I already knew you knew who I was, you made it pretty clear in your first reply, plus it's not like I made it a secret (I'm way too openly crabby and irreverent to claim inconspicuousness at this stage) . Your age was also kinda obvious when you mentioned when you first got exposed to MBTI. I was born around then. Doesn't mean I'll agree by default and that wouldn't be any fun, would it?Thank you for the cookies. I enjoyed your post.
I knew who you were before you replied to my post. I read a post of yours talking about your situation at school, with your fellow students and your concerns. I felt very empathetic as it brought back some rather unpleasant memories from high school and college. I wanted to say something that would be helpful and thought about it for some time. In the end I could not get anything I was happy with so I did nothing. Don't misunderstand me. I have no ulterior motives. I am 77 yrs old and think that doing something for people is a way of giving the finger to reality, and hopefully it can be helpful. I think that you are very bright. Me, too. It is definitely not easy if you have to navigate it alone.
The thing to consider is, you have a problem that is directly connected to personality, politics, and human nature.This is the fatal flaw with the idea as presented. Even if you were to prove a correlation between feeling types and democrats, that would not mean feeling itself is correlated with any one individual choosing a "democrat" political stance/identity.
Northern Lights, the sampling analysis is really quite interesting, but the above is all one needs, yes? This is why, for example, on IQ tests men tend to score higher and lower than women, but that data will not help you in the slightest when you compare any individual man's score to any individual woman's. Their IQ scores will still be what they are, even though gender correlates, on average, to certain tendencies in large samples. Whatever influenced the gender averages has no bearing on an individual score as read.
So forget the hows and whys of the method, the basis of the idea as presented just doesn't pass logical scrutiny for this reason. Thanks, Northern Lights.
And @DarkBarlow regarding the T/F shame spiral: yes, that's a thing on these boards, but I do not think that's what's going on here. In fact, if I had to guess, the back-and-forth between people like @Nell and @Nashvols (and myself at some points, and others) with @BlueFrog might be a product of the aforementioned peeps having a really good sense of reciprocal Fe (which is why they're so witty) but it's a carefully cultivated and hard-won sense. A better handle on Fe is earned through a very humbling and often painful process, so if it seems like someone is dispensing with Fe altogether, intentionally or unintentionally, it can be annoying. That's not hard to understand. In calling this out, subconsciously we may be dealing with our own baggage, but (somewhat) consciously, we're actually trying to help, if not the low-Fe poster, then the world at large, because a world with absolutely no Fe is unsustainable. (Although INTPs may be one of the most potentially antisocial types, we are still human, and humans are instinctively social animals.)
Unfortunately, if someone is really low on Fe, the deeper into it that person will go if criticized, ad infinitum. You can't call people with poor Fe out on not having Fe, because anyone with poor Fe will have a sense and history of constantly being misunderstood...which, of course, they often are/were, due to the faulty Fe. And since you can't improve Fe if you can't validate feedback, on it goes until either someone has a eureka moment of Fi (possible, but good luck!) or someone gives up.
And if you'd guess I think all of this because I can relate...somehow...you might not be wrong. You really, really might not.
Now I'd like to take this opportunity to remind people that there is a thread around these parts right now with puppies in it.
I'm getting a sense of déjà vu...I think another just as relevant option would be to find a way to designate which types shop at which supermarkets i.e. I would be an INTJ-R because I shop at Ralph's.
I'm tired of these superior Pavilions shoppers and I wanna know who they are on sight so I can preemptively disregard their ideas due to their inherent invalidity.
Full circle. INTP and INTJ arriving to the same conclusion in a symmetrically divergent way.I also think having an asterisk next to your type if you like plain tea would be very helpful as well, as I could then dismiss those who don't have it as sad degenerates devoid of good sense and save myself whatever time I'd waste trying to engage them in civilized speech.
I actually got stares because this made me cacklesnort in the middle of a cafeteria. You get a friend request too, I should've done it ages ago frankly but I somehow keep thinking you'd react like this::rolling::encouragement:
I think my issue with it is that I'm principally opposed to a 2 tea system.Full circle. INTP and INTJ arriving to the same conclusion in a symmetrically divergent way.
I still maintain tea preference is a far better discriminating tool. Overwriting the character of tea with additions is akin to doodling on books or vandalizing artwork. Pure savagery.
I will give you my viewpoint as a minority of one on Liberals. They are in order of importance: omelet makers, useful idiots and gimmes. The omelets are on the menu and coming soon. I was a useful idiot for most of my life as I think are most of the people here. I read Radical Son by David Horowitz and The Black Book of Communism back to back a couple of decades ago, and then, as some philosopher once said: "The scales fell from my eyes." No attempt at witticism here, just my take on what I consider the cold, hard facts, but you have to go get them as they will not suddenly appear in your daily life.Another issue I have with this is the focus on INTP. How does this new dichotomy work with the other 15 types? ESFJ's that vote Republican are esfj? ENTJ's that vote Democrat are entj?
Let's also not forget that in the US, minorities generally support Democrats at a much higher rate than Republicans....so would this mean that all XXTX minorities that vote Democrat are xxtx? That seems like it would skew the distribution...
