Personality Cafe banner

1 - 20 of 51 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,247 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
ISTJ - Most Responsible

ISFJ - Most Loyal

INFJ - Most Contemplative

INTJ - Most Independent

ISTP - Most Pragmatic

ISFP - Most Artistic

INFP - Most Idealistic

INTP - Most Conceptual

ESTP - Most Spontaneous

ESFP - Most Generous

ENFP - Most Optimistic

ENTP - Most Inventive

ESTJ - Most Hard Charging

ESFJ - Most Harmonizing

ENFJ - Most Persuasive

ENTJ - Most Commanding




I took this from a website. Do you find this accurate? Does your myers briggs personality type fit those characteristics listed above?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,491 Posts
With one big exception (see my next post), that seems like a reasonably OK list to me, assuming someone's OK with the idea of using single words (that can be subject to different interpretations) and then choosing a single type as the "most" in that department.

I'd say INTJs may deserve our reputation as most independent but, if so, INTPs aren't far behind.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,491 Posts
I think Keirsey had a lot of insightful things to say about the MBTI types, but I also think he made a big mistake when he decided to label ISFPs the "Artists." In going from Please Understand Me to Please Understand Me II, he actually changed Artist to "Composer," but I'm afraid that correction wasn't sufficiently wide in its scope. To his credit, Keirsey also said, right from the start, that NFs were by far the most common types in the arts that involved "verbal and written communication," but the fact is that N's are more common in most of the other arts, too.

My understanding is that, if you distinguish art from crafts — to use a familiar distinction — then, statistically speaking, most types of creative artists (using that term broadly) are disproportionately populated by N's — and it doesn't much matter whether the art you're talking about involves physical stuff (like painting) or incorporeal stuff (like poetry). Browsing the statistics in the MBTI Manual, it looks like maybe a P preference has the second-biggest influence on artistic interests, with F in third place.

Of the 114 professional fine artists in one study shown in the second edition of the MBTI Manual, 91% of them were N's (65% NF and 26% NT). More specifically, 25 were INFP and only one was ISFP.

The list of occupational rankings along the SN dimension at the back of the MBTI Manual (based on a variety of studies in the MBTI database) includes the following entries:

  • Photographers: 73% N
  • Teachers of art, drama & music: 71% N
  • Artists & entertainers (broad category): 69% N
  • Musicians & composers: 65% N
  • Designers: 58% N
There are no artistic occupations that are majority-S.

The correlation between N and creativity isn't limited to the arts, either. An entire section of the MBTI Manual is devoted to "Studies of Creativity," and they include a series of studies conducted by the Institute for Personality Assessment and Research (at UC Berkeley) that looked at people who both worked in creative professions and were "selected by peer nomination" as "highly creative." Out of the resulting 107 "highly creative" mathematicians, architects, research scientists and writers, only three were S's. A 2½-page table presents the results of multiple other studies correlating various measures of creativity (from students majoring in the arts to people working in creative fields), and N's are always in the majority (and often quite overwhelmingly).

And all these N majorities are particularly noteworthy in light of the fact that N's are typically reported to make up only around 25-30% of the general population.

It's widely accepted (and I agree) that the Big Five Openness to Experience factor is essentially tapping into the same underlying human temperament dimension as MBTI S/N, and being high on Openness (the Big Five equivalent of an N preference) is associated with aesthetic interests of all kinds (involving both the verbal and non-verbal arts). The Big Five Inventory is one of the more well-regarded (and academically sanctioned) Big Five tests, and its 44 items include the following three (all of which test for Openness to Experience):

  • "Has few artistic interests" [reverse-scored]
  • "Values artistic, aesthetic experiences"
  • "Is sophisticated in art, music, or literature"
I'd say that, if there's a single type that deserves to be viewed as the quintessential "creative artist" type, it's probably the INFP.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,596 Posts
I think Keirsey had a lot of insightful things to say about the MBTI types, but I also think he made a big mistake when he decided to label ISFPs the "Artists." In going from Please Understand Me to Please Understand Me II, he actually changed Artist to "Composer," but I'm afraid that correction wasn't sufficiently wide in its scope. To his credit, Keirsey also said, right from the start, that NFs were by far the most common types in the arts that involved "verbal and written communication," but the fact is that N's are more common in most of the other arts, too.

My understanding is that, if you distinguish art from crafts — to use a familiar distinction — then, statistically speaking, most types of creative artists (using that term broadly) are disproportionately populated by N's — and it doesn't much matter whether the art you're talking about involves physical stuff (like painting) or incorporeal stuff (like poetry). Browsing the statistics in the MBTI Manual, it looks like maybe a P preference has the second-biggest influence on artistic interests, with F in third place.

