Personality test

[God Emperor]

http://www.humanmetrics.com/cgi-win/JTypes2.asp

The above link is a personality test based on the works of Carl Jung. I have tried this personality 'test' many times over and I must say it is the most precise and accurate test I have ever seen.. It has also improved my understanding of other people. anyway I am not certain how to make the best sale for this test, but I would recomend trying it.

whenever you have taken the test, I would advice looking around on the page, exploring what exactly it is your result means.

anyway have fun with it:) it's worth the while

[Hooahguy]

Interesting test. I got
You are: ISFJ
moderately expressed introvert
moderately expressed sensing personality
moderately expressed feeling personality
very expressed judging personality

[God Emperor]

yes that is one part of it. once you have taken the test it is possible to read description of your result. but there is also one other thing to it.. as your are an ISTJ , you also scored some numbers for each letter. say you scored 60/70/80/5 , means that you are borderlining to an ISTP , so it would be of interest for you to read the ISTP description as well

[Secura]

I have completed one of these before, several years ago, but it was nice to do it again nonetheless. My results came up as ENFJ, often called 'The Teacher (http://keirsey.com/4temps/teacher.asp)', which comprises two percent of the world's population, apparantly.

As ENFJ, I am:
- moderately expressed extravert 33%
- moderately expressed intuitive personality 50%
- moderately expressed feeling personality 50%
- very expressed judging personality 78%

Careers I would be suited to are; counseling, psychology, social work, teaching, physician/medical practitioner, computer programming, management, fashion merchandising, politics.

Famous people who share my result include Leon Trotsky, Pope John Paul II and Oprah Winfrey.

[Togakure]

Good ol' Keirsey/Meyer's-Briggs kind of stuff. Took these a lot prior to about ten years ago.

Currently INFJ, 22 52 52 56. In the past F would lean towards T; J would lean towards P. So I look at INTJ, INFP, and INTP. Usually I rate INFJ or INFP though.

INFJ: "Idealist - portrait of a counselor", Literature/write, humanities, web design, philosophy, archaeology, religious education (gah!), psychology, counseling.


Profile: INFJ
Revision: 3.1
Date of Revision: 8 Aug 2010

Beneath the quiet exterior, INFJs hold deep convictions about the weightier matters of life. Those who are activists -- INFJs gravitate toward such a role -- are there for the cause, not for personal glory or political power.

INFJs are champions of the oppressed and downtrodden. They often are found in the wake of an emergency, rescuing those who are in acute distress. INFJs may fantasize about getting revenge on those who victimize the defenseless. The concept of 'poetic justice' is appealing to the INFJ.

"There's something rotten in Denmark." Accurately suspicious about others' motives, INFJs are not easily led. These are the people that you can rarely fool any of the time. Though affable and sympathetic to most, INFJs are selective about their friends. Such a friendship is a symbiotic bond that transcends mere words.

INFJs have a knack for fluency in language and facility in communication. In addition, nonverbal sensitivity enables the INFJ to know and be known by others intimately.

Writing, counseling, public service and even politics are areas where INFJs frequently find their niche."

I have found these most useful with NLP at work. When a team takes this kind of thing and everyone shares their rating, it can sometimes help in understanding where someone is coming from, and how best to interact with them to get favorable results. But it's all pretty nebulous.

[God Emperor]

ah yes.. that result does not surprise me one bit secura :) with a quick glance at the teacher description the following just hit me as spot on : Teachers are extraordinarily tolerant of others, are easy to get along with, and are usually popular wherever they are.
and : In whatever field they choose, Teachers consider people their highest priority, and they instinctively communicate personal concern and a willingness to become involved. Warmly outgoing, and perhaps the most expressive of all the types, Teachers are remarkably good with language, especially when communicating in speech


I am, as my signature suggests, an INTP , which also hits a minor percentage of the population (1-2 %) (not that it's super important)

[Motep]

ENFP
# moderately expressed extravert
# distinctively expressed intuitive personality
# distinctively expressed feeling personality
# slightly expressed perceiving personality
44 for extraverted
75 for intuitive
75 for feeling
22 for perceiving

[Secura]

INFJ: "Idealist - portrait of a counselor", Literature/write, humanities, web design, philosophy, archaeology, religious education (gah!), psychology, counseling.

I think that I might drift every so slightly towards this one too; I'm an avid reader and creative writer, maintain an interest in archaeology that stems back to my childhood and I'm an avid student of the artistic and historical branches of humanities... but some of the careers in my own reading are correlate strongly with interests too, such as business management and teaching (the profession I hope to go into at some point).


ah yes.. that result does not surprise me one bit secura :) with a quick glance at the teacher description the following just hit me as spot on : Teachers are extraordinarily tolerant of others, are easy to get along with, and are usually popular wherever they are.
and : In whatever field they choose, Teachers consider people their highest priority, and they instinctively communicate personal concern and a willingness to become involved. Warmly outgoing, and perhaps the most expressive of all the types, Teachers are remarkably good with language, especially when communicating in speech

And that strikes you as being very me? :laugh4:

Well, it's actually not far off; I think the only part that I have trouble with is "popular wherever they are", since I look at myself currently and don't think "yeah, I'm popular".

