdated (and I'm talking outdated by centuries) results of semi-scientific research, fantasy, wishful thinking, and clever use of psycho-engineering. --- |
|
gnolam
Member #2,030
March 2002
|
Pfft - such hogwash! We Pisces don't believe in astrology! -- |
|
type568
Member #8,381
March 2007
|
Tobias Dammers said: Astrology is never modern. It is (or was) a branch of science made obsolete by the lack of evidence for its very basis, the assumption that the movements of the "stars" somehow affects our personal fates in any meaningful way. What's sold as "astrology" today is a mixture of outdated (and I'm talking outdated by centuries) results of semi-scientific research, fantasy, wishful thinking, and clever use of psycho-engineering. There are people who believe it's right, thus acting accordingly and making it at least partially right(the idea is open for corrections and extensions).
|
|
Neil Black
Member #7,867
October 2006
|
1) Didn't the astrology change only effect people who were born after 2009? 2) Why do I keep end up explaining this when I don't even believe in astrology? 3) Purple monkey dishwasher (points for getting the reference)
|
|
Derezo
Member #1,666
April 2001
|
1) It really doesn't affect anyone, but lets keep that a secret. I sure hope people born after 2009 aren't affected by it! 2) I'll answer your question with another question: What does global warming, gay marriage and Tiger Woods have in common? 3) ... The Simpsons. Which probably also answers my question "He who controls the stuffing controls the Universe" |
|
van_houtte
Member #11,605
January 2010
|
Derezo said: 1) It really doesn't affect anyone, but lets keep that a secret. I sure hope people born after 2009 aren't affected by it! wrong, astrology is relevant and it does affect people who believe in it ----- Sometimes you may have to send 3-4 messages |
|
Arthur Kalliokoski
Second in Command
February 2005
|
van_houtte said: wrong, astrology is relevant and it does affect people who believe in it Of course it is. Stupid people do what the charlatans want them to do. They all watch too much MSNBC... they get ideas. |
|
van_houtte
Member #11,605
January 2010
|
stupid people just make too many babies ----- Sometimes you may have to send 3-4 messages |
|
Tobias Dammers
Member #2,604
August 2002
|
van_houtte said: wrong, astrology is relevant and it does affect people who believe in it I said it was obsolete. Not irrelevant. Obviously, anything you believe in will affect your behaviour (unless it's a very trivial thing, in which case the word "believe" probably wouldn't be appropriate in the first place). It's still obsolete and wrong, along with homeopathy and all the other looks-like-science-but-definitely-isn't BS. --- |
|
Johan Halmén
Member #1,550
September 2001
|
I tried to find references on who ever invented the 30 degrees sectors defining the exact times for the 12 antique zodiac signs. I couldn't find any. Somehow I remember it was done in modern time, in a time when the zodiac had already turned some 30 degrees from what it was 3000 years ago. Somewhere I have a chart of all constellations on the sky, not only the 12 zodiac signs. And each constellation has a "right angle"[1] polygon boundary around itself. In that chart one can see how the ecliptica crosses the 13 constellations. Could it be that same astronomers who defined the boundaries, also defined that the zodiac be divided into 12 equal sectors? And they just named them beginning with Aries, where the ecliptica crosses the equator to enter the Northern hemisphere. References
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Years of thorough research have revealed that what people find beautiful about the Mandelbrot set is not the set itself, but all the rest. |
|
Arthur Kalliokoski
Second in Command
February 2005
|
@van_houtte: The signs are opportune for you to buy one of these They all watch too much MSNBC... they get ideas. |
|
Michael Jensen
Member #2,870
October 2002
|
I just took two of these tests in the last couple of days... I got INTP and INFP. I forget the exact percentages but one test had me close the middle between T/F and the other had me much closer to F than T. So I'm thinking I'm most likely an INFP. When I was reading the statements about each personality, I was distinctly reminded of horoscopes, and thinking "but isn't this accepted science? why does it sound like a horoscope?" but then I remembered, oh right, it's part of psychology -- which isn't really science, it's more like an approximation of science, it's VERY subjective. (From wikipedia: "Psychology is the science of mind and behavior.", "For many practitioners, one goal of applied psychology is to benefit society." -- I think a big part of being able to make something subjective into something that works and is repeatable is being able to establish reliable grounds for categorization.) There are probably well on a million different continuums on which you can judge