Of the 114 professional fine artists in one study shown in the second edition of the MBTI Manual, 91% of them were N's (65% NF and 26% NT). More specifically, 25 were INFP and only one was ISFP.

The list of occupational rankings along the SN dimension at the back of the MBTI Manual (based on a variety of studies in the MBTI database) includes the following entries:

  • Photographers: 73% N
  • Teachers of art, drama & music: 71% N
  • Artists & entertainers (broad category): 69% N
  • Musicians & composers: 65% N
  • Designers: 58% N
There are no artistic occupations that are majority-S.

The correlation between N and creativity isn't limited to the arts, either. An entire section of the MBTI Manual is devoted to "Studies of Creativity," and they include a series of studies conducted by the Institute for Personality Assessment and Research (at UC Berkeley) that looked at people who both worked in creative professions and were "selected by peer nomination" as "highly creative." Out of the resulting 107 "highly creative" mathematicians, architects, research scientists and writers, only three were S's. A 2½-page table presents the results of multiple other studies correlating various measures of creativity (from students majoring in the arts to people working in creative fields), and N's are always in the majority (and often quite overwhelmingly).

And all these N majorities are particularly noteworthy in light of the fact that N's are typically reported to make up only around 25-30% of the general population.

It's widely accepted (and I agree) that the Big Five Openness to Experience factor is essentially tapping into the same underlying human temperament dimension as MBTI S/N, and being high on Openness (the Big Five equivalent of an N preference) is associated with aesthetic interests of all kinds (involving both the verbal and non-verbal arts). The Big Five Inventory is one of the more well-regarded (and academically sanctioned) Big Five tests, and its 44 items include the following three (all of which test for Openness to Experience):

  • "Has few artistic interests" [reverse-scored]
  • "Values artistic, aesthetic experiences"
  • "Is sophisticated in art, music, or literature"
I'd say that, if there's a single type that deserves to be viewed as the quintessential "creative artist" type, it's probably the INFP.
and here's the proof:

Dawn mix 2 by DonutsGalacticos on SoundCloud - Hear the world’s sounds
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
216 Posts
I'm an ENFP and I don't think I'm that optimistic, I may be slightly idealistic but I'm quite a realist in general
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
707 Posts
I think Keirsey had a lot of insightful things to say about the MBTI types, but I also think he made a big mistake when he decided to label ISFPs the "Artists." In going from Please Understand Me to Please Understand Me II, he actually changed Artist to "Composer," but I'm afraid that correction wasn't sufficiently wide in its scope. To his credit, Keirsey also said, right from the start, that NFs were by far the most common types in the arts that involved "verbal and written communication," but the fact is that N's are more common in most of the other arts, too.

My understanding is that, if you distinguish art from crafts — to use a familiar distinction — then, statistically speaking, most types of creative artists (using that term broadly) are disproportionately populated by N's — and it doesn't much matter whether the art you're talking about involves physical stuff (like painting) or incorporeal stuff (like poetry). Browsing the statistics in the MBTI Manual, it looks like maybe a P preference has the second-biggest influence on artistic interests, with F in third place.

Of the 114 professional fine artists in one study shown in the second edition of the MBTI Manual, 91% of them were N's (65% NF and 26% NT). More specifically, 25 were INFP and only one was ISFP.

The list of occupational rankings along the SN dimension at the back of the MBTI Manual (based on a variety of studies in the MBTI database) includes the following entries:

  • Photographers: 73% N
  • Teachers of art, drama & music: 71% N
  • Artists & entertainers (broad category): 69% N
  • Musicians & composers: 65% N
  • Designers: 58% N
There are no artistic occupations that are majority-S.

The correlation between N and creativity isn't limited to the arts, either. An entire section of the MBTI Manual is devoted to "Studies of Creativity," and they include a series of studies conducted by the Institute for Personality Assessment and Research (at UC Berkeley) that looked at people who both worked in creative professions and were "selected by peer nomination" as "highly creative." Out of the resulting 107 "highly creative" mathematicians, architects, research scientists and writers, only three were S's. A 2½-page table presents the results of multiple other studies correlating various measures of creativity (from students majoring in the arts to people working in creative fields), and N's are always in the majority (and often quite overwhelmingly).

And all these N majorities are particularly noteworthy in light of the fact that N's are typically reported to make up only around 25-30% of the general population.