I don't really have many friends at the moment (unemployed, no longer living in my university city), but I can make friends very easily and did have alot of friends while working/studying... I still keep in touch with them, but for me it's not quite the same because a simple text message or phone call won't suffice; I'd rather be there with them sharing the moments, really.

I guess that it just depends on one's interpretation of popularity.


I am, as my signature suggests, an INTP , which also hits a minor percentage of the population (1-2 %) (not that it's super important)

You're a 'Mastermind (http://keirsey.com/4temps/mastermind.asp)', makes for a very interesting read. :3

[pevergreen]

ISTP, as always.

The description from that link for mine is woefully inaccurate though.

[Hooahguy]

Just finished reading the description for mine and wow that was pretty accurate.


ISFJs are often unappreciated, at work, home, and play. Ironically, because they prove over and over that they can be relied on for their loyalty and unstinting, high-quality work, those around them often take them for granted--even take advantage of them. Admittedly, the problem is sometimes aggravated by the ISFJs themselves; for instance, they are notoriously bad at delegating ("If you want it done right, do it yourself"). And although they're hurt by being treated like doormats, they are often unwilling to toot their own horns about their accomplishments because they feel that although they deserve more credit than they're getting, it's somehow wrong to want any sort of reward for doing work.
Pretty much describes me. :yes:

Though IDK if thats a good thing...

[Yoyoma1910]

I got INTJ... which makes me a mastermind?



:whip:

[PershsNhpios]

Yoyoma, I am also an INTJ.

You shall rule the west, and I the east.

[Veho Nex]

Your Type is INFP
Introverted Intuitive Feeling Perceiving

22 62 12 22


You are:
slightly expressed introvert
distinctively expressed intuitive personality
slightly expressed feeling personality
slightly expressed perceiving personality



Healers present a calm and serene face to the world, and can seem shy, even distant around others. But inside they're anything but serene, having a capacity for personal caring rarely found in the other types. Healers care deeply about the inner life of a few special persons, or about a favorite cause in the world at large. And their great passion is to heal the conflicts that trouble individuals, or that divide groups, and thus to bring wholeness, or health, to themselves, their loved ones, and their community.

Archaeology, Counseling, Humanities, Literature/Writer, Philosophy, Psychology, Religious Education, Web Design

[PershsNhpios]

I will employ you as head Archaeologist in my Natural Scientifically Engineered Law Firm.

[Yoyoma1910]

Yoyoma, I am also an INTJ.

You shall rule the west, and I the east.

As long as I get to be a guy behind a curtain, pulling some strings.

[a completely inoffensive name]

INTJ.

[Sasaki Kojiro]

I don't understand how you are supposed to learn anything from a test where you just say things about yourself that you already know...or think you know.

I don't see how anyone can enter "I like having a large circle of acquaintances" and "You spend your leisure time actively socializing
with a group of people, attending parties, shopping, etc." and "You rapidly get involved in social life
at a new workplace" and feel at all enlightened when told that they are on the extroverted end of the scale.

And for the ones you don't know already, they are just to vague:

"You trust reason rather than feelings"

YES/NO !?!?!? How on earth are you supposed to give a legitimate yes or no answer to that? Feelings ARE reasons, and reason would tell you so.

[PershsNhpios]

You must be an idealist.

[pevergreen]

Nah, Sasaki is just a AMVI

Always mafia, vote ichigo.

[Togakure]

I don't understand how you are supposed to learn anything from a test where you just say things about yourself that you already know...or think you know.

I don't see how anyone can enter "I like having a large circle of acquaintances" and "You spend your leisure time actively socializing
with a group of people, attending parties, shopping, etc." and "You rapidly get involved in social life
at a new workplace" and feel at all enlightened when told that they are on the extroverted end of the scale.

And for the ones you don't know already, they are just to vague:

"You trust reason rather than feelings"

YES/NO !?!?!? How on earth are you supposed to give a legitimate yes or no answer to that? Feelings ARE reasons, and reason would tell you so.

Reason as in active, logical Thinking, vs. Feelings as more intuitive, "gut" thinking.

The value of the results of things like this is two-fold: it can help to understand ourselves better if we are open to it, and it can help to understand others better if we are aware of their personality type. But knowing what ourselves are and what other are in this context is only the beginning. It's what you do with it, and how, that can add value.