I know that I will get a civil, non-condescending response from you, and that you understand simple statements in English. I do not consider myself to have made a hypothesis, but to be simply making a verbal statement about the arrangement of the 16 types when they are arranged from the type which has the highest percentage of it's members choosing Democrat in decreasing order to the last type which has the smallest percentage. That arrangement shows that the 8 types most likely to choose Democrat are all F types so they are all more likely to choose Democrat than any T type. To me that is a correlation. When you look at the types in the half of all types so arranged, the only thing they have in common is F. As for E,I,N,S,J or P they are all equally represented in both the top and bottom half of the list, the only other anomaly is that all the T types are in the bottom half, which is understandable because T-F is a zero-sum game, as are the others. Is there any part of this which is unclear or you think shows faulty reasoning. If so please point it out. If not, do you still think I am making a hypothesis? If so, why? Thanks.I dunno. The whole idea still looks like a hypothesis in search of data rather than a judgement in search of validation to me. But then I don't look at a urinal and see art either.
'Additional data for finer analysis'...without the T/F stats...How do 51/49s stack up? What about the 75/25s?I know that I will get a civil, non-condescending response from you, and that you understand simple statements in English. I do not consider myself to have made a hypothesis, but to be simply making a verbal statement about the arrangement of the 16 types when they are arranged from the type which has the highest percentage of it's members choosing Democrat in decreasing order to the last type which has the smallest percentage. That arrangement shows that the 8 types most likely to choose Democrat are all F types so they are all more likely to choose Democrat than any T type. To me that is a correlation. When you look at the types in the half of all types so arranged, the only thing they have in common is F. As for E,I,N,S,J or P they are all equally represented in both the top and bottom half of the list, the only other anomaly is that all the T types are in the bottom half, which is understandable because T-F is a zero-sum game, as are the others. Is there any part of this which is unclear or you think shows faulty reasoning. If so please point it out. If not, do you still think I am making a hypothesis? If so, why? Thanks.
You don't see art because you flood your eyes with preconceptions based on a life time of using urinals. If you did not have that experience with it and one was unearthed by an archaeological expedition and you saw if for the very first time who knows how you would see it, but definitely not the way you do now. It reminds me of those Yoni pedestals with the lingam inside that are so predominant among Shaivite temples and personal shrines. The lingam is invisible illustrating the spiritual nature of Shiva and transcending the merely physical while calling the physical into existence. Spoken as a former archaeologist. ) But I also get your point and would very much like to recommend a book by Tom Wolfe called The Painted Word, and if you think tall, glass box buildings suck I would throw in his From Bauhaus to Our House. For immediate fun if you are not familiar with it, or even if you are, Google "Deconstructivist Architecture" and look at the images. They are a hoot. Also a conscious attempt to destroy the architectural traditions world wide made possible among the fruits of victory.
Huummm? i can see by your comments that the brain scrambler was attached to my post again. Let me answer you question about where the 51/49 stack up. One letter wins by one, depending on which has the 51. Am I doing something bizarre by looking at it this way? Every type (eight) in which F had a higher score than T was in the first half of the list. All eight in which T had a higher score F was in the bottom half. Can I make the assumption that in every type with a F in it, that every individual in that type had a higher score for F than for T? Can I make the assumption that if I take a percentage of the respondents who were given that type that each one wold have had their F score because it was higher than their T score? I know that this requires higher arithmetic skills in that it uses the concepts of "less than" and "greater than" which can be tricky, given the rigidity of the number line, which in itself may be a difficult concept. The percentages (we are really getting into higher math now; I'm sorry but it just has to be done), the percentages of each of the 16 types in the MBTI which choose each of the three political positions is given by CCP. i have to trust their integrity on the accuracy of these numbers (pesky little bastards) and they did not just throw together some at random, or should I even mention than concept as it is so arcane. If all this is true then all the individuals who chose Democrat in the eight types which in which the highest percentage did chose Democrat all had higher F than T scores. Is this not remarkable as their cannot possible be any association of F with Democrat. Here I throw all caution to the wind. It's like F types all had the same magnetic charge and were attracted to the same pole when placed in a magnetic field. Because that pole is has the opposite charge than they do it also illustrates the concept of useful idiots, for whom ideology blinds them to ontology, but that's another rant. I would ask you if that clarified anything, but that isn't necessary. I did have fun writing the paragraph. ) About the 75/25 thing. That is what the 2nd Order type is supposed to do. The logic is the same as above. There you are given a T or an F depending which one has the most times chosen as the entire T-F axis is split in half, whichever half has the most gets the letter. In the 2nd order only the possible range of responses for a given letter is split in half. If that letter has less than half of the possible choices then it gets a lower-case letter, if more than half it gets a capital letter. But with just this little additional discrimination you now have 256 unique sub-types for any given type, and the potential information that has already been accumulated for your data set can possibly yield even more. I would call this additional discrimination a 2nd Order Type Table with 16 cells within each of which would be the 256 sub-cells of the 2nd Order types. For anyone who knows anything about spreadsheets this is child's play and their graphic capabilities make looking at the data in many different ways very informative.'Additional data for finer analysis'...without the T/F stats...How do 51/49s stack up? What about the 75/25s?
And then there's lies, damned lies and statistics. Dean Edell had my favorite take on this when it came to medical studies, '75% of people involved in car accidents surveyed had carrots for dinner at least once the month prior. Eating carrots causes car accidents!'