Author Topic: The Principle of Constant Optimization: What's Your Myers-Briggs?  (Read 69516 times)

Carrie

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 278
Re: The Principle of Constant Optimization: What's Your Myers-Briggs?
« Reply #100 on: August 16, 2013, 04:44:06 PM »
I'm a female INTJ too -
I'm new here, but I can already tell I'm going to love it.  Nice to meet you all.

I've been on the line between E/I before, but after being married almost 18 years to an I, I've become more of one myself.


footenote

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 802
  • MMMing in MN
Re: The Principle of Constant Optimization: What's Your Myers-Briggs?
« Reply #101 on: August 16, 2013, 04:57:50 PM »
Carrie - Yep, for whatever reason, there are lots of us female INTJs here. Welcome!
It's always darkest before it dawns on you

FunkyStickman

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 492
  • Age: 43
  • Location: Louisiana
    • I Follow The Architect
Re: The Principle of Constant Optimization: What's Your Myers-Briggs?
« Reply #102 on: August 16, 2013, 05:02:09 PM »
It should be "Optimism" not "Optimization." That kind of annoys the grammar Nazi in me.

I'm ENTP, by the way. :)
"There is no dignity quite so impressive, and no one independence quite so important, as living within your means." -Calvin Coolidge

"Civilization is the limitless multiplication of unnecessary necessities." - Mark Twain

footenote

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 802
  • MMMing in MN
Re: The Principle of Constant Optimization: What's Your Myers-Briggs?
« Reply #103 on: August 16, 2013, 05:12:06 PM »
It should be "Optimism" not "Optimization." That kind of annoys the grammar Nazi in me.

I'm ENTP, by the way. :)
Welcome fellow Grammar Nazi! MMM's blog post was about constant "Optimization": http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2013/05/15/the-principle-of-constant-optimization/

(And I love me my "Optimism" as well. ; )
It's always darkest before it dawns on you

grantmeaname

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4309
  • Age: 24
  • Location: London
  • This night has silence and very little fear
    • The MMM Blogger Community
Re: The Principle of Constant Optimization: What's Your Myers-Briggs?
« Reply #104 on: August 16, 2013, 05:20:46 PM »
(And I love me my "Optimism" as well. ; )

Pew pew! Pewpewpew!

Daleth

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1205
Re: The Principle of Constant Optimization: What's Your Myers-Briggs?
« Reply #105 on: August 16, 2013, 06:36:22 PM »
Holy cow, so many INTJ's!

I'm an INFJ, nearly 100% N, F, and J, but just barely more of an I than an E. I feel like such a minority...

We can be minorities together! :) I've tested both INFJ and INFP. For me the marginal preference (obviously) is P/J. I'm also not strongly introverted, though that preference is apparently more distinct than the P/J one.

I'm surrounded by INTJ's because I work in a law firm. We all did the M-B test and probably 40%-45% of the lawyers were some form or other of NT!

footenote

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 802
  • MMMing in MN
Re: The Principle of Constant Optimization: What's Your Myers-Briggs?
« Reply #106 on: August 16, 2013, 07:17:52 PM »
(And I love me my "Optimism" as well. ; )

Pew pew! Pewpewpew!
I grew up in OH. Want to be adopted? ; )
It's always darkest before it dawns on you

grantmeaname

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4309
  • Age: 24
  • Location: London
  • This night has silence and very little fear
    • The MMM Blogger Community
Re: The Principle of Constant Optimization: What's Your Myers-Briggs?
« Reply #107 on: August 16, 2013, 07:24:03 PM »
I grew up in OH. Want to be adopted? ; )

I don't even no how to answer that. Can I keep my own parents?

arebelspy

  • Administrator
  • Senior Mustachian
  • *****
  • Posts: 25038
  • Age: -999
  • Location: Traveling the World
Re: The Principle of Constant Optimization: What's Your Myers-Briggs?
« Reply #108 on: August 16, 2013, 10:19:40 PM »
I grew up in OH. Want to be adopted? ; )

I don't even no how to answer that. Can I keep my own parents?

Given that this is probably the first grammar error I've seen you make, I think Freud may have answered for you.

We are two former teachers who accumulated a bunch of real estate, retired at 29, and now travel the world full time with a kid.
If you want to know more about me, or how we did that, or see lots of pictures, this Business Insider profile tells our story pretty well.
We (occasionally) blog at AdventuringAlong.com.
You can also read my forum "Journal."

footenote

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 802
  • MMMing in MN
Re: The Principle of Constant Optimization: What's Your Myers-Briggs?
« Reply #109 on: August 17, 2013, 05:36:41 AM »
arebelspy: I, too, was amused by "I don't even.... NO!!"
It's always darkest before it dawns on you

grantmeaname

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4309
  • Age: 24
  • Location: London
  • This night has silence and very little fear
    • The MMM Blogger Community
Re: The Principle of Constant Optimization: What's Your Myers-Briggs?
« Reply #110 on: August 17, 2013, 06:30:19 AM »
It's certainly not the first. Maybe I'll have to pepper them in from now on. Love your Freudian slip.