a personality and some might even overlap each other or contradict one another... and others might only be valid when we are in a certain state (primary strengths mean nothing, when your internal state machine does not permit you to use them) but 4 might be good enough to give meaningful and usable results for a practicing psychologist... which is all their supposed to be... keep in mind though that these are 4 weighted continuums, so two INTPs for example may have vastly different distributions, but they're close enough and have the same primary traits that for some categorization purposes, this might be useful. Now, some people have claimed in this thread the system can be gamed... honestly the questions on the service that said I was an INFP, I thought some of the questions were amazing -- simply because BOTH answers looked "right". You really had to weight "Which do you value more here?", and all it does is on four continuums say "Okay start in the middle and move it left or right based on each answer." It seems perfectly acceptable to me to say that when I statistically chose emotions over thinking that I'm more likely to make a decision in emotion than in thinking -- I don't see what's bogus about that. Mind you the tests did say I put more weight on average to my emotions than I do into thinking about things, so maybe I'm not a very hard person to convince. Also, in closing, wikipedia was quick to point out (with both personality types I looked at) the strengths AND weaknesses of each (I thought it outlined my internal frustrations about working in a team VERY well, better than I could have.) And I feel that the INTP did NOT fit me very well, INFP was a fairly good match, but it still did feel reminicisint of a horoscope, which honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if that's where the bad rep. is coming from.
|
|
gnolam
Member #2,030
March 2002
|
Michael Jensen said: When I was reading the statements about each personality, I was distinctly reminded of horoscopes, and thinking "but isn't this accepted science? why does it sound like a horoscope?" but then I remembered, oh right, it's part of psychology -- which isn't really science, it's more like an approximation of science, it's VERY subjective.
There are scientific disciplines within psychology. This isn't one of them. This is pure pseudoscience. -- |
|
Matthew Leverton
Supreme Loser
January 1999
|
Michael Jensen said: It seems perfectly acceptable to me to say that when I statistically chose emotions over thinking that I'm more likely to make a decision in emotion than in thinking -- I don't see what's bogus about that. Questions like this are bad: "You trust reason rather than feelings." How I answer the question is how I perceive myself to be. Thus of course the result on the test is what I expect. You might as well get to the point: "Sensing or intuition?" However, questions like this are potentially good: "You feel involved when watching TV soaps". You can easily answer the question honestly without thinking about the end result. Of course, this question is actually bad because it assumes you watch soaps. i.e., Maybe you answered "no" because you don't watch them, but you would feel involved if you watched them. This particular test had far more bad questions than good ones. So the result is hardly interesting. |
|
Michael Jensen
Member #2,870
October 2002
|
@ML I agree. The first test I took, the one that gave me INFP, I was very impressed by the way it asked most of the questions (sorry, no link, I just randomly googled for personality test the other day and found two of them), though each question only had 2 answers, both answers sounded like they were better than the other, so you really had to choose which one you identified with most -- edit: and I wonder if each question wasn't weighted differently. The second test I took, however, (which put me as an INTP) some of the questions were kind of bad -- to the point where the answers actually didn't even make sense in regards to the question, and others were yes/no. Like anything, with an internet test, you should just plain be suspicious of it's accuracy. For practical usage, I wouldn't trust either test I took any more than an online IQ test, though I think for the most part, I have a good feeling for what I might be. Edit: For both tests though, it did take quite a bit of exercise to make sure I was being honest in my answers and not just picking what I wanted to be labeled as.
|
|
Arthur Kalliokoski
Second in Command
February 2005
|
Michael Jensen said: I wouldn't trust either test I took any more than an online IQ test You mean I shouldn't be showing people the screenshot I took saying I have an I.Q. of 165? They all watch too much MSNBC... they get ideas. |
|
Michael Jensen
Member #2,870
October 2002
|
@Arthur Kalliokoski, no way man, you should pimp that shit all over your myspace. People there are likely to even believe it... smart ass.
|
|
|
|