On a fairly large project some time ago, my whole team took a much more detailed test that used the same classification system (it was a Kiersey test iirc). My role was technical project leader, and I had responsibility for both IT staff and business staff for whom the system was being developed. I noted the results of all the team members as they were discussed in class (it was an extended training class in which the test and subsequent discussion were only a part). Later, when I had to approach a team member about something and needed something important from them (and anticipated difficulty), I reviewed their personality type as described by the results of the test. It was helpful in adjusting my approach in how I presented the need, how I responded to their concerns, and how to compromise with them on how to get what needed to be done, done. If there was failure, I don't think it was because the test and method is bogus, it was because I failed to make effective use of the results.

Sasaki Kojiro-san, I would say: think less when considering the questions, answer with your gut. but my guess is, you would be classified "T," and that very suggestion is not natural to you, as "T"'s tend to reason out, think about, logically consider, rather than go with how they "feel" about it. This is not a problem per se, it just makes understanding the point and value of exercises like these more difficult for some than others.

But I am probably the wrong messenger in this. With respect. :bow:

[God Emperor]

No secura INTP is the architect, however with 22 it would be a minor borderline to the INTJ (mastermind) :)

@ Sasaki , imo there is a clear difference between rational and irrational thinking (You trust reason rather than feelings") - It is as Togakure says, that trusting in feelings would mean you are inclined to go with your gut feeling (or simply what your current mood tells you) , where the rational mind would need a logical set of reasons, to believe that situation-x is right/wrong

[Ronin]

Your Type is
ISTJ
Introverted Sensing Thinking Judging
Strength of the preferences %
78 1 69 28

You are:

* very expressed introvert
* slightly expressed sensing personality
* distinctively expressed thinking personality
* moderately expressed judging personality

Careers suited:
Computer Programming
Technology Education
Engineering
Mechanics/Automotive Repair

Similar famous people:
Lance Armstrong, Warren Buffet, Donald Rumsfeld, Greta Garbo

[Vladimir]

Oh dear. This is who I am:

https://img441.imageshack.us/img441/82/drevilz.jpg (https://img441.imageshack.us/i/drevilz.jpg/)

Uploaded with ImageShack.us (https://imageshack.us)

Your Type is
INTJ
Introverted 56

Intuitive 75

Thinking 38

Judging 67

[Subotan]

Your Type is
INFJ
Introverted Intuitive Feeling Judging
Strength of the preferences % 11 75 12 1



slightly expressed introvert
distinctively expressed intuitive personality
slightly expressed feeling personality
slightly expressed judging personality


Counselors have an exceptionally strong desire to contribute to the welfare of others, and find great personal fulfillment interacting with people, nurturing their personal development, guiding them to realize their human potential. Although they are happy working at jobs (such as writing) that require solitude and close attention, Counselors do quite well with individuals or groups of people, provided that the personal interactions are not superficial, and that they find some quiet, private time every now and then to recharge their batteries. Counselors are both kind and positive in their handling of others; they are great listeners and seem naturally interested in helping people with their personal problems. Not usually visible leaders, Counselors prefer to work intensely with those close to them, especially on a one-to-one basis, quietly exerting their influence behind the scenes.

Counselors are scarce, little more than three percent of the population, and can be hard to get to know, since they tend not to share their innermost thoughts or their powerful emotional reactions except with their loved ones. They are highly private people, with an unusually rich, complicated inner life. Friends or colleagues who have known them for years may find sides emerging which come as a surprise. Not that Counselors are flighty or scattered; they value their integrity a great deal, but they have mysterious, intricately woven personalities which sometimes puzzle even them.


(http://www.keirsey.com/sample/emp_boss_comm_guide_sample.pdf)Counselors tend to work effectively in organizations. They value staff harmony and make every effort to help an organization run smoothly and pleasantly. They understand and use human systems creatively, and are good at consulting and cooperating with others. As employees or employers, Counselors are concerned with people's feelings and are able to act as a barometer of the feelings within the organization.
Blessed with vivid imaginations, Counselors are often seen as the most poetical of all the types, and in fact they use a lot of poetic imagery in their everyday language. Their great talent for language-both written and spoken-is usually directed toward communicating with people in a personalized way. Counselors are highly intuitive and can recognize another's emotions or intentions - good or evil - even before that person is aware of them. Counselors themselves can seldom tell how they came to read others' feelings so keenly. This extreme sensitivity to others could very well be the basis of the Counselor's remarkable ability to experience a whole array of psychic phenomena. [WTH no]

Bold bits are sentences more or less that I agree with.


Immanual Kant

oh crap

[Rhyfelwyr]

I'm an individual, you don't know me, you can't stick a label on me! etc etc

INTJ
62/12/1/56 respectively

distinctively expressed introvert
slightly expressed intuitive personality
slightly expressed thinking personality
moderately expressed judging personality

[Fisherking]

Hum. I find out I am a Champion. What the heck does that mean?

