I took three different tests, got INTP all three times~
98% Introveted... I literally have no friends at ALL.
98% Introveted... I literally have no friends at ALL.
forum
What personality type are you?
posted
Total Posts
501
i am kuudere
Apparently I got INFJ 6 months ago. I know I've changed quite a bit (probably for the better) so I'm not surprised that I got a different answer this time.
chaee
ENFJ
From ESFJ to
Pretty much accurate..
ENTREPRENEUR
- MIND -
?ExtravertedIntroverted
18%
?
- ENERGY -
?IntuitiveObservant
17%
?
- NATURE -
?ThinkingFeeling
27%
?
- TACTICS -
JudgingProspecting
35%
?
- IDENTITY -
AssertiveTurbulent
50%
- MIND -
?ExtravertedIntroverted
18%
?
- ENERGY -
?IntuitiveObservant
17%
?
- NATURE -
?ThinkingFeeling
27%
?
- TACTICS -
JudgingProspecting
35%
?
- IDENTITY -
AssertiveTurbulent
50%
It's rare to find extroverts here. o/Fezzes wrote:
Pretty much accurate..
[deleted]
SameButteredPotato wrote:
INTP - A. Took an official test at my school a while before this as well and got the same results.
Dang ! i also got introvert type.... mine is INTJ though...piruchan wrote:
I believe a large number of people here are introverts
Just read the description, this thing is very accurate (for me, at least).
Ok, I'm actually gonna do this
Seems legit
Why is there so many introverted ppl in these forums?
Seems legit
Why is there so many introverted ppl in these forums?
First test this year still INTJ while my first few ones are INTJ last year. Glad to be still sticking to this.
Got pretty mild results aside from being introverted...is this a sign?
Hippy in da house
Hippy in da house
this is the prime example as for why online tests have their current image.
First off, this is not MBTI. It's not. It's "our theory".
http://www.16personalities.com/articles/our-theory
The description makes me wonder if the people who designed this actually understood Jungs original theories, which they supposedly took as foundation, and mixed them up with a mockery of one of the Big5-factors (neuroticism).
They also seem to exploit the Barnum-effect to lure people into buying a premium version, very much like a a variety of other psychological scams. (I mean.. look at this: https://www.16personalities.com/premium-profiles)
If you look at the type-descriptions, you have to wonder if this is an actual scientific evaluation of someones personality, or just an online-tool for ego-stroking.
In short: Don't take this test seriously. Don't post "your" results online or identify with them. If you want to know your personality, try lots of introspection and self-honesty, or take a real test. Not this one. Without delving in too deep (I did read most of the website), this seems to be a real clusterfuck , a mixture of half-applied and altered original theories. Their scales are inconsistent, they use psychological trickery to scam people into buying their product without fulfilling any sort of scientific standard.
Don't support this please.
First off, this is not MBTI. It's not. It's "our theory".
http://www.16personalities.com/articles/our-theory
The description makes me wonder if the people who designed this actually understood Jungs original theories, which they supposedly took as foundation, and mixed them up with a mockery of one of the Big5-factors (neuroticism).
They also seem to exploit the Barnum-effect to lure people into buying a premium version, very much like a a variety of other psychological scams. (I mean.. look at this: https://www.16personalities.com/premium-profiles)
If you look at the type-descriptions, you have to wonder if this is an actual scientific evaluation of someones personality, or just an online-tool for ego-stroking.
In short: Don't take this test seriously. Don't post "your" results online or identify with them. If you want to know your personality, try lots of introspection and self-honesty, or take a real test. Not this one. Without delving in too deep (I did read most of the website), this seems to be a real clusterfuck , a mixture of half-applied and altered original theories. Their scales are inconsistent, they use psychological trickery to scam people into buying their product without fulfilling any sort of scientific standard.
Don't support this please.
sottovoce
Even MBTI takes quite some liberty with Jung's theory. But you're correct, this particular test is completely awful. If you are really interested in Jungian typology I recommend doing your own research until you feel more confident in typing yourself. Most internet tests are going to be very inaccurate. Your type does not change so if you are getting different results that's the first big sign something is wrong. Questions in these tests are often very leading - for example, they often have things such as 'I try to act logically' as in indicator for a 'Thinking' type. Well who is going to say they act illogically? Not to mention if you understand the Thinking/Feeling axis you'd realise it has nothing to do with being logical. People also come with preconceptions that the test is ill equipped to deal with - for example, men may be predisposed to answer a certain way, due to societal expectations of how a man should think and act. You get the idea.Railey2 wrote:
this is the prime example as for why online tests have their current image.