Maigahane

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 967
Re: The Principle of Constant Optimization: What's Your Myers-Briggs?
« Reply #111 on: September 11, 2013, 01:22:42 PM »
ISTJ
Introvert(89%)  Sensing(25%)  Thinking(25%)  Judging(44%)

I've taken this test quite a few times over the years (my mom loved it so I took it as a child) and I'm pretty sure I was always INTx until this one. The introvert cracked me up (see my 27 Problems only Introverts Will Understand in Off Topic) partially because this has come up more recently but also because of how far introvert I was. I started out this far over as a kid but moderated as I got older, then went screaming back in the other direction :D

The S/N switch kind of threw me off but reading the descriptions I see a lot both. I'm detail oriented and unimaginative but I plan for the future (hence ER forums)

MsGuided

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 919
  • Location: Colorado
Re: The Principle of Constant Optimization: What's Your Myers-Briggs?
« Reply #112 on: September 21, 2013, 04:07:03 PM »
INFJ here.  For all you skeptics (I'd bet my retirement you are NTs), the MBT types are spot on accurate to human temperament, but problems arise with testing.  Yes, people test inaccurately.  I, for example tested 2x, over the course of 8 years, as an INTJ.  That inaccurate result stemmed from my desire to be more of a thinker (T) than a feeler (F) as well as adaptive behavior. 

Until about 3 years ago, I thought MBT was marginally helpful.  I read the description of INTJ and INFJ and didn't feel I had been pegged or truly identified.  Then, a friend of mine, a fellow INFJ, read a book and met with a coach/counselor who identified her as an INFJ even though she'd tested as an ISTJ. Suddenly, his description of the INFJ and help in identifying her as such, opened the floodgates for her to understand herself.  She, in turn, helped me understand my temperament and it has changed my life dramatically.

Not all types struggle with their temperament (most sensors (S)) are perfectly content and are not in a search for meaning or categorization.  Many N's are curious.  Almost all NFs have a great need for self understanding and self actualization.

It is true that N's are in the minority in the general population and appear to be in the majority on the MMM forums.  That doesn't surprise me at all.  Ns love the world of ideas and concepts.   

avonlea

  • Guest
Re: The Principle of Constant Optimization: What's Your Myers-Briggs?
« Reply #113 on: September 21, 2013, 04:53:10 PM »
INFJ/ISFJ 
« Last Edit: August 17, 2014, 08:03:24 AM by avonlea »

ender

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3712
Re: The Principle of Constant Optimization: What's Your Myers-Briggs?
« Reply #114 on: September 21, 2013, 05:54:39 PM »
INFJ here.  For all you skeptics (I'd bet my retirement you are NTs), the MBT types are spot on accurate to human temperament, but problems arise with testing.  Yes, people test inaccurately.  I, for example tested 2x, over the course of 8 years, as an INTJ.  That inaccurate result stemmed from my desire to be more of a thinker (T) than a feeler (F) as well as adaptive behavior. 

Hey now, this INTJ fully appreciates the value in this sort of thing :) A lot of disagreement in my life is a result of S vs N...

You are right, though about testing - I think a lot of people test based on what they want to do or are expected to do rather than what they actually are inclined to do.

grantmeaname

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4309
  • Age: 24
  • Location: London
  • This night has silence and very little fear
    • The MMM Blogger Community
Re: The Principle of Constant Optimization: What's Your Myers-Briggs?
« Reply #115 on: September 21, 2013, 06:12:44 PM »
the MBT types are spot on accurate to human temperament, but problems arise with testing.
1) How do you figure they're spot-on accurate?
2) If they types are spot-on accurate but can't accurately categorize people when they actually need to be applied to them, doesn't that make them not spot-on accurate?

MsGuided

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 919
  • Location: Colorado
Re: The Principle of Constant Optimization: What's Your Myers-Briggs?
« Reply #116 on: September 22, 2013, 11:55:44 AM »
the MBT types are spot on accurate to human temperament, but problems arise with testing.
1) How do you figure they're spot-on accurate?
2) If they types are spot-on accurate but can't accurately categorize people when they actually need to be applied to them, doesn't that make them not spot-on accurate?

Hi grantmemyname, I "figure" they are spot on accurate because since I've gotten proper testing and information I've become a student of the subject and have been amazed by the modern research that supports it as well as its' historical roots.  If you'd like to do some reading on the topic, it's quite fascinating to discover the recognition of four main temperament types stretches back to Greek philosophers and even references in the Bible.  The idea of temperament was well accepted until Freud came along.  Reading Jung also helps see the progression that has become the MBT.  I'd also recommend reading Keirsey, Montgomery and Ray Lincoln for further confirmation of the value and accuracy of this system of identifying temperament.

