Sunday, January 24, 2010

No Neat Little Boxes for Moi

In the comments to a previous post, Relentless, there's been quite a lot of talk about the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MCTI) for assessing personality type. As I've written before, I'm not enthralled with this tool, not because I don't think it doesn't has some merit or value for some people, but because I don't seem to fit well in ANY of the neat little boxes or categories. I seem to draw equally from both sides of the two-sided sets in most instances.

For this post, I'll be quoting from one of the many websites that help to explain these personality preferences. Listed items will be followed by their tag within the set.
1. Where is your energy naturally directed?
Extraverts' energy is directed primarily outward, towards people and things outside of themselves. Introverts' energy is primarily directed inward, towards their own thoughts, perceptions, and reactions. Therefore, Extraverts tend to be more naturally active, expressive, social, and interested in many things, whereas Introverts tend to be more reserved, private, cautious, and interested in fewer interactions, but with greater depth and focus.

My analysis of me.
  • Have high energy (Extravert)
  • Talk more than listen (Extravert)
  • Think out loud (Extravert)
  • Think, then act (Introvert)
  • Feel comfortable being alone (Introvert)
  • Prefer to work "behind-the-scenes" (Introvert)
  • Can sometimes be easily distracted & Have good powers of concentration (both)
  • Prefer to focus on one thing at a time (Introvert)
  • Are outgoing & enthusiastic (Extravert)
Scorecard: 4 - Extravert, 4 - Introvert, 1 - Both

2. What kind of information do you naturally notice and remember?
Sensors notice the facts, details, and realities of the world around them whereas Intuitives are more interested in connections and relationships between facts as well as the meaning, or possibilities of the information. Sensors tend to be practical and literal people, who trust past experience and often have good common sense. Intuitives tend to be imaginative, theoretical people who trust their hunches and pride themselves on their creativity.

My analysis of me.
  • Focus on details & specifics & Focus on the big picture & possibilities (both)
  • Admire practical solutions & Admire creative ideas (both)
  • Notice details & remember facts & Notice anything new or different (both)
  • Are pragmatic - see what is & Are inventive - see what could be (both)
  • Think about future implications (Intuitive)
  • Trust actual experience (Sensor)
  • Like to use established skills (Sensor)
  • Like to figure things out for themselves (Intuitive)
  • Work at a steady pace & Work in bursts of energy (both)
Scorecard: 2 - Sensor, 2 - Intuitive, 5 - Both

3. How do you decide or come to conclusions?
Thinkers make decisions based primarily on objective and impersonal criteria--what makes the most sense and what is logical. Feelers make decisions based primarily on their personal values and how they feel about the choices. So, Thinkers tend to be cool, analytical, and are convinced by logical reasoning. Feelers tend to be sensitive, empathetic, and are compelled by extenuating circumstances and a constant search for harmony.

My analysis of me.
  • Make decisions objectively (Thinker)
  • Appear warm and friendly (Feeler)
  • Are most convinced by rational arguments (Thinker)
  • Are honest and direct (Thinker)
  • Value honesty and fairness & Value harmony and compassion (both)
  • Take few things personally (Thinker)
  • Tend to see flaws (Thinker)
  • Are motivated by achievement (Thinker)
  • Argue or debate issues for fun (Thinker)
Scorecard: 7 - Thinker, 1 - Feeler, 1 - Both

4. What kind of environment makes you the most comfortable?
Judgers prefer a structured, ordered, and fairly predictable environment, where they can make decisions and have things settled. Perceivers prefer to experience as much of the world as possible, so they like to keep their options open and are most comfortable adapting. So, Judgers tend to be organized and productive while Perceivers tend to be flexible, curious, and nonconforming.

My analysis of me.
  • May have difficulty making decisions (Perceiver)
  • Are serious & conventional & Are playful & unconventional (both)
  • Pay attention to time & are prompt (Judger)
  • Prefer to start projects (Perceiver)
  • Work first, play later (Judger)
  • Want things decided & Want to keep their options open (both)
  • Question the need for many rules (Perceiver)
  • Like to make & stick with plans (Judger)
  • Find comfort in schedules (Judger)
Scorecard: 4 - Judger, 3 - Perceiver, 2 - Both
Of course, my analysis is based on my own subjective view of myself. Each of you might come to different conclusions. Since I tend to be a moody person, the answers are often influenced by my current mood.

With the exception of the Thinker designation, I don't appear to fit into any of the other categories. So, I've come up with my own code. I'm a WSTP (Wacky, Strange, Thinking, Person). :>)


  1. WSTP. I love it. Incidentally, in Hawaii, "moi" is a kind of particularly delicious fish, (Pacific threadfin) traditionally reserved for royalty, but now aquacultured and put in neat little boxes for the Japanese. (I thought it was time for a joke.)

  2. There once was a fish from Hawaii,
    who found it hard to say "Goodbye-ee".
    But from sea to a tin,
    where does A fish begin?
    To be eaten, you first have to die-ee.