EIFP



Like the other Idealists, Champions are rather rare, say three or four percent of the population, but even more than the others they consider intense emotional experiences as being vital to a full life. Champions have a wide range and variety of emotions, and a great passion for novelty. They see life as an exciting drama, pregnant with possibilities for both good and evil, and they want to experience all the meaningful events and fascinating people in the world. The most outgoing of the Idealists, Champions often can't wait to tell others of their extraordinary experiences. Champions can be tireless in talking with others, like fountains that bubble and splash, spilling over their own words to get it all out. And usually this is not simple storytelling; Champions often speak (or write) in the hope of revealing some truth about human experience, or of motivating others with their powerful convictions. Their strong drive to speak out on issues and events, along with their boundless enthusiasm and natural talent with language, makes them the most vivacious and inspiring of all the types.

Sorry guys, but I guess someone has to do the job...

[Sasaki Kojiro]

@ Sasaki , imo there is a clear difference between rational and irrational thinking (You trust reason rather than feelings") - It is as Togakure says, that trusting in feelings would mean you are inclined to go with your gut feeling (or simply what your current mood tells you) , where the rational mind would need a logical set of reasons, to believe that situation-x is right/wrong

There is a clear difference between rational and irrational thinking, but not between reason and feeling. When you come up with reasons you evaluate them based on how you feel about them. People who have the emotional part of their brain disconnected from their reasoning process are incredibly irrational. For example, they are asked which day next week would be best for their next appointment and they spend 30 minutes listing all the possible reasons that come into their mind.

The question is obviously garbage. It's like asking "When talking to someone, do you trust their facial expression/body language, or the literal meaning of what they say". Obviously you use both all the time and trying to divide them is silly. It might as well just ask "would you rather see yourself as a logical person or someone in touch with your emotions".

Same thing here:

"Your actions are frequently influenced by emotions"

The answer is YES. DUH.



Reason as in active, logical Thinking, vs. Feelings as more intuitive, "gut" thinking.

The value of the results of things like this is two-fold: it can help to understand ourselves better if we are open to it, and it can help to understand others better if we are aware of their personality type. But knowing what ourselves are and what other are in this context is only the beginning. It's what you do with it, and how, that can add value.

On a fairly large project some time ago, my whole team took a much more detailed test that used the same classification system (it was a Kiersey test iirc). My role was technical project leader, and I had responsibility for both IT staff and business staff for whom the system was being developed. I noted the results of all the team members as they were discussed in class (it was an extended training class in which the test and subsequent discussion were only a part). Later, when I had to approach a team member about something and needed something important from them (and anticipated difficulty), I reviewed their personality type as described by the results of the test. It was helpful in adjusting my approach in how I presented the need, how I responded to their concerns, and how to compromise with them on how to get what needed to be done, done. If there was failure, I don't think it was because the test and method is bogus, it was because I failed to make effective use of the results.

No doubt it can tell you something about someone else. But it doesn't reveal your personality.

Just look at the two questions I picked out. Or just the one, "Your actions are frequently influenced by emotions". People who want to think of themselves as logical will say no, and then the test result will tell them what they want to hear about themselves. And vice versa. EVERYONE'S actions are frequently influenced by emotions.


Sasaki Kojiro-san, I would say: think less when considering the questions, answer with your gut. but my guess is, you would be classified "T," and that very suggestion is not natural to you, as "T"'s tend to reason out, think about, logically consider, rather than go with how they "feel" about it. This is not a problem per se, it just makes understanding the point and value of exercises like these more difficult for some than others.

I had a very strung gut suspicion that the questionnaire was bogus. The reasoning came after.

The test linked certainly is. I took the actual one once and don't remember it being much better.

[Vladimir]

Same thing here:

"Your actions are frequently influenced by emotions"

The answer is YES. DUH.



I'm going pick this particular nit here. These questions are subjective. What if the answer is testing how you perceive your actions? Don't get too wound up over it and just take the damn test.

[Fisherking]

I don't understand how you are supposed to learn anything from a test where you just say things about yourself that you already know...

And for the ones you don't know already, they are just to vague:

"You trust reason rather than feelings"

YES/NO !?!?!? How on earth are you supposed to give a legitimate yes or no answer to that? Feelings ARE reasons, and reason would tell you so.


Indeed! It is difficult to answer some of those questions.

You may do some of them more than at other times and select YES or you seldom do those things and select NO.

there is no sometimes or never or hardly ever answer. Life is not so black and white.

[Rhyfelwyr]

Sasaki strikes again!