What I said was that the four main temperaments (SJ, SP, NT, NF) and the sixteen types that are subsets of the types as identified are spot on accurate.  The implementation of identifying people with their types is flawed.  I agree with the idea that that is a problem and needs to be dealt with to be more useful to those seeking to understand themselves and others.

arebelspy

  • Administrator
  • Senior Mustachian
  • *****
  • Posts: 25038
  • Age: -999
  • Location: Traveling the World
Re: The Principle of Constant Optimization: What's Your Myers-Briggs?
« Reply #117 on: September 22, 2013, 01:07:45 PM »
the MBT types are spot on accurate to human temperament, but problems arise with testing.
1) How do you figure they're spot-on accurate?
2) If they types are spot-on accurate but can't accurately categorize people when they actually need to be applied to them, doesn't that make them not spot-on accurate?

Hi grantmemyname, I "figure" they are spot on accurate because since I've gotten proper testing and information I've become a student of the subject and have been amazed by the modern research that supports it as well as its' historical roots.  If you'd like to do some reading on the topic, it's quite fascinating to discover the recognition of four main temperament types stretches back to Greek philosophers and even references in the Bible.  The idea of temperament was well accepted until Freud came along.  Reading Jung also helps see the progression that has become the MBT.  I'd also recommend reading Keirsey, Montgomery and Ray Lincoln for further confirmation of the value and accuracy of this system of identifying temperament.

What I said was that the four main temperaments (SJ, SP, NT, NF) and the sixteen types that are subsets of the types as identified are spot on accurate.  The implementation of identifying people with their types is flawed.  I agree with the idea that that is a problem and needs to be dealt with to be more useful to those seeking to understand themselves and others.

Astrology also has very historical roots dating back many millennia.
We are two former teachers who accumulated a bunch of real estate, retired at 29, and now travel the world full time with a kid.
If you want to know more about me, or how we did that, or see lots of pictures, this Business Insider profile tells our story pretty well.
We (occasionally) blog at AdventuringAlong.com.
You can also read my forum "Journal."

matchewed

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4012
  • Location: CT
Re: The Principle of Constant Optimization: What's Your Myers-Briggs?
« Reply #118 on: September 22, 2013, 01:51:36 PM »
the MBT types are spot on accurate to human temperament, but problems arise with testing.
1) How do you figure they're spot-on accurate?
2) If they types are spot-on accurate but can't accurately categorize people when they actually need to be applied to them, doesn't that make them not spot-on accurate?

Hi grantmemyname, I "figure" they are spot on accurate because since I've gotten proper testing and information I've become a student of the subject and have been amazed by the modern research that supports it as well as its' historical roots.  If you'd like to do some reading on the topic, it's quite fascinating to discover the recognition of four main temperament types stretches back to Greek philosophers and even references in the Bible.  The idea of temperament was well accepted until Freud came along.  Reading Jung also helps see the progression that has become the MBT.  I'd also recommend reading Keirsey, Montgomery and Ray Lincoln for further confirmation of the value and accuracy of this system of identifying temperament.

What I said was that the four main temperaments (SJ, SP, NT, NF) and the sixteen types that are subsets of the types as identified are spot on accurate.  The implementation of identifying people with their types is flawed.  I agree with the idea that that is a problem and needs to be dealt with to be more useful to those seeking to understand themselves and others.

Astrology also has very historical roots dating back many millennia.

Same with alchemy. And just so I'm clear it's not that putting people into types is flawed, it's how we put them into types which is flawed?

grantmeaname

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4309
  • Age: 24
  • Location: London
  • This night has silence and very little fear
    • The MMM Blogger Community
Re: The Principle of Constant Optimization: What's Your Myers-Briggs?
« Reply #119 on: September 22, 2013, 07:38:07 PM »
That's what I was getting at, I guess. If astrology perfectly describes human behavior when they're not unduly influenced by thetans, and they're often unduly influenced by thetans, astrology isn't really useful.

MsGuided

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 919
  • Location: Colorado
Re: The Principle of Constant Optimization: What's Your Myers-Briggs?
« Reply #120 on: September 23, 2013, 01:05:00 AM »
the MBT types are spot on accurate to human temperament, but problems arise with testing.
1) How do you figure they're spot-on accurate?
2) If they types are spot-on accurate but can't accurately categorize people when they actually need to be applied to them, doesn't that make them not spot-on accurate?

Hi grantmemyname, I "figure" they are spot on accurate because since I've gotten proper testing and information I've become a student of the subject and have been amazed by the modern research that supports it as well as its' historical roots.  If you'd like to do some reading on the topic, it's quite fascinating to discover the recognition of four main temperament types stretches back to Greek philosophers and even references in the Bible.  The idea of temperament was well accepted until Freud came along.  Reading Jung also helps see the progression that has become the MBT.  I'd also recommend reading Keirsey, Montgomery and Ray Lincoln for further confirmation of the value and accuracy of this system of identifying temperament.