It's widely accepted (and I agree) that the Big Five Openness to Experience factor is essentially tapping into the same underlying human temperament dimension as MBTI S/N, and being high on Openness (the Big Five equivalent of an N preference) is associated with aesthetic interests of all kinds (involving both the verbal and non-verbal arts). The Big Five Inventory is one of the more well-regarded (and academically sanctioned) Big Five tests, and its 44 items include the following three (all of which test for Openness to Experience):

  • "Has few artistic interests" [reverse-scored]
  • "Values artistic, aesthetic experiences"
  • "Is sophisticated in art, music, or literature"
I'd say that, if there's a single type that deserves to be viewed as the quintessential "creative artist" type, it's probably the INFP.
I think this wins the award for "most ridiculous thing I've read on the forums."
First of all, "openness" has NOTHING to do with S/N... that already shows you have a huge lack of understanding of MBTI (shame you have so many posts).

Second of all... one of the DEFINING characteristics of Si is LITERALLY "great eye for aesthetic appeal." ...N types are typically thought of being BAD at doing that, so when you say "N's are better than S's at aesthetic appeal" it makes no sense.

Thirdly, I went to a performing arts high school, and the people who excelled were SP's... really. My best friend is/was ISFP and she was one of the most musically-inclined people I've met. She is now studying music performance at university.
Additionally, a large number of the visual arts students were pretty stereotypical xSFP's.

The dance students seemed to be S's as well - SJ's or SP's.

and I wasn't friends with very many drama students so I couldn't tell you what types were common there.

There were a lot of N's in the literary arts program, though...


The amount of incorrect/biased S vs N descriptions out there make it sound as if "S = boring, uncreative" "N = spontaneous, creative" and so artists are probably biased and incorrectly think of themselves as N's.



Look at the musical RENT - it's all about "starving artists" and nearly everyone in the story is an S.



You're just trying to have your cake and eat it too.
How devastated will you be if you ever find our you're actually an S? Would you break down and cry?
...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,596 Posts
Fuck you man, i never tried to say that, asshole. Of course Ss can be musicians too, but maybe the 80% of them are just uncreative individuals that achieve success by ripping off other well known bands. Wolfmother is a great example of this. You called for it, you have it. FFS.
See i was just trying to give some proof for my case. I don't care 'bout nor for anyone here. Furthermore that's just my ego spitting, do whatever you want with it, swallow it or matrix it.
OH STOP... generation z.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
707 Posts
Fuck you man, i never tried to say that, asshole.
Oh sorry if I was assuming to much... let's see what else you have to say~

80% of them are just uncreative individuals that achieve success by ripping off other well known bands.
oh...
LOL
turns out I was right about your intentions all along. <3




i never tried to say that
i never tried to say that
i never tried to say that
i never tried to say that
i never tried to say that
i never tried to say that
i never tried to say that
i never tried to say that
i never tried to say that
i never tried to say that


Lol.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,491 Posts
I think this wins the award for "most ridiculous thing I've read on the forums."
First of all, "openness" has NOTHING to do with S/N...
McCrae and Costa (probably the leading Big Five psychologists) certainly disagree with you there.

And in any case, as described in my first post, the correlations in MBTI data between artistic interests and an N preference have been quite strong and consistent.

But here's some more cake for you, if you're hungry...

The official MBTI folks put out Career Reports that show the popularity for each type of "22 broad occupational categories," based on "a sample of more than 92,000 people in 282 jobs who said they were satisfied with their jobs." The sample included 3,230 ISFPs.

Here are the "Most Attractive Job Families" (= scores above 60) for ISFPs:

Health Care Support [100]
—Nurse's aide, veterinary assistant, pharmacy aide, physical therapy aide
Architecture and Engineering [91]
—Architect, surveyor, mechanical engineer, chemical engineer
Food Preparation and Service [78]
—Chef, food service manager, bartender, host/hostess
Office and Administrative Support [78]
—Bank teller, receptionist, clerical services, legal secretary
Building and Grounds Maintenance [75]
—Gardener, tree trimmer, housekeeping, lawn service supervisor
Transportation and Materials Moving [66]
—Pilot, air traffic controller, driver, freight handler
Personal Care and Service [64]
—Lodging manager, personal trainer, hairdresser, child care provider

In 19th place (out of 22) for the ISFPs (with a job satisfaction score of 30 out of 100) is the category that includes arts, design, entertainment and media:

Arts, Design, Entertainment, Sports, and Media
— Artist, coach, musician, reporter

By contrast, for INFPs, jobs involving creative work and music are on the short list of "occupations that INFPs are attracted to."