I also thought some of the questions were strange. But you can tell what they are getting at, so just go with the flow. I don't think the questions were designed to be 100% logically flawless, it is more about prompting an answer out of us to see what that reveals about how we think.

The value of the test isn't in the questions themselves, its how we see them and react to them.

[CBR]

INTJ
100/75/25/11

very expressed introvert
distinctively expressed intuitive personality
moderately expressed thinking personality
slightly expressed judging personality

Yes some of the questions could go the other way depending on situation. That would shift the last one from J to P

[Togakure]

As usual, Sasaki, you have good points and provide something for me/others to think about.

There are many more questions on the "professional" tests and iirc, they aren't yes/no but multiple-choice. With a lot of redundancy, these tests seem a bit more accurate because, in the event that a question is not clear and yields a questionable answer, others cover the same base but are worded differently (probably utilizing the very subject matter that's being assessed to target people who think differently, and hence, perceive questions and answers in a different light).

The tests have been around for years, and so many organizations spend oodles of their training budget on them, it seems that a great deal of folks find value in them. I do take the results with a grain of salt though; we are very complex creatures and I find it unlikely that we can be so easily categorized with consistency. Still, the information can be useful.

[Sasaki Kojiro]

Well, this particular online version I'm fairly certain is worthless. I don't know about the actual version, but I'm somewhat suspicious because the business tie in can keep something like that chugging along in popularity even if it isn't accurate.

In general, having any test measuring a hard to define psychological variable DEFAULTS to questionable. There are quite a few personality tests that implicitly claim this one is illegitimate.


These questions are subjective. What if the answer is testing how you perceive your actions? Don't get too wound up over it and just take the damn test.

What if the answer is ignoring the test? That question isn't the slightest bit subjective. Everyone is frequently influenced by their emotions. It is testing how you want to perceive yourself, but it's pretending to be something entirely different, with a pretty little "You're a mastermind like einstein and kant" bow on top. I'm insulted because it's pandering to me. "Find your future career!" "Take the Jung marriage test!"


The value of the test isn't in the questions themselves, its how we see them and react to them.

Can you estimate how introverted or extroverted you are based on memory? I bet you can, and I bet it would be more accurate and insightful than any test score...same for all of it.

[God Emperor]

though it is true, that a questions like 'are you often influenced by emotions' are bad questions, however they are , imo, a minority. But viewing the 'tests' that way, is imo, a wrong way. The main purpose of Jung's work is to catagorize people into 16 different groups, with 8 different points of focus. Emotional/rational etc. . Now tests (perhaps with the exeption of IQ tests) have some inaccuracy, so a result a person recieves is naturally not an answer, however it is a guide line, as you naturally will get somewhat close to your own person in a test like this one.

as the main purpose is to divide people into readable groups and add's a test to help the interested parties to find a group that fits, the right way to take this test is to read the type you get, AND read the borderline types, as you are likely to find characteristics in yourself, in those groups as well. it is also important to understand the difference between a P and J etc, if you are to understand what the result exactly says. Imo the 8 different points of focus are very well spotted, and they are useful in dividing people on important areas when it comes to personality. So bottom line is that focusing on a question (or perhaps two?) that goes without saying, is a failed viewpoint as it will not affect your result in any major way.

[A Nerd]

This is me.

Your Type is
ISFP
Introverted Sensing Feeling Perceiving
Strength of the preferences %
100 25 38 11

You are:
very expressed introvert

moderately expressed sensing personality

moderately expressed feeling personality

slightly expressed perceiving personality


Princess Diana, Auguste Rodin, Elvis Presley, Frederic Chopin

[Togakure]

Frederic Chopin! One of my faves. What I can't figure out is, how the hell they can confirm what personality type he was? For that matter, how are they determining the types of so many of these historical characters who have been gone for a long time. Some haven't left any autobiographies, and biographies are just an interpretation by someone else. Hmm.

[A Nerd]

Perhaps they asked George Sand. She probably knew him well.

[PershsNhpios]

Far too many INTJs.

There can be only one.

[Sasaki Kojiro]

Ok, I did a little digging, since what I remembered is that the actual mbti is not terrible like the online versions are (much like IQ tests).


ABSTRACT The Myers-Bnggs Type Indicator (MBTI, Myers & McCauUey,
1985) was evaluated from the perspectives of Jung's theory of psychological
types and the five-factor model of personahty as measured by self-reports and
peer ratings on the NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI, Costa & McCrae,
1985b) Data were provided by 267 men and 201 women ages 19 to 93 Con-
sistent with earlier research and evaluations, there was no support for the view
that the MBTI measures truly dichotomous preferences or qualitatively distmct
types, instead, the instrument meastires four relatively independent dimensions
The interpretation of the Judging-Pferceivmg index was also called into ques-
tion The data suggest that Jung's theory is either incorrect or madequately op-
erationalized by the MBTI and cannot provide a sound basis for interpreting it
However, correlational analyses showed that the four MBTI indices did measure
aspects of four of the five major dimensions of normal personality The five-
factor model provides an alternative basis for interpreting MBTI findings within
a broader, more commonly shared conceptual framework

...