What I said was that the four main temperaments (SJ, SP, NT, NF) and the sixteen types that are subsets of the types as identified are spot on accurate.  The implementation of identifying people with their types is flawed.  I agree with the idea that that is a problem and needs to be dealt with to be more useful to those seeking to understand themselves and others.

Astrology also has very historical roots dating back many millennia.

Same with alchemy. And just so I'm clear it's not that putting people into types is flawed, it's how we put them into types which is flawed?

Not sure it's wise to get into the snarky comments here, but I'll try one more time.  My reason for pointing out the historical roots of temperament recognition is that the fact that there are distinct types of people that fit into similar patterns is something that has been recognized by common people,philosophers and writers historically.  Getting at the patterns and similarities common in the four main temperaments is useful for people that want to understand others.  So, to respond to your dismissive response, I'll say that understanding temperament and type is not putting people into types, it's recognizing patterns of behavior, language and preferences common to the temperament and using that as a tool to understand them.  Not everyone is interested in doing that, but I would hope you'd be willing to concede that you recognize that there are certain general similarities (not 100%, but quite notable in number) in people who gravitate to certain occupations or interests. 

Let's use the recent MMM post about who his readers are by the work they do as a stepping off point for discussion.  MM wrote that a large number of respondents appear to be engineers & specifically software engineers.  Have you ever noticed a general pattern in the interests and preferences in engineers in general?  How about social workers?  Do you generally think most engineers and most social workers have some pretty sharp differences in ways of looking at life in their thought processes?  Do you think there might be something very revealing about the fact that a huge majority of MMM readers who responded identified themselves as Intuitives (either NT or NF)? 

I may not have been clear, but I did not mean to say that there is no way to correctly identify people, because there is a good way.  Just that the tests that are out there, when used without a trained administrator that can follow up with confirmation questions about each letter (I or E, N or S, T or F, and J or P) and have the subject respond is a great way to get accurate results but is very rarely used. 

Freckles

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2772
  • Location: Portland, Oregon, USA
Re: The Principle of Constant Optimization: What's Your Myers-Briggs?
« Reply #121 on: September 23, 2013, 01:30:26 AM »
I did this recently during a staff development at work.  I was ISF...J?  I think that was it.  I was in a group of fellow teachers and they were all E-somethings, save for me and one other, which I found amusing.  We were supposed to partner up with someone with our same letter and read the descriptions.  My partner and I sat there quietly reading while everyone else read it out loud with their partner and discussed every freaking sentence.  Damn noisy group of Es!  My partner and I just smiled at each other once in a while.  Haha.

MsGuided

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 919
  • Location: Colorado
Re: The Principle of Constant Optimization: What's Your Myers-Briggs?
« Reply #122 on: September 23, 2013, 01:53:17 AM »
I did this recently during a staff development at work.  I was ISF...J?  I think that was it.  I was in a group of fellow teachers and they were all E-somethings, save for me and one other, which I found amusing.  We were supposed to partner up with someone with our same letter and read the descriptions.  My partner and I sat there quietly reading while everyone else read it out loud with their partner and discussed every freaking sentence.  Damn noisy group of Es!  My partner and I just smiled at each other once in a while.  Haha.

Love that story, Freckles!  The similarities you discover of others similar to yourself can sometimes be great bonding moments.  As I mentioned in an earlier post, I've gotten really into studying the MBT over the last few years.  I have taken 3 weekend training classes on it.  The fun, revealing thing about each of the three groups at each training class was that ALL of the participants were of two types only:  INFJ (my temperament) and ENFJ.  NFs are a VERY small percentage of the overall population but comprised 100% of these classes. 

Silvie

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 212
  • Age: 31
  • Location: the Netherlands
Re: The Principle of Constant Optimization: What's Your Myers-Briggs?
« Reply #123 on: September 23, 2013, 03:05:26 AM »
I had never heard of this test, but I took it anyway. This is what came up:

INTJ
Introvert(100%)  iNtuitive(38%)  Thinking(62%)  Judging(67%)

    You have strong preference of Introversion over Extraversion (100%)
    You have moderate preference of Intuition over Sensing (38%)
    You have distinctive preference of Thinking over Feeling (62%)
    You have distinctive preference of Judging over Perceiving (67%)

100% introvert! I already knew I'm an introvert but 100%? Wow!
I am not weird, I am a limited edition.

MsGuided

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 919
  • Location: Colorado
Re: The Principle of Constant Optimization: What's Your Myers-Briggs?
« Reply #124 on: September 23, 2013, 07:43:03 AM »
I had never heard of this test, but I took it anyway. This is what came up:

INTJ
Introvert(100%)  iNtuitive(38%)  Thinking(62%)  Judging(67%)

    You have strong preference of Introversion over Extraversion (100%)
    You have moderate preference of Intuition over Sensing (38%)
    You have distinctive preference of Thinking over Feeling (62%)
    You have distinctive preference of Judging over Perceiving (67%)

100% introvert! I already knew I'm an introvert but 100%? Wow!

