similarminds.com

[Lenka]

From reading about type frequencies from various sites I got the feeling that the *real* population is a lot less linear than typology makes it seem to be. 16 types, 4 temperaments, sounds simple enough, but how do these relate to each others? How do they interact?

I know socionics takes a stab at this with "intertype relations", and I think they're vaguely accurate, I find, if a little ... deterministic? basically what we're looking for in "the world" seems to be a population made up (and I'm going by the percentages from Dolphin Cove, which are the only ones I can find atm and seem to reflect what I've seen in the past on the official MBTI site and Kiersey thingy site) of a whole lot of xSFJs and ISTJs and ENFPs and, well, it seems like they're all fairly common except for the xNxJs which are the only truly rare types (at 1-2%). Us INxPs, we are also quite rare at out 3-4%, but hey, there's deffinitely more of us. INFP, despite their whole "we're so innocent and rare" thing, is actually quite a normal and common type that seems to exist in real time and place and probably makes up fo most of the fantasy and science fiction market (yes, very lol). So you got 4% of the population who spend their whole life on some mission to find something special because their lives feel so goddamn boring once they remove all the usual obstacles like mortgages and whatnot, which i don't think we bother with that much.

Ok, so basically in real time and space you have a whole bunch of SJs who spend their weekends at bake sales or dog races and love nothing more than to have everything organized and predictable, then you have the ENxJs... (I can visualize them) being talkative, but probably not hanging much together.... SPs are out doing theit exciting power and pleasure games, whether that is in bussiness, clubs or sports fields.... and then you get INFJs in their ivory towers of righteousness, INTJs in towers of super-strength-and-power, INTPs are locked up gestating ideas and INFPs are wobbling around without purpose, occasionaly adopting purpose just for the sake of having one? And everyone's too blind to see how weird this is?

How is this a good system? is this how it really works? Does it work?
_________________
Mercy, INFP, RLUEI, INFj.... Aries and Dragon.... and such stuff.

[lilithsansracine]

It assumes, to a pretty high degree, a level of ideality that does not exist in the real world.

Newton's Laws are true and such, but a lot of the times they aren't as deterministic as we would like them to be because we are not looking at force interactions within very small units such as atoms and molecules. The sum of all those interactions can throw off the calculations for something more large scale.

That is we have a totally separate field of applied mechanics.

I guess what we are exposed to here for the most part is just dealing with the nuances of the theory. Of course this is not how it plays out in the real world, there are other factors such as culture, gender, weather, time of day, occupation, family situation, sexual orientation etc.

I think we are not looking at the whole system. We are kind of just studying people in a vacuum.

I suggest a 2^k factorial design experiment
_________________
Lilith sans Racine
INTP, RCUEI, Enneagram 7/5, sx/sp/so, Facilitator

"I accept chaos. I don't know whether it accepts me." - Arthur Rimbaud, I'm Not There

[Lenka]

These are concepts I am not so good at dealing with, I guess. The theory seems valid, yet reality works differently still. Is the toery then only valid on an individual level, crumbling into unpredictability, like weather, when we're no longer dealing with on molecule or one force or whatever?
_________________
Mercy, INFP, RLUEI, INFj.... Aries and Dragon.... and such stuff.

[lilithsansracine]

Yeah, I guess it's all very relative. Your frame of reference dictates how you perceive and apply the theory and also how you recognize things as the implication of that theory, so yes, you can't have absolutes, and things are all very random. This is true with most theories of any kind.

I think it's also because the theory gives sort of a flat understanding of people, and we all get really caught up in that. I definitely don't sit around all day gestating theories and I am sure that the search for purpose doesn't mean you can't enjoy a spur of the moment activity.
_________________
Lilith sans Racine
INTP, RCUEI, Enneagram 7/5, sx/sp/so, Facilitator

"I accept chaos. I don't know whether it accepts me." - Arthur Rimbaud, I'm Not There

[Annabel_Lee]

It's interesting that the theory eventually becomes a system to categorize and compartmentalize the identities of people. I've only ever taken it as one piece in the larger realm of interactions. Knowing someone is an xxxx is meaningless to me beyond the fact that one superficially resembles some of the xxxx's I've known. I think it's one of the things that's actually really important to keep in perspective. It's just like knowing bits of other factors that Lilith outlined. There are bound to be levels of similarities, but they only go so far. I like similarities, they make things easier to understand. But pieces don't make people. Because really, not all INFJs sit in towers of righteousness, not all SJs love organization and predictability (because comfort, habit and love are different sentiments), not all INTJs care about super strength and power and INFPs often have a very meaningful. self-determined sense of conviction and purpose. In fact, my sample size of all the 16 types isn't extensive, but most people I've known stretch the elastic of type constraint more than they comply with it. And that's always a comforting discovery.
_________________
"There's man all over for you, blaming on his boots the faults of his feet" -Samuel Beckett

[PitKnight]

The MBTI is a pseudo-science... That's all you need to consider when you're totally awed by how inaccurate it can be regarding some more unique "XXXXs".
_________________

[Zephr]

[maglite]

¬_¬ that's all u need to consider

[Romana]

People do not do what they do because MBTI exists and claims to describe how they will behave, either individually or in groups. They do what they do independent of any attempts to explain or categorize, and it is up to MBTI or similar systems to adjust the theory accordingly to maintain sufficient predictive value to be useful. Like any tool, type systems must be used properly and with an understanding of their limitations (use the right tool for the job). As several people have already said, it can shed some light on who people are and why they do what they do, but is not the only factor.
_________________
Romana
INTJ

“The awareness of our own weaknesses allows us to view the weaknesses of others with immense compassion and to appreciate the value of their offerings.” ~ Logospilgrim

[Isra]

Personally, I don't buy into the percentages which have been published. First of all, they only compiled data from approximately a third of the tests taken at that time, and secondly, isn't it 70% of people who test as a different type within a year? I doubt that a thorough and long-term study of type distribution would find anything like the published results.

But then, I know several (super special and rare!) ENFPs, and have yet to get to know an ESTJ or ESFJ, who are allegedly crawling all over the place. I know, I know, it's personal experience. Do I think there are as many INTJs as ESFPs? No, of course not. For one thing, it's generally considered that only 25% of people are introverts. And that statistic comes from decades of thorough study, not one sampling of MBTI results.

And then, you know, there's the whole "the label doesn't limit you" thing. I'm would guess that an INFP made this commercial, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tq4nrmnqY9o and INFPs in advertising is probably considered odd...

I do realize that I sort of went on a tangent here, by the way. I'll try to have something more productive to say later.
_________________
(Fi)(Ne)ly tuned ISTP

"In three words I can sum up everything I've learned about life: it goes on."
-Robert Frost

[Stuckasfook]

It said I was INTP.

We may want to consider this when determining what is the best type.


=P

[Lenka]

[PitKnight]

I've met way too many STJs and SPs to supplement you (and trust me I think you should accept said supplement because most aren't worth knowing... Some can be though to be PC enough).
_________________

[maglite]

may I ask, what is INFP about the commercial?

[Isra]