What is your personality type?

[Dillon Levenque]

Spectral and all, I don't want to sound like a hater, but I have seen Myers-Briggs before. Yes, there are some pretty good questions that if answered objectively and honestly might give you an idea of what sort of thing you might enjoy doing.

Remember that it was created for the purpose of helping women find the kinds of jobs they might be well-suited for. It was put together during World War II, a time when a great many women were asked to join the work force since the men who would normally make up that force were in the military. The vast majority of those women had never held a paid job in their lives, and the ones they had done were in almost all cases 'women's work'. Now the job world was their oyster, but what to do? I can see why something like Myers-Briggs would have been a big help.

I do not think the idea that a 70 year old test based on 100 year old theories can provide a precise definition of personality types is valid. Sure, there are some questions that give good indications on introvert/extrovert. "I like being by myself", for example. I gave that a 'HELL yes'. That probably indicates I'm somewhat of an introvert and someone who gave that a 'HELL no' is probably an extrovert. But so many are vague and completely at the mercy of objectivity. How about, "I am easy to get to know."? Really? What, you did a poll among all the people who have ever seen you cross their paths? Some are just silly. This one, for example: "I consider myself objective". There are people who don't?

As it happens, I do consider myself objective, but I disagreed completely with "I strive for harmony among people", even though I have actually been called a 'peacemaker' by someone in SL. I admit disharmony upsets me but I don't think I have ever striven for harmony and even if I have wished for it, that's been soley among people I know and care about, not 'people' in general.

Well, I seem to have gone on a bit of a rant. Sorry about that. Might stem from my upbringing. My father more than once used the term 'skull candlers' in reference to psychologists and phsychiatrists alike; a lot of that probably rubbed off on me.

For what it's worth, I scored ISTJ.:smileywink:

[Cinnamon Mistwood]

I usually think these things are pretty stupid, but took it for the laughs.  It is actually pretty close...

ISTP

[Griffin Ceawlin]

ASDFJKL;

[Ceka Cianci]

PIE

nom nom

hehehehe

[Clarissa Lowell]

---

Dillon Levenque wrote:

For what it's worth,

I scored ISTJ.:smileywink:

---

 

Which as your smiley wink seems to say, is the perfect 'type' to have written what you did.  

To me it is all for fun. If we see ourselves in some description and it makes us examine ourselves on the inside and we come out better for it or feel enriched by it that's good. The rest can skip over it, which is fine too.

Freud's theories and Jung's theories are all old too. A lot of things are old but whether they are valid does not really have much to do with when the thing began. JMO

[Argus Collingwood]

---

Griffin Ceawlin wrote:

ASDFJKL;

---

ABCD goldfish?...

 

*waves*

[Griffin Ceawlin]

I must've played hookey that day. :smileytongue:

[Maryanne Solo]

ISTJ

That's 4 of us

[Dillon Levenque]

---

Clarissa Lowell wrote:

---

Dillon Levenque wrote:

For what it's worth,

I scored ISTJ.:smileywink:

---

 

Which as your smiley wink seems to say, is the perfect 'type' to have written what you did.  

---

 

It is? Damn, maybe I didn't give the thing enough credit. I didn't really read up on what all the 'types' meant.

By the way, even though I don't really accept the data on a personal basis there were several posts that made references to rations of I's to E's in the general population compared to SL residents. I DO think studies like that are interesting, Detailed conclusions (to me, anyway) are subject to doubt but with enough people involved tendencies are visible.