    It is certainly time for a joke.
    Before we all go up in smoke.
    A limerick, too,
    if one's low-down and blue,
    might appeal to a regular bloke.

    Religion and politics mix,
    like explosives and matches and sticks.
    It is wise to stay clear,
    of downers and beer,
    For a bad situation to fix.

    Some of us may think it quite daft,
    To saddle and ride a giraffe.
    But poison to one, is good food to one's mom,
    It is rarely a bad thing to laugh.

  3. Mon dieu! Des bonnes plaisanteries! Maybe we're all OCD. In a good way.

  4. Dis donc, alors! Que tu parle le francais aussi quand meme.
    On dois rire de temps en temps, non?
    Merci a dieu pour les petits surprises dans une vie souvent triste.
    Pour La Gloire!

  5. Crow,
    I love to things that are funny. For me though, you've just illustrated one of my key points -- you refuse to dialog in any meaningful way because you're too full of yourself.

  6. Wrong again.
    But I don't mind.

  7. Crow,
    I LOVE responses like that last one. You're unwittingly making my argument for me.

  8. Nice that you're enjoying yourself.
    It's about time.
    But I rarely do anything unwittingly, RT.
    I know what I am talking about.
    Strangely, there are actually people that do.

  9. These types of tests are yet another attempt by society to put people into a box and stereotype them negatively in many cases.

  10. Crow,
    You MAY indeed know what you're talking about, but the problem is that you provide no evidence to support that conclusion.

    I realize this is partly my fault. For too long I have allowed your vacuous pronouncements to grace this blog unchallenged. More often than not, I just skip over them.

    Beginning right now, I'm not going to let any of them pass in silence. Each time you spew out your amateurish armchair philosophy AND you don't provide a shred of substantive information to back up your claims, I'm going to point it out.

    I'm not going to direct any questions your way because you've shown time and again that you refuse to answer questions and so it would be a waste of my time to pose them.

    So, you're free to fire away as always. Just be forewarned that, if you say A is fact, but you don't offer any reason to accept A as fact, I will be here to point it out.

  11. Roshi Hogan,
    I shout an AMEN to that.

  12. You sound more like a dictator than a taoist, RT.

  13. @Crow
    Yet another declarative statement with no reasoning provided. At least you're consistently obtuse.

  14. One supplies reason to one who can reason. It is one's choice.

  15. Well RT as you may remember, I've taken these types of test before, but only because I find the subject extremely interesting, and something I really wanted to do of my own volition, not because somebody asked me to do it.

    I usually get INTJ and sometimes INFJ, but I don't see it as a way of society putting me in a box, or negatively stereotyping me as one commenter suggested. INTJ and INFJ both resonate with me, but if the description didn't resonate with me, I'd reject it.

    If you wanted to you could see it as societies way of putting you in a box, or you could see it as providing a mirror reflection of yourself, a reflection that could potentially be used as a tool for enriching self-understanding. But it's just one tool out of many, and if you don't like it, and aren't getting clear results with it, there's no reason why you should continue using it.

    However, since nobody can know you better then you know yourself, if the results you keep getting don't resonate with you, their probably inaccurate, and you'd probably have better luck just reading through the descriptions of all the personality types, and seeing which one resonates with you the most, instead of repeatedly taken the test only to keep getting different contradictory results every time.

  16. @Crow,
    More gobbledygook.

    Good point with solid reasoning.

  17. RT said: "Just be forewarned that, if you say A is fact, but you don't offer any reason to accept A as fact, I will be here to point it out."

    Obviously he doesn't follow his own advice consistently, or else he would have pointed out that Roshi Hogan did that.

    In fact, the MBTI is not an attempt by "society" (whoever that is) to do anything. It was an attempt by Jung and later by Myers and Briggs, clincial psychologists, to help people find out more about themselves and live more fulfilling lives.

  18. Hey Cloudberry my fellow victim :)
    If you're looking for consistency, you came to the wrong place.

  19. Cloudberry & Crow,
    You both must have reading impairments. I did NOT state that I was going to monitor each and every commenter. All I wrote is that I'm going to monitor The Crow. So, there is no inconsistency here.

    The REASON I've chosen to monitor The Crow and The Crow alone is because he is an habitual offender. The vast majority of his comments include conclusions with no premises.

    Besides, this is my blog, not yours. I get to choose whose comments I will monitor closely and whose I won't. If you don't like it, then don't visit.

  20. Well RT.
    The only reason I am here at all is because you apologized for vandalizing my blog, and invited me back to discuss with you.
    Was there something you wanted to discuss?
    Or was it just a poorly thought-out trap?
    How's it working out for you?

  21. Crow,
    I did apologize but NOT for "vandalizing" your blog. If you consider "vandalizing" to be leaving numerous brusque comments in a short period of time, then you've paid me back 3 or 4 times over. You've left more inane comments on my blog in the last 8 hours or so than I've left on your blog all-time. It must be working for you somehow.


Comments are unmoderated, so you can write whatever you want.