100% is really strong.  I think you'll find quite a number of INTJs on this forum.  INTJ aka the MasterMind is a very rare type in the general population.

arebelspy

  • Administrator
  • Senior Mustachian
  • *****
  • Posts: 25038
  • Age: -999
  • Location: Traveling the World
Re: The Principle of Constant Optimization: What's Your Myers-Briggs?
« Reply #125 on: September 23, 2013, 08:45:13 AM »
Not sure it's wise to get into the snarky comments here, but I'll try one more time.  My reason for pointing out the historical roots of temperament recognition is that the fact that there are distinct types of people that fit into similar patterns is something that has been recognized by common people,philosophers and writers historically.  Getting at the patterns and similarities common in the four main temperaments is useful for people that want to understand others.  So, to respond to your dismissive response, I'll say that understanding temperament and type is not putting people into types, it's recognizing patterns of behavior, language and preferences common to the temperament and using that as a tool to understand them.  Not everyone is interested in doing that, but I would hope you'd be willing to concede that you recognize that there are certain general similarities (not 100%, but quite notable in number) in people who gravitate to certain occupations or interests. 

The response was not dismissive.

The point of bringing up astrology, or alchemy, is that plenty of fine minds in the past thought they had merit as well.  Read whatever "snark" you want into that, but none is intended.  It's just pointing out that your "historical" context of it being around for thousands of years doesn't hold much weight.

Clearly you are quite a fanatic/believer/whatever you want to call it about this topic, having done three weekend trainings on it, but you just may need to accept that others here may not put as much stock in it telling as much insight about a particular individual as you do.  It has nothing to do with not being "interested in doing that," but in believing that this tool isn't the be-all end-all that some claim.

Cool?  :)
We are two former teachers who accumulated a bunch of real estate, retired at 29, and now travel the world full time with a kid.
If you want to know more about me, or how we did that, or see lots of pictures, this Business Insider profile tells our story pretty well.
We (occasionally) blog at AdventuringAlong.com.
You can also read my forum "Journal."

matchewed

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4012
  • Location: CT
Re: The Principle of Constant Optimization: What's Your Myers-Briggs?
« Reply #126 on: September 23, 2013, 10:03:21 AM »
Not sure it's wise to get into the snarky comments here, but I'll try one more time.  My reason for pointing out the historical roots of temperament recognition is that the fact that there are distinct types of people that fit into similar patterns is something that has been recognized by common people,philosophers and writers historically.  Getting at the patterns and similarities common in the four main temperaments is useful for people that want to understand others.  So, to respond to your dismissive response, I'll say that understanding temperament and type is not putting people into types, it's recognizing patterns of behavior, language and preferences common to the temperament and using that as a tool to understand them.  Not everyone is interested in doing that, but I would hope you'd be willing to concede that you recognize that there are certain general similarities (not 100%, but quite notable in number) in people who gravitate to certain occupations or interests. 

Let's use the recent MMM post about who his readers are by the work they do as a stepping off point for discussion.  MM wrote that a large number of respondents appear to be engineers & specifically software engineers.  Have you ever noticed a general pattern in the interests and preferences in engineers in general?  How about social workers?  Do you generally think most engineers and most social workers have some pretty sharp differences in ways of looking at life in their thought processes?  Do you think there might be something very revealing about the fact that a huge majority of MMM readers who responded identified themselves as Intuitives (either NT or NF)? 

I may not have been clear, but I did not mean to say that there is no way to correctly identify people, because there is a good way.  Just that the tests that are out there, when used without a trained administrator that can follow up with confirmation questions about each letter (I or E, N or S, T or F, and J or P) and have the subject respond is a great way to get accurate results but is very rarely used.

I'm just a skeptic. You may be able to look at occupations and see the individuals in them as gravitating towards those occupations, while I may look at those people and see people shaped somewhat by their environment, and the truth lying somewhere between those. Regardless of where that truth lies, questioning "established" or historically accurate assumptions, conclusions, and methods is the hallmark of progress. I'm not saying you're wrong I'm just approaching it from a different perspective, you could very well be right and we're all hardwired to be 1 of 16 categories I just don't see any evidence of that regardless of historical agreement from the Bible, the Greeks, and modern philosophers. Just because I disagree doesn't mean I'm dismissing it.

There is an inherent fuzziness to these sorts of tests because they are psychologically based which carries western culture biases. Assuming that these are universal since they are backed up by western psychologists, western history, and frankly western pattern recognition is a huge assumption I'm uncomfortable making. It's cool that you're comfortable with it. It's also cool that I'm not. :)

footenote

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 802
  • MMMing in MN
Re: The Principle of Constant Optimization: What's Your Myers-Briggs?
« Reply #127 on: September 23, 2013, 10:48:49 AM »
matchewed - Good points. One additional point of information: Jung, upon whose concepts the MBTI was based, did not believe that humans emerge with hard-wired temperaments that never change. Indeed, he believe that as people mature, they learn more about and come to appreciate the strengths of temperaments they may not have had when younger.