The results of the present study provide the basis for a very mixed eval-
uation—-or a radical reinterpretation—of the MBTI Consistent with
much previous research (especially Stncker & Ross, 1964a), the study
found no support for the typological theory the instrument is intended to
embody There was no evidence that preferences formed true dichoto-
mies, the 16 types did not appear to be qualitatively distinct, because
analyses of then-joint effects on personality dimensions showed that only
1 of 55 interactions was significant, and only m women, and, contrary to
hypothesis, the theoretically dominant function was no more clearly pre-
ferred than the auxiliary The Jungian prediction that opposing functions
should be developed in later life was not confirmed using the MBTI The
correlates of individual scales were consistent with their item content,
but would probably not have been predicted from Jungian theory Froni
the perspective of construct validation, the MBTI appears to have very
senous problems Weighing the evidence to date, the MBTI does not
seem to be a promising instrument for measunng Jung's types, those
who embrace Jung's theory should probably avoid the MBTI
Conversely, those who have found the MBTI to be a useful instrument
for assessing and descnbing individual differences should senously con-
sider abandoning Jungian theory and some of the associated language
Yet how can the MBTI be interpreted or employed without reference to
Jung's psychological types'? One alternative is to adopt the perspective
of the five-factor model of personality Each of the four indices showed
impressive evidence of convergence with one of the five major dime
sions of normal personality, whether assessed through self-reports
peer ratings It is these convergences that probably account for the man
meaningful associations between MBTI scales and extemal cntena suc
as occupational preferences, creativity, and educational performance

...

Most conspicuous is the lack of a Neuroticism factor in the
MBTI Its absence is understandable on two counts first, because emo-
tional instability versus adjustment did not enter into Jung's definitions
of the types, and second, because the authors of the test were apparently
philosophically committed to a position which saw each type as equally
valuable and positive (Myers with Myers, 1980)—a view that is difficult
to hold with regard to Neuroticism ' Although it makes interpretation of
results palatable to most respondents, this approach also omits informa-
tion that may be cmcial to employers, co-workers, counselors, and the
individuals themselves For many, if not most, applications, some mea-
sure of Neuroticism would be useful
Further, the MBTI does not give comprehensive information on the
four domains it does sample The TF scale, for example, encompasses
the tough- versus tender-minded aspect of Agreeableness, but has no di-
rect measures of interpersonal aspects such as trust, altmism, and co-
operativeness All four indices give only a broad, global picture, without
any distinctions of traits within each domain Other personality mea-
sures give more detail For example, the NEO-PI provides information
on SIX specific facets of Extraversion—Warmth, Greganousness, Asser-
tiveness, Activity, Excitement Seefang, and Positive Emotions This is
especially important for understanding individuals who score in the av-
erage range on overall extraversion



Basically, there isn't much basis for the types. INTJ, ENFP etc are pretty pointless. There's just the 4 traits it measures, and people are somewhere on the spectrum for them. And that ends up with it being a gussied up misleading, less informative version of a test like the big five test. Which is really kind of a devastating critique, since the main deal with the mbti is the typology and associated stuff.


Frederic Chopin! One of my faves. What I can't figure out is, how the hell they can confirm what personality type he was? For that matter, how are they determining the types of so many of these historical characters who have been gone for a long time. Some haven't left any autobiographies, and biographies are just an interpretation by someone else. Hmm.

I wonder what hitler's was :laugh4:

They act like all personalities are positive :book:

***************************

I do find the big five test to be much less obnoxious:

http://www.outofservice.com/bigfive/

5 point scale, sensible set of questions, rates you on percentile vs other takers (skewed by internet surely??) rather than assigning you to a type. Has the possibility for someone to score as "Conventional, disorganized, inhibited, callous, and insecure". Get the MBTI to tell you that :laugh4:

I don't even know if that's the real version of the test or not.

It does seem like it's lacking some major parts of personality though. I'm not sure conscientiousness really covers it.

[Subotan]

Kant didn't exactly have a positive personality. Kant was freakin' nuts.

[The Stranger]

depending on the type of test and my mood i guess i am usually ENFP or ENFJ but INFP comes pretty close too. I have my days that i am really extravert and days or situations that i am not.