First off, this is not MBTI. It's not. It's "our theory".
http://www.16personalities.com/articles/our-theory
The description makes me wonder if the people who designed this actually understood Jungs original theories, which they supposedly took as foundation, and mixed them up with a mockery of one of the Big5-factors (neuroticism).
They also seem to exploit the Barnum-effect to lure people into buying a premium version, very much like a a variety of other psychological scams. (I mean.. look at this: https://www.16personalities.com/premium-profiles)
If you look at the type-descriptions, you have to wonder if this is an actual scientific evaluation of someones personality, or just an online-tool for ego-stroking.
In short: Don't take this test seriously. Don't post "your" results online or identify with them. If you want to know your personality, try lots of introspection and self-honesty, or take a real test. Not this one. Without delving in too deep (I did read most of the website), this seems to be a real clusterfuck , a mixture of half-applied and altered original theories. Their scales are inconsistent, they use psychological trickery to scam people into buying their product without fulfilling any sort of scientific standard.
Don't support this please.
If anyone does have an interest in learning more I can recommend this YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCmDcT_ ... Q/featured
My type is ENFP.
What you mentioned is called "cultural bias", pretty much the most common type of test bias. In most cultures, answering in a way that implies the subjects affiliation with illogical thought processes would lead to the subject feeling bad, thus the subjects unconsciousness will seek to avoid answering in ways that imply the aforementioned. Questions that should be open and neutral suddenly have a right and a wrong answer - cultural bias, a form of test bias.sottovoce wrote:
Even MBTI takes quite some liberty with Jung's theory. But you're correct, this particular test is completely awful. If you are really interested in Jungian typology I recommend doing your own research until you feel more confident in typing yourself. Most internet tests are going to be very inaccurate. Your type does not change so if you are getting different results that's the first big sign something is wrong. Questions in these tests are often very leading - for example, they often have things such as 'I try to act logically' as in indicator for a 'Thinking' type. Well who is going to say they act illogically? Not to mention if you understand the Thinking/Feeling axis you'd realise it has nothing to do with being logical. People also come with preconceptions that the test is ill equipped to deal with - for example, men may be predisposed to answer a certain way, due to societal expectations of how a man should think and act. You get the idea.Railey2 wrote:
this is the prime example as for why online tests have their current image.
First off, this is not MBTI. It's not. It's "our theory".
http://www.16personalities.com/articles/our-theory
The description makes me wonder if the people who designed this actually understood Jungs original theories, which they supposedly took as foundation, and mixed them up with a mockery of one of the Big5-factors (neuroticism).
They also seem to exploit the Barnum-effect to lure people into buying a premium version, very much like a a variety of other psychological scams. (I mean.. look at this: https://www.16personalities.com/premium-profiles)
If you look at the type-descriptions, you have to wonder if this is an actual scientific evaluation of someones personality, or just an online-tool for ego-stroking.
In short: Don't take this test seriously. Don't post "your" results online or identify with them. If you want to know your personality, try lots of introspection and self-honesty, or take a real test. Not this one. Without delving in too deep (I did read most of the website), this seems to be a real clusterfuck , a mixture of half-applied and altered original theories. Their scales are inconsistent, they use psychological trickery to scam people into buying their product without fulfilling any sort of scientific standard.
Don't support this please.
If anyone does have an interest in learning more I can recommend this YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCmDcT_ ... Q/featured
My type is ENFP.
About the link:
That was very insightful and educating.
Heres a comment that you might enjoy (took it from the second video of the Notes on Jung series, I watched both though)
SPOILER
Sensation is simply sensory perception, Si is not memory, Se is not a will to action; to be a sensate is to be primarily motivated by sensation, where an extrovert is drawn by the intensity of the sensation of objects themselves, and an introvert is drawn by the intensity of personally experiencing the object.
A sensation type is where sensation is most developed and abstracted into aesthetics. In other types, sensation would be more concrete, exemplar, and sensual.
Sensation types:
ESTP: Se Te
ESFP: Se Fe
ISTP: Si Ti
ISFP: Si Fi
Intuition is simply the perception of hunches, Ni is not about the future, Ne is not about inventions; to be an intuitive is to be primarily motivated by intuitive, where an extrovert is drawn by the intuition drawn from objects themselves, and an introvert is drawn by the intensity of personally experiencing the intuition.