Don't get me wrong, though. I understand that data like this, involving thousands of people, is no match for your personal experience. :tongue:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
707 Posts
I told you what you were wishing to read, not my actual opinion.
You obviously have such an eloquent way with words~
I mean, INFP's are said to be good writers so I shouldn't expect anything less, right hun?


I wonder how funny your reaction would be if someone typed you as an SJ.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,596 Posts
I don't even speak english in real life, i just use it for internet. You seem to know nothing about life. Furthermore writting eloquently has nothing to do with types, go do some search and look some INFPs artist interviews and make up your own conclusions.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
707 Posts
McCrae and Costa (probably the leading Big Five psychologists) certainly disagree with you there.
Was the Big 5 test not created because MBTI was viewed as insufficient? To say, "O I SCORED HIGH ON OPEN-MINDED SO I MUST BE AN N" is the most idiotic thing I could even imagine anyone doing.



But here's some more cake for you, if you're hungry...
You're not doing it right.




Here are the "Most Attractive Job Families" (= scores above 60) for ISFPs:

Health Care Support [100]
—Nurse's aide, veterinary assistant, pharmacy aide, physical therapy aide
Architecture and Engineering [91]
—Architect, surveyor, mechanical engineer, chemical engineer
Food Preparation and Service [78]
—Chef, food service manager, bartender, host/hostess
Office and Administrative Support [78]
—Bank teller, receptionist, clerical services, legal secretary
Building and Grounds Maintenance [75]
—Gardener, tree trimmer, housekeeping, lawn service supervisor
Transportation and Materials Moving [66]
—Pilot, air traffic controller, driver, freight handler
Personal Care and Service [64]
—Lodging manager, personal trainer, hairdresser, child care provider

In 19th place (out of 22) for the ISFPs (with a job satisfaction score of 30 out of 100) is the category that includes arts, design, entertainment and media:
This just in - Architecture/engineering takes 0 creativity!
And I hadn't realized that a person can't pursue artistic interests outside of their careers... how close-minded of you. That means you're 100% an S!


By contrast, for INFPs, jobs involving creative work and music are on the short list of "occupations that INFPs are attracted to."
INFPs are at the very top (WAAAAAY above any other type) of my list for "Special snowflake syndrome"
it validates them SO MUCH to be seen as "unique" and "creative" that they'll risk anything to pursue careers in those fields even if they're not the most inclined.

ISFP's have a little more sense in them and don't always do so.



Don't get me wrong, though. I understand that data like this, involving thousands of people, is no match for your personal experience. :tongue:
MBTI is pseudo-psychology. Don't pretend like these "studies" hold much ground
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,491 Posts
MBTI is pseudo-psychology. Don't pretend like these "studies" hold much ground
On hard sciences, soft sciences and pseudosciences, and where the MBTI stands in that regard, see this post, which includes links that point to quite a lot of scientific support for the MBTI.

This just in - Architecture/engineering takes 0 creativity!
What on earth is that supposed to be a response to? Neither I — nor any respectable source — has ever made anything remotely resembling a claim that S's have no creative abilities.

Did your recent OP claim that only SJs had any interest in music? Of course not. The MBTI is about tendencies and probabilities. So-called "N characteristics" are characteristics that, on average, N's tend to exhibit to a greater degree than S's. Anybody who says things like "all N's are this" or "all S's are that" or "S's can't do this" is seriously confused about what the underlying personality dimensions are about.

I hope you're not one of those.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,805 Posts
McCrae and Costa (probably the leading Big Five psychologists) certainly disagree with you there.

And in any case, as described in my first post, the correlations in MBTI data between artistic interests and an N preference have been quite strong and consistent.

But here's some more cake for you, if you're hungry...

The official MBTI folks put out Career Reports that show the popularity for each type of "22 broad occupational categories," based on "a sample of more than 92,000 people in 282 jobs who said they were satisfied with their jobs." The sample included 3,230 ISFPs.

Here are the "Most Attractive Job Families" (= scores above 60) for ISFPs:

Health Care Support [100]
—Nurse's aide, veterinary assistant, pharmacy aide, physical therapy aide
Architecture and Engineering [91]
—Architect, surveyor, mechanical engineer, chemical engineer
Food Preparation and Service [78]
—Chef, food service manager, bartender, host/hostess
Office and Administrative Support [78]
—Bank teller, receptionist, clerical services, legal secretary
Building and Grounds Maintenance [75]
—Gardener, tree trimmer, housekeeping, lawn service supervisor
Transportation and Materials Moving [66]
—Pilot, air traffic controller, driver, freight handler
Personal Care and Service [64]
—Lodging manager, personal trainer, hairdresser, child care provider

In 19th place (out of 22) for the ISFPs (with a job satisfaction score of 30 out of 100) is the category that includes arts, design, entertainment and media:

Arts, Design, Entertainment, Sports, and Media
— Artist, coach, musician, reporter

By contrast, for INFPs, jobs involving creative work and music are on the short list of "occupations that INFPs are attracted to."