11% # slightly expressed extravert
75% # distinctively expressed intuitive personality
25% # moderately expressed feeling personality
33% # moderately expressed perceiving personality

I am a Champion Idealist or an Idealistic Champion XD
Like the other Idealists, Champions are rather rare, say three or four percent of the population, but even more than the others they consider intense emotional experiences as being vital to a full life. Champions have a wide range and variety of emotions, and a great passion for novelty. They see life as an exciting drama, pregnant with possibilities for both good and evil, and they want to experience all the meaningful events and fascinating people in the world. The most outgoing of the Idealists, Champions often can't wait to tell others of their extraordinary experiences. Champions can be tireless in talking with others, like fountains that bubble and splash, spilling over their own words to get it all out. And usually this is not simple storytelling; Champions often speak (or write) in the hope of revealing some truth about human experience, or of motivating others with their powerful convictions. Their strong drive to speak out on issues and events, along with their boundless enthusiasm and natural talent with language, makes them the most vivacious and inspiring of all the types.

Fiercely individualistic, Champions strive toward a kind of personal authenticity, and this intention always to be themselves is usually quite attractive to others. At the same time, Champions have outstanding intuitive powers and can tell what is going on inside of others, reading hidden emotions and giving special significance to words or actions. In fact, Champions are constantly scanning the social environment, and no intriguing character or silent motive is likely to escape their attention. Far more than the other Idealists, Champions are keen and probing observers of the people around them, and are capable of intense concentration on another individual. Their attention is rarely passive or casual. On the contrary, Champions tend to be extra sensitive and alert, always ready for emergencies, always on the lookout for what's possible.

Champions are good with people and usually have a wide range of personal relationships. They are warm and full of energy with their friends. They are likable and at ease with colleagues, and handle their employees or students with great skill. They are good in public and on the telephone, and are so spontaneous and dramatic that others love to be in their company. Champions are positive, exuberant people, and often their confidence in the goodness of life and of human nature makes good things happen.

[The Stranger]

Kant didn't exactly have a positive personality. Kant was freakin' nuts.

maybe... but he was also a genius :P a self righteous one but one nonetheless

[The Stranger]

Well, this particular online version I'm fairly certain is worthless. I don't know about the actual version, but I'm somewhat suspicious because the business tie in can keep something like that chugging along in popularity even if it isn't accurate.

In general, having any test measuring a hard to define psychological variable DEFAULTS to questionable. There are quite a few personality tests that implicitly claim this one is illegitimate.



What if the answer is ignoring the test? That question isn't the slightest bit subjective. Everyone is frequently influenced by their emotions. It is testing how you want to perceive yourself, but it's pretending to be something entirely different, with a pretty little "You're a mastermind like einstein and kant" bow on top. I'm insulted because it's pandering to me. "Find your future career!" "Take the Jung marriage test!"



Can you estimate how introverted or extroverted you are based on memory? I bet you can, and I bet it would be more accurate and insightful than any test score...same for all of it.

lighten up dude :P its just for fun haha...

it is for me anyway.

[Sasaki Kojiro]

lighten up dude :P its just for fun haha...

it is for me anyway.

Sure, by the way are you a Gemini? :mellow:

[PershsNhpios]

I think Sasaki is upset because he took the test and came out as a healer or peasant.

He wouldn't be criticising the system if he was a Fieldmarshal.

[Beirut]

Apparently I am:

89% - very expressed introvert
38% - moderately expressed intuitive personality
62% - distinctively expressed feeling personality
11% - slightly expressed perceiving personality

If all this means is that I can have another beer, I'm happy with it. :balloon2:

[Hooahguy]

I came out as a Protector. Guess that means I should don a cape and start catching bad guys.

[The Stranger]

Sure, by the way are you a Gemini? :mellow:

mwuaha i thought i was libra... im confused :dizzy:

[Hax]

ENTP:
Slightly expressed extrovert (6%)
Slightly expressed intuitive personality (12%)
Slightly expressed thinking personality (12%)
Slightly expressed perceiving personality (11%)


Inventors begin building gadgets and mechanisms as young children, and never really stop, though as adults they will turn their inventiveness to many kinds of organizations, social as well as mechanical. There aren't many Inventors, say about two percent of the population, but they have great impact on our everyday lives. With their innovative, entrepreneurial spirit, Inventors are always on the lookout for a better way, always eyeing new projects, new enterprises, new processes. Always aiming to "build a better mousetrap."Inventors are keenly pragmatic, and often become expert at devising the most effective means to accomplish their ends.

Intriguing. Also, this:


You might find them in politics, in real estate development, in advertising, in marketing, or in public relations. They could be a venture capitalist, a management consult, or a sports agent.

Yuk. I'm a musician, not one of these...things.

[The Stranger]

I think Sasaki is upset because he took the test and came out as a healer or peasant.