I agree that this is a western-based outlook and that to call it universal would be silly. I'm sure there is a (pick any non-western culture) personality assessment that that culture finds useful and that would be baffling to me.
It's always darkest before it dawns on you

MsGuided

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 919
  • Location: Colorado
Re: The Principle of Constant Optimization: What's Your Myers-Briggs?
« Reply #128 on: September 23, 2013, 11:01:48 AM »
Not sure it's wise to get into the snarky comments here, but I'll try one more time.  My reason for pointing out the historical roots of temperament recognition is that the fact that there are distinct types of people that fit into similar patterns is something that has been recognized by common people,philosophers and writers historically.  Getting at the patterns and similarities common in the four main temperaments is useful for people that want to understand others.  So, to respond to your dismissive response, I'll say that understanding temperament and type is not putting people into types, it's recognizing patterns of behavior, language and preferences common to the temperament and using that as a tool to understand them.  Not everyone is interested in doing that, but I would hope you'd be willing to concede that you recognize that there are certain general similarities (not 100%, but quite notable in number) in people who gravitate to certain occupations or interests. 

The response was not dismissive.

The point of bringing up astrology, or alchemy, is that plenty of fine minds in the past thought they had merit as well.  Read whatever "snark" you want into that, but none is intended.  It's just pointing out that your "historical" context of it being around for thousands of years doesn't hold much weight.

Clearly you are quite a fanatic/believer/whatever you want to call it about this topic, having done three weekend trainings on it, but you just may need to accept that others here may not put as much stock in it telling as much insight about a particular individual as you do.  It has nothing to do with not being "interested in doing that," but in believing that this tool isn't the be-all end-all that some claim.

Cool?  :)
Arebelspy,
 Cool.:)  I admit you accurately pegged me as a huge believer in the MBT and I read snark into your response where there wasn't any.  Sorry for that.  I'll stop evangelizing about this topic for now. 

arebelspy

  • Administrator
  • Senior Mustachian
  • *****
  • Posts: 25038
  • Age: -999
  • Location: Traveling the World
Re: The Principle of Constant Optimization: What's Your Myers-Briggs?
« Reply #129 on: September 23, 2013, 05:16:32 PM »
No worries.  It's probably just my IESNTFPJ part coming out.  ;)

Thanks for understanding our (skeptical) position on it, and I can see what would make someone inclined towards it.  I'm betting you have a lot of people with strong personalities in your life.
We are two former teachers who accumulated a bunch of real estate, retired at 29, and now travel the world full time with a kid.
If you want to know more about me, or how we did that, or see lots of pictures, this Business Insider profile tells our story pretty well.
We (occasionally) blog at AdventuringAlong.com.
You can also read my forum "Journal."

Freckles

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2772
  • Location: Portland, Oregon, USA
Re: The Principle of Constant Optimization: What's Your Myers-Briggs?
« Reply #130 on: September 23, 2013, 06:34:53 PM »

Love that story, Freckles!  The similarities you discover of others similar to yourself can sometimes be great bonding moments.  As I mentioned in an earlier post, I've gotten really into studying the MBT over the last few years.  I have taken 3 weekend training classes on it.  The fun, revealing thing about each of the three groups at each training class was that ALL of the participants were of two types only:  INFJ (my temperament) and ENFJ.  NFs are a VERY small percentage of the overall population but comprised 100% of these classes.

Yeah, I immediately felt understood by her and that's a nice feeling.  And I think I probably feel like I know her better than my other co-workers as she's new this school year, and until this activity, I really didn't know her at all.  So that's cool.  Now I know who I want to team up with when we have to work together on things.  :)

HappierAtHome

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5856
  • Location: Australia
Re: The Principle of Constant Optimization: What's Your Myers-Briggs?
« Reply #131 on: September 29, 2013, 05:10:42 AM »
Another female INTJ here.

We do the Myers-Briggs at team events at work all the time... no one believes me that I'm INTJ because I talk a lot and don't act like their stereotyped idea of an introvert.

Little do they know that I come home exhausted from having to be around people all day, and hang out with my spreadsheets, books, and ISFJ partner.

dragoncar

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7029
  • Registered member
Re: The Principle of Constant Optimization: What's Your Myers-Briggs?
« Reply #132 on: September 30, 2013, 02:30:41 PM »
I took the test and I'm a lawful good ranger with a +2 AC bonus.

Maigahane

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 967
Re: The Principle of Constant Optimization: What's Your Myers-Briggs?
« Reply #133 on: September 30, 2013, 02:37:14 PM »
I took the test and I'm a lawful good ranger with a +2 AC bonus.
If I were a coffee drinker I might have just spit some at my monitor :D
And maybe it's just me but it's "lawful ranger" kind of an oxymoron?

grantmeaname

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4309
  • Age: 24
  • Location: London
  • This night has silence and very little fear
    • The MMM Blogger Community
Re: The Principle of Constant Optimization: What's Your Myers-Briggs?
« Reply #134 on: September 30, 2013, 02:55:40 PM »
Rangers can be any good class in AD&D 2nd, which is the best D&D.

