wiwax- no, what I said was that the difference between Introverts & Extroverts has been accepted by mainstream psychology. Not the MB test. Read more carefully, please.
Actually, no school of psychology has been completely validated by mainstream medical science. Besides those cures done by drugs, therapy seems to be about as valid as exorcisms.
…and as an introvert too, I think one of the positive effects of tests like this is that by thinking of people as “types,” is that it is at least one step above the sort of prejudice introverted types usually get.
Even psychiatrists I’ve talked to seem to think that my introversion is a “problem” that has to be solved, and given some of the feedback I’ve read in this thread, it seems the introverts feel better treated by converts to Myers-Briggs system. It took me forever to understand that the preference for highly-social, go-getter extroverts was culturally constructed, and that I had something to offer the world, too.
Still, that being said, tests like this do go against many of my fundamental beliefs. They would be very dangerous if they were taken too far, and I really wanted to hate this test. But dammit, it was just so damn accurate in my case, and none of the other categories (I looked through a random sample) seemed to come close.
For the record, INFJ.
Yes OK. I was just trying to be amusing, you know. Futile maybe, but worth the attempt. 
So, to paraphrase, there is nothing objectively worthwhile about the test. It only works to the extent that people believe in it. It encourages self-exploration but so would believing in tealeaves. The means justify the ends, since the means are fairly harmless and the ends worth having, but the test itself could be replaced with astrology and have the same effect.
This is my point.
Oh - and you’re wrong about the dichotomies too, as Spiritus has pointed out. But I’m guessing noone wants to see a resurrection of my “What do opposites really mean, when you get right down to it” thread.
pan
No doubt about it. The creators of the test think so, alice.
I refer you here.
Emphasis added.
Now, that isn’t to say that the personality types listed don’t exist, I think they do. I simply also agree with those persons here that they are meant to be dichotomous when, in fact, they don’t have to be dichotomous.
kabees, however, makes the much stronger claim:
I disagree. There are, I would think, some people who definitely do intuit more than they rely on concrete perceptions. You want to pit Ayn Rand against Immanuel Kant or David Hume and tell me they didn’t go about things in different ways? The test is not a complete descriptor of human personality, but its flaws lie in its incompleteness, IMO, not in its inability to say nothing objectively worthy.
———————————And now for something completely different—————————————
This is nonsense. No one who loves chicken could possibly love fish :eek: 
I, at least, am happy to have it lie in the dust.
Just out of curiosity, how would they know if Thomas (Christ’s disciple) is an ISTJ? I haven’t taken the test since '94, when I was interviewing at an advertising agency. I had taken the test on the web prior to that, so I kind of knew how to guide my answers. It must of worked because I got the job. I would suggest it as a means to end to anyone.
Oops, to “an” end. That’s what I meant…
I see all.
You said the introversion-extroversion continuum is accepted in mainstream psychology, then you added that you don’t know how much validity is has. I thought you were questioning whether the I-E scale in MBTI might have some validity. That’s why I pointed out that MBTI has not been validated at all, ie not the I-E scale either. I don’t see how you perceived this as meaning I said you said the MBTI was accepted by mainstream psychology, but I hope the confusion is cleared up.
This is of course another discussion, and I’m not sure what “schools of psychology” you refer to, since the area of psychology includes a variety of treatment schools as well as theoretical and experimental schools in different fields. Treatment is one area, but in several areas there are constructs within psychology that can’t and shouldn’t be operationalised into medical science. Or do you include biology, genetics, neuroscience, etology and study of overt behaviour in medical science?
APA has a guide with treatment guidelines. IANA clinical psychologist, but a few years ago, Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT) was listed as treatment of choice for several DSM-IV diagnoses, among those specific phobias and panic disorder. I have not seen any randomised, controlled clinical trials that compare exorcism and CBT, but there are many such studies published that, for instance, show equal efficacy for CBT and SSRI in patients with depression.
Sorry for the off topic paragraph. Returning to MBTI, I think it’s a test to be viewed more like entertainment or to trigger a discussion, rather than saying something about your personality.
Now if I may put a little bit of a twist on my own thread…
How does an extreme introvert coexist peacefully with an extreme extrovert? This seems to have been one of the major problems in a recent failed relationship of mine. I would never have believed that something like this could have derailed an otherwise happy relationship but according to my X, that was the reason.
So, when one person wants- no, needs constantly to go out into social settings that are jam-packed full of people, and the other needs to stay away from such situations to avoid becoming “drained”, what is the solution?
My feeling is that each needs to recognize the needs & limitations of the other, and if both want the relationship to continue, they will learn to “meet in the middle”. On the other hand, if their introversion or extroversion is blind & rabid, no meaningful relationship is possible.
I’m an INTJ. …Is that good?
No, Gadarene - very bad. The only answer is to wear radishes in your underpants at all times.
Attrayant - you’re looking at people like little bundles of preprogrammed genes, blindly following the whims of their so-called “preferences”. Being with others makes you “drained”? Tough. This is a society and a vital social skill is getting on with others. Learn it. Not being with others causes you insanity? Tough. If you don’t learn peace within yourself, you’re in for a rough road.
Once upon a time, it was seen as good practice to cultivate all social and personal skills. Now we can just excuse ourselves our failings by saying “I’m an [sub][sup]checks what Gadarene is[/sup][/sup] INTJ”. I don’t buy it.
The “extrovert” ex needs to learn how to have quiet time. The “introvert” ex needs to learn how to get on with groups of people. This is true regardless of whether the relationship itself has a future - it used to be known as “being a well-rounded person”.
pan
“Getting on” with others is hardly necessary to exist in modern society. When I was forcing myself to go out to social events and make idle chit-chat with people I didn’t care to know in the the first place, yes it left me drained with a feeling of wasted energy and an hour or more of my life that I could have been doing something useful or productive.
I learn peace within myself by being in a quiet place, reflecting upon the day’s events or spending quite time with someone special. One man’s needful things are another man’s rubbish.
Just because I prefer not to be crammed into a busy noisy social setting feeling obligated to exchange banal chatter with lots of strangers does not mean I lack the ability to interface with society when necessary. Although a recluse is probably an introvert, not all introverts are reclusive to the point of being unable to function in society.
I’m reluctant to discuss this further, because it seems to be becoming personal.
I still think that it is admirable to strive to be as well rounded an individual as you can. That involves being strong on ALL aspects of the so-called Myers Briggs “dichotomies”.
pan
I agree with kabbes. I always get a different result when I take the MBTI, despite a conscientious attempt to answer the questions about the way I “usually” behave. The only consistent thing is that I am an ‘N’. This time through was no exception - I took the linked test, which said that I am an ENTP, with strengths of 1%, 78%, 1%, 22%. As always, many of the questions required me to choose between true alternatives. (At least this version got rid of the atrocious grammar and made-up words).
I found Chinese astrology roughly equally descriptive, and more fun.