Personality Cafe banner
1 - 1 of 1 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,374 Posts
Largely reasonable points. The satire wasn't the greatest, but it was sufficient to support the overall message (which was to show up how easy it is to give any theory a degree of verisimilitude solely by keeping the construct vague and malleable). The parallels are evident enough - how easy is it, for instance, to dismiss in a Ti-dom what might usually be seen as Fi signs by talking about the similarities between both introverted judging functions, or talking about elevating the inferior (or alternatively being in the grip of it), or simply ascribing those signs (normally assigned to Fi) to some other function the person is "supposed" to have (Si or Ni, say)? The parallel of having S/N be inferred by whether your J/P was "thought" or "felt" works particularly well to illustrate just how clumsily some of the inferences usually drawn in "standard" functions theories are drawn. And I'd generally agree with the claim that what are most needed are better definitions, and that working from an unfalsifiable characterisation of the theory generally holds back that search for accurate definitions of real personality differences.

So, all in all, I think the article works well to emphasise some fair criticisms of MBTI theory.
 
1 - 1 of 1 Posts
Top