Maigahane

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 967
Re: The Principle of Constant Optimization: What's Your Myers-Briggs?
« Reply #135 on: September 30, 2013, 03:00:38 PM »
Rangers can be any good class in AD&D 2nd, which is the best D&D.
I'm a young'un so I didn't get into it until 3rd Edition (and then switched to Pathfinder when 4th came out...). I always associate rangers with Robin Hood who was quite definitely chaotic neutral :)

grantmeaname

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4309
  • Age: 24
  • Location: London
  • This night has silence and very little fear
    • The MMM Blogger Community
Re: The Principle of Constant Optimization: What's Your Myers-Briggs?
« Reply #136 on: September 30, 2013, 03:04:06 PM »
I'm possibly a younger 'un then you are, but we got all our D&D rulebooks from Half Price Books so we played a generation old, and then never upgraded even as new sets came out. Honestly, even if I started a campaign today I'd probably have it be AD&D 2nd.

Maigahane

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 967
Re: The Principle of Constant Optimization: What's Your Myers-Briggs?
« Reply #137 on: October 01, 2013, 07:24:33 AM »
I'm possibly a younger 'un then you are, but we got all our D&D rulebooks from Half Price Books so we played a generation old, and then never upgraded even as new sets came out. Honestly, even if I started a campaign today I'd probably have it be AD&D 2nd.
Ah, I just saw your age, you are a younger'un than me by about 6 years...
My in-law's played AD&D and that's what DH learned on (actually in-laws started on the original D&D and recently gave us the original rule books...) but in high school he started on 3rd and that's what our group learned on. We grudgingly upgraded to 3.5 a couple years after it came out then converted to Pathfinder when we realized it was basically 3.75 and fixed some issues from 3rd. If you're still stuck on AD&D then you need to at least look through a Pathfinder book so you can admire the phenomenal artwork :)

FunkyStickman

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 492
  • Age: 43
  • Location: Louisiana
    • I Follow The Architect
Re: The Principle of Constant Optimization: What's Your Myers-Briggs?
« Reply #138 on: October 03, 2013, 10:53:02 AM »
I'm possibly a younger 'un then you are, but we got all our D&D rulebooks from Half Price Books so we played a generation old, and then never upgraded even as new sets came out. Honestly, even if I started a campaign today I'd probably have it be AD&D 2nd.

"Why , back in my day...."

Lol. I used to play, haven't picked up an AD&D book in years, but my kids are almost old enough to learn how to play... I still have my 3rd edition Shadowrun rulebook.

And yeah, I was a 2nd Ed. AD&D guy.
"There is no dignity quite so impressive, and no one independence quite so important, as living within your means." -Calvin Coolidge

"Civilization is the limitless multiplication of unnecessary necessities." - Mark Twain

Anatidae V

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6321
  • Location: West Aus yo
  • Naps for all!
Re: The Principle of Constant Optimization: What's Your Myers-Briggs?
« Reply #139 on: October 16, 2013, 05:34:19 PM »
So, I already know I'm an introvert, because at gatherings I head off to a quiet spot for a few minutes at select intervals, and people just wear me out socially and at work. I took the test, and not sure how accurate, but here goes:
Introvert(78%)  Sensing(12%)  Thinking(25%)  Judging(89%)
You have strong preference of Introversion over Extraversion (78%)
You have slight preference of Sensing over Intuition (12%)
You have moderate preference of Thinking over Feeling (25%)
You have strong preference of Judging over Perceiving (89%)

The strong I and J are not a surprise. I'm currently learning how to do the touchy-feely stuff, so I reckon if you'd asked me a year ago, I would have been stronger T... and I think for this test, 12%S over N is probably a bit meh, but I love the idea of being an "Inspector". Heh. (also, Female for records :) )

arebelspy

  • Administrator
  • Senior Mustachian
  • *****
  • Posts: 25038
  • Age: -999
  • Location: Traveling the World
Re: The Principle of Constant Optimization: What's Your Myers-Briggs?
« Reply #140 on: November 03, 2013, 08:49:31 AM »
This makes the MB thing so much more fun.

Star Wars Myers-Briggs

;)
We are two former teachers who accumulated a bunch of real estate, retired at 29, and now travel the world full time with a kid.
If you want to know more about me, or how we did that, or see lots of pictures, this Business Insider profile tells our story pretty well.
We (occasionally) blog at AdventuringAlong.com.
You can also read my forum "Journal."

avonlea

  • Guest
Re: The Principle of Constant Optimization: What's Your Myers-Briggs?
« Reply #141 on: November 03, 2013, 09:01:40 AM »
This makes the MB thing so much more fun.

Star Wars Myers-Briggs

;)

Haha!  That's great.

rocksinmyhead

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1525
  • Location: Oklahoma
Re: The Principle of Constant Optimization: What's Your Myers-Briggs?
« Reply #142 on: November 14, 2013, 02:59:58 PM »
I think last time I took it I was an ESFJ. The description definitely fits. I guess I'm really common in the "real world" but kind of a weirdo in MMM terms?