An intuitive type is where intuition is most developed and abstracted into symbolic hunches and associations. In other types, intuition would be more concrete, exemplar, and phantastical.
Intuitive types:
ENTP: Ne Te
ENFP: Ne Fe
INTP: Ni Ti
INFP: Ni Fi
Feeling is simply reasoning through feelings, Fi is not about strong personal values, Fe is not about being openly social; to be a feeler is to be primarily motivated by feelings, where an extrovert is drawn by the feelings derived from culture and environment, and an introvert is drawn by the feelings constructed around instinctive values.
A feeling type is where feeling is most developed and abstracted into morals, ideals, and aesthetic values. In other types, feelings would be more concrete, exemplar, and impulsive.
Feeling types:
ENFJ: Fe Ne
ESFJ: Fe Se
INFJ: Fi Ni
ISFJ: Fi Si
Thinking is simply reasoning through thought, Ti is not about accuracy, Te is not about being proactive; to be a thinker is to be primarily motivated by thoughts, where an extrovert is drawn by the thoughts derived from culture and environment, and an introvert is drawn by the thought constructed around instinctive logic.
A thinking type is where thinking is most developed and abstracted into general concepts. In other types, thinking would be more concrete, exemplar, and impulsive.
Thinking types:
ENTJ: Te Ne
ESTJ: Te Se
INTJ: Ti Ni
ISTJ: Ti Si
A sensation type is where sensation is most developed and abstracted into aesthetics. In other types, sensation would be more concrete, exemplar, and sensual.
Sensation types:
ESTP: Se Te
ESFP: Se Fe
ISTP: Si Ti
ISFP: Si Fi
Intuition is simply the perception of hunches, Ni is not about the future, Ne is not about inventions; to be an intuitive is to be primarily motivated by intuitive, where an extrovert is drawn by the intuition drawn from objects themselves, and an introvert is drawn by the intensity of personally experiencing the intuition.
An intuitive type is where intuition is most developed and abstracted into symbolic hunches and associations. In other types, intuition would be more concrete, exemplar, and phantastical.
Intuitive types:
ENTP: Ne Te
ENFP: Ne Fe
INTP: Ni Ti
INFP: Ni Fi
Feeling is simply reasoning through feelings, Fi is not about strong personal values, Fe is not about being openly social; to be a feeler is to be primarily motivated by feelings, where an extrovert is drawn by the feelings derived from culture and environment, and an introvert is drawn by the feelings constructed around instinctive values.
A feeling type is where feeling is most developed and abstracted into morals, ideals, and aesthetic values. In other types, feelings would be more concrete, exemplar, and impulsive.
Feeling types:
ENFJ: Fe Ne
ESFJ: Fe Se
INFJ: Fi Ni
ISFJ: Fi Si
Thinking is simply reasoning through thought, Ti is not about accuracy, Te is not about being proactive; to be a thinker is to be primarily motivated by thoughts, where an extrovert is drawn by the thoughts derived from culture and environment, and an introvert is drawn by the thought constructed around instinctive logic.
A thinking type is where thinking is most developed and abstracted into general concepts. In other types, thinking would be more concrete, exemplar, and impulsive.
Thinking types:
ENTJ: Te Ne
ESTJ: Te Se
INTJ: Ti Ni
ISTJ: Ti Si
Do you happen to have some more links you want to share while we are at it? I'd absolutely love to read/hear more material of comparable quality.
I kinda want to read Jung again, but the last time he scared me away with his wording. His German is just as convoluted as it is conceptually and metaphorically heavy. Maybe another time. For the time I rather watch videos like the one you linked, or read excerpts/summaries.
sottovoce
Railey2 wrote:
snip
I wish I knew of more stuff of similar quality, but most internet resources on Jungian/MBTI theory are swamped in misinformation and shallow interpretations - most of what I know is simply the result of much searching through the rubbish to find the good stuff hidden beneath it. As you mentioned, reading Jung himself is interesting but his writing can be inaccessible, and there isn't that much secondary criticism available because, for a myriad of reasons, academic psychology took after Freud in the 20th Century and discredited Jung.
so yeah
fuck da rulezz
@edit shit I just necroed this
sorry some dumbass linked the thread somewhere else
xD