I don't use MBTI to categorize people, I use it to expand my understanding of people. We tend to think everyone thinks like us, but Myers Briggs allows me to get a glimpse of how other types think and feel
@IDontKnowMyName-tv1ze
Жыл бұрын
Also, I really loved this video!! Your perspective is always really interesting and I feel like I learn a lot
@auroralively814
Жыл бұрын
Very good video!! Enjoyed watching it
@SchmausiMausi
Ай бұрын
Hmm, I’m not sure I agree with the idea that extroverts don’t have issues with a lot of stimulation. Because of this, I thought I was an introvert for most of my life. I’ve always been more of an observing person and never liked big crowds or too much sensory input. However, I’ve read that this doesn’t necessarily relate to introversion versus extroversion. What actually determines whether you are introverted or extroverted is what you focus on or what energizes you. For example, if you’re sitting alone in a waiting room and you’re bored, and you start looking out the window, grabbing your phone, or reading a magazine, you are exhibiting extroverted behavior because you’re actively engaging with something in the external world. On the other hand, if you start daydreaming or mentally preparing for the upcoming conversation with the doctor, pulling your focus back into your head, then you are displaying introverted behavior. I do both. I’m even often more in my head than in the external world, but if I stay there for too long, I become tired, exhausted or even depressed from so much overthinking (Ti aux). However, when I shift my focus outward, I get an energy boost because everything around me cretaes new ideas and connections in my head (Ne dom) That’s why I consider myself extroverted, even though I cannot handle a lot of stimulation at once and need to retreat to a quieter place like a serene park or the woods. An introvert might also retreat to a park or the woods, but unlike me, they do so not to be inspired by the surroundings but perhaps to meditate or reflect.
@espressocoffeeshine4346
Жыл бұрын
Good video! Probably just a summmery of what you are saying: MBTI gives us the ability and understanding to know we may have to get outside our box and comfort zone to develop some secondary cognitive functions to accomplish certain goals and be happy and successful. It also give us the ability to know and develop our primary cognitive functions and not neglect them which may also be something that is needed to be happy and successful.
@IDontKnowMyName-tv1ze
Жыл бұрын
This video got me thinking way too much and a KZitem comment isn't the place to cover it all. But I do want to say a couple of things. I think I overall have a bit of an unpopular opinion on this but I feel like MBTI is more like a philosophical framework than psychology/science. But this is in no way a negative judgement of MBTI, I being a philosophy is worthy enough on its own. MBTI builds its framework from hypothesises based on observed examples but it was not derived empirically, nor has it focused much on trying to gather empirical evidence. (I.e. How does MTBI seek to prove that there are only 8 cognitive functions? How do you know there aren't more or fewer? Why stop at the 8 cognitive functions, couldn't you subdivide further? Also MBTI hasn't attempted to 'measure' use of a function, i.e. figure out how to quantify strength in a function that can consistently be compared against other functions in the same person or the same function between people. What 'unit' of strength could be used to say Bob has 20 units of strength in Ni but only 3 in Se? How do you prove that Se and Ni can't be used together? How can you empirically prove a negative like that? You try use the logical argument you presented in your video but that's not empirical that's logic, its philosophical not scientific. There is no current way to measure use of the functions so what experiment could be done to try to prove that someone was using Se and Ni at the same time? (also couldn't someone with Ni & Se in their 2nd and 3rd slots fairly easily jump between usage of the two? What does 'using 2 at the functions at the same time' actually mean?)) Instead the strength of MBTI (in my opinion) is in its logical framework. The cognitive functions don't need to map to brain regions and it doesn't matter if other equally viable systems of personality typing also exist. MBTI is useful because it provides a structure to break down kinds of thought into. By creating a hierarchy of P vs J, N vs S vs T vs F and i vs e, MBTI creates categories to divide experience into. This allows us to group certain experiences together and distinguish them more easily from other ones. It provides a lens to look at our experiences with and it doesn't have to preclude us from using other lenses instead whenever we want or need to. There already exist other ways to group thoughts and experiences such as the Big 5 personality traits and enneagram, but we also create categories for people's personalities all the time in normal language: charismatic, chatty, kind, excitable, quiet, energetic, dramatic, sober, pessimistic, optimistic, lazy etc. These are just smaller in scope and complexity. I