I could see how my type might not be as well suited to the Mustachian lifestyle for two reasons: wanting to spend money going out to bars and restaurants with my friends all the time, and wanting to spend money to make other people happy. These are both huge weak spots for me :( But at least I know what to focus on!

Also I love the Star Wars thing, just saw that the other day :)

lovesthesea

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 11
Re: The Principle of Constant Optimization: What's Your Myers-Briggs?
« Reply #143 on: November 29, 2013, 01:14:57 PM »
The original post asked if there might be something that INTJs are missing because of personality type.  I am almost the opposite of INTJ (ENFP), so I wanted to comment on this because there are some things that stand out to me as I read posts on sites like this.  I think that sometimes INTJs can lose the forest for the trees, so to speak, because of a need to adhere to the "right way" to do things, or follow "the plan" that they've laid out.  (By the way, I have INTJs in my family and my husband is INFJ.)  For instance, I read on here a post from a woman who recently became a millionaire and mentioned that she'd bought new cars and kept them well and for a long time.  Somebody said something like, "Hey, new car buying is not MMM," completely missing the point that the woman said she'd just reached millionaire status.  Who cares if she didn't get there completely MMM style??  What she did obviously worked.  That's what I mean about the forest for the trees.  I think that INTJs might miss opportunities that come from being open to a diversity of ways of doing things, and also from networking with real people.  Their strength seems to be structure, order, routine, optimization, planning.  I think that the liability is that sometimes it can be a little Rain Man-esque when there's a need to switch things mid-stream, invent a new plan on the fly, etc. 

I also wanted to comment on some of the posts that talk about how many INTJs are on here because it's a good fit (can be alone with your computer, for example, and not in a crowd).  I am guessing that there are a lot of personality types that come and go on sites like this, so these people likely aren't voting on this because they've already gleaned what they needed and are now down at the coffee shop talking about it with their investor friends.  If you are a Perceiver, you tend to like change and diversity, so to come and go makes sense.  I know that I get inspired on sites like this, but then start thinking about creating a little monthly group in my community where we can get together and trade ideas and inspirations in person.  My guess is that INTJs use a forum like this as a main source of their inspiration routine.  Thus, it makes sense that many personality types are saving and building their wealth in MMM ways, but just not talking about it online.  To come and go has its liability also, however, because there are things that one probably gets from hanging out here for a long time and regularly.  Thank goodness for archives :)   
« Last Edit: December 03, 2013, 05:00:55 PM by lovesthesea »

footenote

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 802
  • MMMing in MN
Re: The Principle of Constant Optimization: What's Your Myers-Briggs?
« Reply #144 on: November 29, 2013, 03:57:30 PM »
The ENFP alliance will die. ... "Good, I can feel your anger. I am defenseless. Take your weapon. Strike me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!"
It's always darkest before it dawns on you

lovesthesea

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 11
Re: The Principle of Constant Optimization: What's Your Myers-Briggs?
« Reply #145 on: November 29, 2013, 11:53:03 PM »
"I will not fight you father."

TinyLightsBelow

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 34
Re: The Principle of Constant Optimization: What's Your Myers-Briggs?
« Reply #146 on: December 06, 2013, 02:09:56 PM »
INFP here! (I sometimes test into INFJ, but I am functionally a lot more like an INFP - I enjoy structure but have trouble maintaining it.) My partner is an INTP and he has difficulty maintaining Mustachianism despite understanding the advantages of the ideology.

JessieImproved

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 160
  • Age: 35
  • Location: Atlanta
    • Jessie : Improved
Re: The Principle of Constant Optimization: What's Your Myers-Briggs?
« Reply #147 on: December 06, 2013, 03:10:25 PM »
An ENTP that's actually learned to admit when she's wrong...if you show me the evidence. :-P
We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors; we borrow it from our children - Unknown

My Journal: http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/forum/journals/little-green-employees/

Charlotte

  • Guest
Re: The Principle of Constant Optimization: What's Your Myers-Briggs?
« Reply #148 on: December 08, 2013, 05:38:51 AM »
Another female INTJ here.

We do the Myers-Briggs at team events at work all the time... no one believes me that I'm INTJ because I talk a lot and don't act like their stereotyped idea of an introvert.

Little do they know that I come home exhausted from having to be around people all day, and hang out with my spreadsheets, books, and ISFJ partner.

INTJ (female) also married to an ISFJ. Curiouser and curiouser....

Daleth

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1205
Re: The Principle of Constant Optimization: What's Your Myers-Briggs?
« Reply #149 on: December 08, 2013, 01:09:30 PM »
INFP here! (I sometimes test into INFJ, but I am functionally a lot more like an INFP - I enjoy structure but have trouble maintaining it.)

That's me exactly, too! I've tested as both too, but usually INFP. We're like TWINS!