He wouldn't be criticising the system if he was a Fieldmarshal.

i think you are on to something :P

[Csargo]

INTP

Introverted Intuitive Thinking Perceiving

56 62 50 44


Architects need not be thought of as only interested in drawing blueprints for buildings or roads or bridges. They are the master designers of all kinds of theoretical systems, including school curricula, corporate strategies, and new technologies. For Architects, the world exists primarily to be analyzed, understood, explained - and re-designed. External reality in itself is unimportant, little more than raw material to be organized into structural models. What is important for Architects is that they grasp fundamental principles and natural laws, and that their designs are elegant, that is, efficient and coherent.

Architects are rare - maybe one percent of the population - and show the greatest precision in thought and speech of all the types. They tend to see distinctions and inconsistencies instantaneously, and can detect contradictions no matter when or where they were made. It is difficult for an Architect to listen to nonsense, even in a casual conversation, without pointing out the speaker's error. And in any serious discussion or debate Architects are devastating, their skill in framing arguments giving them an enormous advantage. Architects regard all discussions as a search for understanding, and believe their function is to eliminate inconsistencies, which can make communication with them an uncomfortable experience for many.

Communication tip for INTP employee with an Idealist boss Ruthless pragmatists about ideas, and insatiably curious, Architects are driven to find the most efficient means to their ends, and they will learn in any manner and degree they can. They will listen to amateurs if their ideas are useful, and will ignore the experts if theirs are not. Authority derived from office, credential, or celebrity does not impress them. Architects are interested only in what make sense, and thus only statements that are consistent and coherent carry any weight with them.

Architects often seem difficult to know. They are inclined to be shy except with close friends, and their reserve is difficult to penetrate. Able to concentrate better than any other type, they prefer to work quietly at their computers or drafting tables, and often alone. Architects also become obsessed with analysis, and this can seem to shut others out. Once caught up in a thought process, Architects close off and persevere until they comprehend the issue in all its complexity. Architects prize intelligence, and with their grand desire to grasp the structure of the universe, they can seem arrogant and may show impatience with others who have less ability, or who are less driven.

I agree with Sasaki some of these questions were weird. I finished the test anyways for fun.

[Fisherking]

You might find them in politics, in real estate development, in advertising, in marketing, or in public relations. They could be a venture capitalist, a management consult, or a sports agent.



I thought he said that it was all positive? These people are all professional liars!:laugh4:

[Vladimir]

I think Sasaki is upset because he took the test and came out as a healer or peasant.

He wouldn't be criticising the system if he was a Fieldmarshal.

Methinks he doth protest too loudly.

[edyzmedieval]

I took it twice because there were too many questions who were RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE for me.

I got this:

ESFJ and ENTP.

[Populus Romanus]

ISTJ
very expressed inrovert
moderately expressed sensing personality
distinctly expressen thinking personality
slightly expressed judging personality

[Kagemusha]

ENTJ
Extraverted Intuitive Thinking Judging
Strength of the preferences %
11 25 12 1

You are:

* slightly expressed extravert
* moderately expressed intuitive personality
* slightly expressed thinking personality
* slightly expressed judging personality


"I don't care to sit by the window on an airplane. If I can't control it, why look?"

ENTJs have a natural tendency to marshall and direct. This may be expressed with the charm and finesse of a world leader or with the insensitivity of a cult leader. The ENTJ requires little encouragement to make a plan. One ENTJ put it this way... "I make these little plans that really don't have any importance to anyone else, and then feel compelled to carry them out." While "compelled" may not describe ENTJs as a group, nevertheless the bent to plan creatively and to make those plans reality is a common theme for NJ types.

ENTJs are often "larger than life" in describing their projects or proposals. This ability may be expressed as salesmanship, story-telling facility or stand-up comedy. In combination with the natural propensity for filibuster, our hero can make it very difficult for the customer to decline.

TRADEMARK: -- "I'm really sorry you have to die." (I realize this is an overstatement. However, most Fs and other gentle souls usually chuckle knowingly at this description.)

ENTJs are decisive. They see what needs to be done, and frequently assign roles to their fellows. Few other types can equal their ability to remain resolute in conflict, sending the valiant (and often leading the charge) into the mouth of hell. When challenged, the ENTJ may by reflex become argumentative. Alternatively (s)he may unleash an icy gaze that serves notice: the ENTJ is not one to be trifled with.
famous people of your type: Napoleon, Franklin D. Roosevelt , Mark Anthony, Sean Connery, Madonna, Yulia Tymoshenko

[G. Septimus]

Mine:
ENFJExtraverted iNtuitive Feeling Judging

Extraverted Intuitive Feeling Judging
Strength of the preferences %
33 25 38 11
moderately expressed extravert
moderately expressed intuitive personality
moderately expressed feeling personality
slightly expressed judging personality
Famous People: Bill Clinton, Tony Blair, Clara Barton (Founder of the American Red Cross), Ronald Reagan, Scipio Africanus, David