Any MBTI sites with subpar/misguided information out there?

[edcoaching]

Originally Posted by sarah

I agree -- the Best-Fit Type : Exploring the Multiple Models of Personality Type website has descriptions composed by type theorist Dr. Linda Berens, whose work has made a huge impact in the world of psychological type. Her research methods are unique (as far as I know) in that they involve having long conversations with multiple members of each of the 16 types whose type preferences have been verified by professionals who are anti-bias and who know what they're doing, and also using those people's own words in the descriptions. No wonder people like me who hate the romanticized or idealized (or insulting) type descriptions written by other type theorists rate them the best they've seen so far.

Sarah
ISFP

Actually a lot of the authors (but not a lot of the websites) use this technique. Anything by Lawrence, Hirsh, Kummerow, Quenk, Barger, Kirby, etc. not only did the interviews/gathered the facts, but sent the chapters or descriptions back out to people of that type to get unbiased wording.

[substitute]

Originally Posted by Jack Flak

Umm..."All of 'em, I think." I'm not really kidding around, either. It's all based on what someone perceives as true, and you know how perceptions go.

Yes. Most of them I come across are written from a very biased point of view, mostly you can tell the author was an NT with a grudge against SJ's and F's, in that order. The profiles of the N types are like eulogies, whilst the SJ's are made to sound like mindless cattle or startled bunnies. No wonder not many Sensors seem to take to the system or end up here, proportionally.

I've been thinking for a while that a really comprehensive website with indepth profiles for all of the types - as indepth as the INTP one that's found on INTPc - is really needed. I keep thinking of writing it myself, but it'd be a big job to do on my own. Would be good to have indepth descriptions of the individual functions. You can probably get all of these things from books or whatever, but you have to pay. I'd love to create a central, reliable and unbiased, free source for all of this.

But this one's pretty awful. See what I mean about unflattering for SJ's? And what's with the confident pegging of people's views on tattoos and stuff there??? LOL
ISFJ - Jung Type Descriptions

[sarah]

Originally Posted by edcoaching

Actually a lot of the authors (but not a lot of the websites) use this technique. Anything by Lawrence, Hirsh, Kummerow, Quenk, Barger, Kirby, etc. not only did the interviews/gathered the facts, but sent the chapters or descriptions back out to people of that type to get unbiased wording.

Sensing does not equal thinking only of mundane and trivial things. Well, it doesn't. The general stupidity of type descriptions IN BOOKS written by NTs and NFs about SJs and SPs ticks me off. I figure these authors probably have convinced themselves that anyone who is reasonably intelligent and interested (however mildly) in something that can be described as "abstract" must therfore prefer iNtuition. As a result, I think their books are pretty worthless.

Naomi Quenk isn't so terrible (albeit she thinks all introverts are shy loners), but most type authors, including the ones you mention, only take undeveloped examples of the SJ and SP types. You know what I mean -- they only notice and interview people who only use their preferred cognitive processes and never develop any of the supporting ones.

The difference between these people and Linda Berens/Dario Nardi is that Berens and Nardi actually used these interviewed people's own language in the decriptions -- they didn't filter it with their own editorial comments or color the wording with an INFP or INTP flavor first, and they were very careful not to make value judgments about what was being said, so as to make other types' descriptions sound worse than their own.

I waffled for years regarding my type preferences, precisely because of poorly written descriptions by authors who publish books on type. It finally took a qualified type practitioner to help me find my best type fit. And because of my experiences and what I notice others going through, I suspect many people who say they prefer iNtuition really do not, and it's the fault of bad descriptions in books, not just websites written by amateurs.

Sorry, but I feel extremely strongly about this.

Sarah
ISFP

[sarah]

Originally Posted by substitute

Yes. Most of them I come across are written from a very biased point of view, mostly you can tell the author was an NT with a grudge against SJ's and F's, in that order. The profiles of the N types are like eulogies, whilst the SJ's are made to sound like mindless cattle or startled bunnies. No wonder not many Sensors seem to take to the system or end up here, proportionally.

I've been thinking for a while that a really comprehensive website with indepth profiles for all of the types - as indepth as the INTP one that's found on INTPc - is really needed. I keep thinking of writing it myself, but it'd be a big job to do on my own. Would be good to have indepth descriptions of the individual functions. You can probably get all of these things from books or whatever, but you have to pay. I'd love to create a central, reliable and unbiased, free source for all of this.

But this one's pretty awful. See what I mean about unflattering for SJ's? And what's with the confident pegging of people's views on tattoos and stuff there??? LOL
ISFJ - Jung Type Descriptions

That's why Similarminds gets my vote for the Worst Type Webiste Ever. And like you I can't understand why the guy puts his own obsessions in there -- as if the rest of us really care about his generalizations about tattoos? If that kind of fluff is believed to be type-related, then why stop there? Why not analyze a whole host of other pointless things, like, which types might be more prone to buying red cars, or wearing chartreuse, or refusing to dye their hair once it goes gray.

I've actually thought of creating a website for ISFPs written by us and for us because most of what's written about our type is UTTER CRAP. But then, doing that would take a heck of a lot of time away from fun stuff I would rather do in my spare time, so I haven't bothered. Still, it annoys me that 98% of people who say they prefer iNtuition do not understand what it's like to prefer Sensing but still be able to use your tertiary or inferior intuition. I don't know why that is, but most "N" people really seem to be sold on the idea that they are the lucky few who have a whole brain and SJs and SPs only have half a brain. :P

Sarah
ISFP

[563 740]

Whatever site "Joe Butts" (hehehehehe) writes for also seemed pretty decent; he breaks down the functions in order of preference & whatnot.

[Jack Flak]

Originally Posted by 563 740

Whatever site "Joe Butts" (hehehehehe) writes for also seemed pretty decent; he breaks down the functions in order of preference & whatnot.

TypeLogic Home Page

Yes, it's been one of the simplest and best since '97 when I started reading about the business.

[sciski]

Originally Posted by sarah

I don't know why that is, but most "N" people really seem to be sold on the idea that they are the lucky few who have a whole brain and SJs and SPs only have half a brain. :P

You don't know why that is because you only have half a brain.

But I think it's really because some Ns keep running into Ss who don't seem to want to engage their Tertiary or Inferior N... and any unbalanced person is kinda annoying and in a way, really only using half their brain. I'm sure Ss who run into Ns that don't want to engage their Tertiary or Inferior S would also think that the N was not completely mentally there... But Ss have an advantage here in that they are the majority, so don't tend to be surrounded by unbalanced Ns who force them into certain ways of thinking.

[sarah]

Originally Posted by sciski

..But I think it's really because some Ns keep running into Ss who don't seem to want to engage their Tertiary or Inferior N... and any unbalanced person is kinda annoying and in a way, really only using half their brain. I'm sure Ss who run into Ns that don't want to engage their Tertiary or Inferior S would also think that the N was not completely mentally there... But Ss have an advantage here in that they are the majority, so don't tend to be surrounded by unbalanced Ns who force them into certain ways of thinking.

Yeah, I agree with you there. Regardless of your type, if you're completely unaware of how your non-preferences might be negatively affecting others, then you're going to leave a trail of annoyed people in your wake. At least being aware of it helps somewhat.

Perhaps the descriptions that are the most annoying are the ones that stick to describing just those SJs and SPs who have been exposed to a limited variety of life situations.

Sarah
ISFP

[mlittrell]

most of em are crap

[Anja]

I always have this creeping suspicion that some of those sites are originated by people who have been dissatisfied with the mental health services they've received!