ISTJ here. Funny, I’ve been wondering lately if tax law is the right career for me.
ENTJ:
“…They are prone to the ‘open expression of anger’ and also lust. Theirs is an ‘all or nothing’ style. Excess is an ‘antidote to boredom’, and (we might add) to underdeveloped feeling. ‘Late hours, heavy entertainment, bingeing. Too much, too loud, too many.’…”
Yeah that sounds about right.
I don’t want to hijack this thread but Maastricht could you pop over to this thread to add your opinion?
Thanks. As you were.
Another INTJ here. So how are the percentages stacking up on SDMB, since INTJs supposedly are “rather rare, comprising no more than, say, one percent of the population.”
I generally fall quite close to the line between INTP (programming nerd) and INFP (fantasy writer)
I tried contemplating my navel once and all I came up with is “what makes it go inward?” and “why does fibrous material collect in there?”
Seriously, I had to take one of these in high school as a freshman (nearly 10 years ago by now.) I put more stock in it than phrenology, but not all that much. (This might be my hard-science bias kicking in again.) Anyway, if I remember correctly, my result has changed some since high school, which only tells me what I already knew–that four years of high school, four of undergrad, and currently two of grad school have made me a somewhat different person.
Yes, and that one percent has apparenty taken up residence on the SDMB.
Not all that surprising really, given the nature of the Dope. This place is a Thinker’s/Judger’s paradise.
It might help bolster my skepticism if I didn’t continually get the same reading, regardless of the particular test. I’m pretty much an INFJ, through and through. Except for when I’m an INTJ, which is usually how I cope at work. I seem to have found a disproportionate number of IN(F/T)J’s here on the boards, too.
And one percent of six billion is?
INTP, first took the test the summer between 8th grade and freshman high school. I’ve re-taken it a couple more times since then and haven’t changed. I have to say that it fits me pretty well.
Math is really an INTP specialty. drachillix? lokij?
Let us not omit from this discussion the Scientology Tone Scale, which assigns a number and a ranking to almost every human emotion. Based on what LRon though it should be, of course, which is about as scientific as you’re gonna get for a personality test.
Musicat, I’m afraid I don’t find your Skeptic’s Dictionary link to have a whole lot of credibility. I find it disingenuous and full of logical fallacies.
I have been subject to the MBTI questions before, and at no point did any literature associated with it fail to mention that it’s meant to measure your preferences on 4 continua, and that results should not be regarded as definitive. The SkepDic page seems to insist that the test is meant to pigeonhole, and attempts to use the owning organization’s clear admission of its shortcomings (which lends creedence to the level-headedness of its profferers) as some sort of detriment to its integrity.
They then point to the MBTI’s underpinnings in Jung’s study of personality types, and launch an ad hominem againt Jung. Since it’s not even Jung’s test, it’s a strawman as well.
Finally, they take two personality types whose letter codes are nearly identical, and declare that because the two descriptions of them bear a number of similarities, that the whole thing is no better than astrology. That’s selective data picking right there. Why compare ISTJ to INTJ? If the evidence is really that glaring, why not show how ISTJ is identical to ENFP? Or is that not true, weakening the case for the Forer effect?
I’m a Pisces. Over the years at work we have had lots of these schemes for the credulous where someone tells you what group you belong to on the basis of your own answers about yourself. Luckily due to my insistence on arguing with the presenters I am exempt from attending these seances any more.
The group I work with attended some course that substituted colours for letters, you became a blue/red/yellow/green or some such nonsense. When they returned from the course I gave them certificates that I had had printed with their “Fairy” names and “Fairy” personalities on them. Most people admitted that what I had made up was just as close as the course material.
INTJ. Strong preference on the INT, weak on the J (1%). Makes sense, since I fail to see how judging can be seperated from perceiving. Does a strong Perceiver gather information and ignore it, while a strong Judge makes decisions while closing his eyes, covering his ears and singing “LALALA I CAN’T HEAR YOU!”?
Umm… if you take different tests, using the same overall type categories, do you EXPECT to get different type results? Well, maybe slightly different, based on the chance difference in questions. I’d be much more skeptical if my readings were wildly different than if they happened to end up the same each time though, myself.
You seem to have this backwards. Skepdic is a list of logical fallacies. If anyone knows his subject, it’s Robert Todd Carroll, who is a philosophy prof at Sacramento City College.
It is based on Jung, as advocates admit, and derived from Jung, as the original developers claim. If the underpinnings are highly suspect, that throws considerable doubt on the MBTI theory itself.
(all bolding mine)
If you believe it enough, palm reading works, too.
Yes. I am saying I am NOT skeptical, unlike some here, because I do get the same results over and over again, hence I tend to feel the results are fairly accurate.
INTJ - I had to think about roughly three of the questions
@PastAllReason - was that just a sneaky way of sampling ?
- while I confess that until about 6 years ago I read Harry Potter books if placed in front of me, I don’t exactly see how that site is related to Quidditch or Owls
Quite a neat idea, as most SDers will have read one Harry Potter simply to find out what the bucks/publicity are/is about, the phrase ‘funnel spider trap’ comes to mind.
A neat trick for a thesis - but a bit derivative.
I wish you well in your future career.
And it also looks as if you could get some really interesting results if you colluded with the hamster.
Sorry to p/ss on your parade - but my personality type points out the obvious
- even if other people don’t (or won’t) see it.
Perceivers want to be sure they make the right decision, so keep looking for good evidence for their choices 
Judgers sometimes, in the search for closure and brevity, make their judgements based on too little information. From where I sit on my end of the spectrum, anyhoo.