Don't get me wrong, though. I understand that data like this, involving thousands of people, is no match for your personal experience. :tongue:
But they made the test! The system, the requirements. They ask, "Do you like menial tasks?" fifteen different ways and then come back with stats that show that SJs do menial tasks as if they discovered something or it is meaningful or reflective of some psychological truth.

No, it is an arbitrary made up system from which you get out precisely what you put in.

You list these occupations and say that if you are an SJ you probably fit into X menial task job... but you aren't saying that at all. You are saying that if you enjoy humdrum menial tasks you are bound to probably do humdrum menial tasks.

So, yes, in that case MBTI and these stats and studies are absolutely correct. Nailed it.

That was exciting. Can we all go home now? We learned that (probably) creative people are, get this!, (probably) creative. And we know it is true because we can TEST IT!

Yes, that is right. Empirical proof that people who report themselves as being creative have jobs involving creativity. That is iron clad.

MBTI and these studies are all a perfectly legitimate self-contained system... and y'all are welcome to it. For whatever in the world it could possibly be worth.

These arguments back and forth are constant conflations of one specific system with what people perceive as a theory of cognition. The arguments needn't continue for a second longer, because it is nothing but a misunderstanding.

An apple telling an orange that it is being an apple wrong.

If MBTI wants N to be the creative artistic type, then fabulous. Self contained system doing its thing. It's just a shame they chose to co-opt Jung's terminology... since it is not vaguely reflective of it. Not vaguely. It absolutely and openly contradicts him. Expanding on Jung is one thing, but they just did something else entirely 'inspired by' Jung, but it isn't the same thing at all.

So, now that a renaissance back to Jung (building from there, not from Myers) has happened, there is a confusion. Like a Christian arguing with a Muslim that his view of Redemption is wrong because he doesn't understand 'religious principles' but really he is just arguing something altogether different, though it confuses the mind by using the same or similar words to similar ends.

I am trying to discipline myself into saying stuff like 'If you mean MBTI, then X... but if you mean JCF, then Y.."

Then, of course, we can rip each other up over which viewpoint is better. And in doing so will expose in ourselves certain cognitive lenses. The same lenses that a long long time ago prompted Carl Jung to consider at length the problem of types. Which was a question of cognition... and thus answered by a study of cognition.

MBTI is something else entirely. Such a pursuit is hardly even a pretense of that system.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
707 Posts
On hard sciences, soft sciences and pseudosciences, and where the MBTI stands in that regard, see this post, which includes links that point to quite a lot of scientific support for the MBTI.
Stop linking to your own posts.
You can't just throw around posts you've made as "evidence".... and besides, the ignorance in each and every on of them is making me more and more annoyed.


What on earth is that supposed to be a response to? Neither I — nor any respectable source — has ever made anything remotely resembling a claim that S's have no creative abilities.
You said ISFP's weren't drawn to any artistic careers until their 22nd one or something like that even though Architecture was #2.

Did your recent OP claim that only SJs had any interest in music?
I'm sure there's a logical fallacy for the way you keep derailing and skewing what you actually said.


Of course not. The MBTI is about tendencies and probabilities. So-called "N characteristics" are characteristics that, on average, N's tend to exhibit to a greater degree than S's.
The grass outside of my house is green.

Anybody who says things like "all N's are this" or "all S's are that" or "S's can't do this" is seriously confused about what the underlying personality dimensions are about.
who said that?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,491 Posts
Stop linking to your own posts.
You can't just throw around posts you've made as "evidence".... and besides, the ignorance in each and every on of them is making me more and more annoyed.
The "evidence" in the posts I'm linking to isn't my evidence, and the only reason I link to my posts is to avoid repeating their contents unnecessarily by pasting them into a second post. If you can't be bothered to click on them and find that out, I'm afraid I don't see that as my problem — or my loss.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
707 Posts
The "evidence" in the posts I'm linking to isn't my evidence, and the only reason I link to my posts is to avoid repeating their contents unnecessarily by pasting them into a second post. If you can't be bothered to click on them and find that out, I'm afraid I don't see that as my problem — or my loss.
You're forcing yourself to be *SUCH* a Te user.
Links to posts that are links to posts....



Will you stop derailing if I give you your special snowflake points?
 
1 - 20 of 51 Posts
Top