also want to add that someone's MBTI type doesn't fully define their personality because no two people of the same type are identical to each other in how act and react in the world. MBTI clearly only aims to explain certain aspects of personality, and further only aims to explain them up to a certain level of specificity. Because of this the question "Is MBTI true?" isn't really a question that I personally find compelling because, with my current understanding of it, MBTI doesn't try to present itself as something that could be falsifiable.What outcome of what experiment could prove that any of Ni,Ne, Si,Se,Fi,Fe,Ti or Te don't exist? What outcome of what experiment could prove that we don't split our mental faculties between perception and judging? These questions don't really make sense for MBTI because the system fundamentally isn't empirically based. What I find much more interesting are questions like: - "Is MBTI useful?" - "In which ways is MBTI useful?" - "What are its strengths?" - "What are its weaknesses?" - "What questions does MBTI seek to answer?" So for me, "why is MBTI useful?": It provides a lens to view my experience of life through. This lens categorises experiences into groups emphasising specific axes of similarity and difference. By having groups like this it allows for analysis of these experiences at a group level. As such, ideas/lessons can be learnt from one subset of experiences and then inferred to apply to other subsets of experience because they share the same cognitive function grouping. MBTI also provides language to discuss/communicate these similarities and differences and communicate things like strengths and weaknesses that are common to experiences within the same function / combination of functions. Now, the above could be said for any grouping of experiences, so what makes MBTI more useful than a random grouping of experiences? My answer to this is simply that it is successful at being compelling to a wide range of people. It is a method of grouping experiences that is complex enough to encompass a wide range of human experiences to a significant depth while not being so detailed as to become too difficult to practically use. It is a framework that when used encourages you to think about your life in more detail. Typically MBTI also encourages a view that the functions are each equally valuable, as such it asks people to consider the importance of aspects of experience that they find personally less compelling. As such, MBTI actively encourages us to expand our understanding of the world. It tells us that there exists sets of experiences that we don't know of /understand yet whilst also providing a framework which enables us to ask questions to try to find out what these experiences are. Could another system exist that does the same thing? In my opinion yes. Could it be as compelling or even more so? Again yes. But at this point in time I don't know what that hypothetical framework is but I do know MBTI. At the moment I still feel like MBTI will help me to ask interesting and useful questions of myself and of others. When I no longer feel like it's helping me grow then I'll probably start to find it less interesting. In my opinion, when it comes to personality systems the critical aspect is figuring out in what ways do the lenses expand my ability to understand experiences and what ways do they limit it. What aspects of life does bundling experiences into T, F, N and S obscure and what aspects does it highlight? For aspects that it obscures, I will definitionally need to look elsewhere away from MBTI to grow.
@quinsutton7097
8 ай бұрын
Bad philosophies exist too. The idea that being social and being intelligent are inverses for example, just baseless romanticism.
@brocklytodd5317
Жыл бұрын
yeah that's the point.
@Maiakaii
Жыл бұрын
Thats what It’s supposed to do lol
@jefferyjones8399
Жыл бұрын
I don't find it helpful at all. It's about as credible as astrology.
@TrickyD
Жыл бұрын
In order to learn about myself (how I think + why do I think the way that I think) I use every philosophy that speaks to me. In this regard I follow Bruce Lee's philosophy of Jeet Kun Do *"Absorb what is useful; Disregard that which is useless"* - Bruce Lee I'm just fortunate that on my journey of selfknowledge I've realised as a child that understanding the other = understanding yourself and vice versa. I'm also lucky that I'm autodidact so learn primarily from my own experience instead of gaining knowledge through reading books. You gain wisdom through experience and not from theoretical knowledge -> experience = knowledge, but knowledge is not experience. Because I'm autodidact I've no problem to agree with the parts of a philosophy that works for me and disregard everything else from that philosophy that doesn't work for me. Examples are: - I consider myself a higly analytical person which is a subtype of the HSP. The difference between myself and most HSP is that I'm more logical than sensitive, while HSP generally are more sensitive than logical ea they have more faith in paraspsychology than logical science. - I consider myself gifted, but officially I'm not cauz you need to have an IQ of
Пікірлер: 12