Oh, certainly not. I just want to know how they know. I'll look for it.
I know that I didn't "learn" to be lazy.
I think laziness is kind of universal though....
ebrown_p wrote:I happen to know 17 people, and I can state without doubt that there are more than 16 personalities. No two of these people seem to have the same personality.
It could be that there are just 17 types of personailities and if I meet more people, they will just repeat.
I will let you know when I meet more people... but I doubt is is ever very useful trying to categorize something as diverse and ill-defined as personality.
I have no doubt that there is only 16 different type of personalties. I have given this test to several people and every single one of them has one of the 16 personalities. It isn't that it describes them to a T but it gets pretty close. Of course there is different experiences and such which makes ceratin parts of the personality more promanate than others. But there is only 16. People are too into being unique. They still are, to a point. But the personalities explain why certain people are friends and others are not. Why people are attracted to certain people and are not. David Keirsey studied people and couples for 40 years so I think he got a good eye on whether or not there is 16 personalities.
Quote:Do you mean the Myers-Briggs thing?
I think we have common traits, extroverted-introverted ect. but, these are just generalities. Personality is as unique as the person. We all have similar experiences ie. school, country, language but beyond that there are so many variables. I know several sets of twins, rarely do they have the same personalities.
It is based on the Myers-Briggs thing. Everyone wants to be unique, they are to a point, but everyone fits within the 16 different ones. Twins wouldn't have the same personality just because they were born from the same egg.
There are infinite numbers of personalities. You might try to categorize people into groups, but every person makes himself and there will always be differences.
rufio wrote:There are infinite numbers of personalities. You might try to categorize people into groups, but every person makes himself and there will always be differences.
40 year study proves that there is not an infinite amount. The only differences would be what extremes they have within that personality. But there is not infinite amount.
BlueMonkey, it's all in the categorization. You say yourself that it gets pretty close without describing them to a T. I can say there are three basic personality types; introvert, extrovert, and combination. I bet you that everyone would fit in one of those three categories. Does that mean there are only three types of personalities?
An interesting categorization scheme doesn't prove anything.
sozobe wrote:
An interesting categorization scheme doesn't prove anything.
Psychologists have a lot to answer for!
Myers-Briggs is a model -- not a bad one, from what I've seen, but a model, just like every other system we have for categorizing the world.
For instance, in looking at traffic on a highway, it might be sufficient to the observer to not simply the ratio of motorcycles:cars:light trucks:heavy trucks. Or it might be important what colors the vehicles are. Or the year in which they were manufactured. Or their emissions. Or their emissions as compared to an established mean for cars of that make, model, and vintage.
The answers you get depend on the questions you ask, and, so long as methodology is sound, all answers are equally valid (even if most of them are of no use to a particular observer).
sozobe wrote:BlueMonkey, it's all in the categorization. You say yourself that it gets pretty close without describing them to a T. I can say there are three basic personality types; introvert, extrovert, and combination. I bet you that everyone would fit in one of those three categories. Does that mean there are only three types of personalities?
An interesting categorization scheme doesn't prove anything.
There are many of skeptics and yet all proven wrong when they take the test. Those who refuse are scared it's right and don't want to be proven wrong. Case in point my cousin.
You can't say there are three basic personalities because introvert, extrovert or a mix of the two don't give detailed information as does the 16. You think that it is simple information that is generic in telling, but it is detailed information. It would freak one out to know they are already known.
I know people who'll say the same thing about horoscopes. It's all in how you read it.
If it's a multiple choice test, there's no choice but to fall into one of the set categories that exist for the results.
Ceili wrote:I know people who'll say the same thing about horoscopes. It's all in how you read it.
That has nothing to do with personality. I have read those that give them out according to a certain time you were born but it doesn't work. That is not the study of people anyway.
This was a study of over 40 years of couples and people. It is okay if you don't want to believe me. I am not hurt. I still know I am right. And it isn't how you read into it with this type. It is specific when it states about the personalities.
Wilso wrote:If it's a multiple choice test, there's no choice but to fall into one of the set categories that exist for the results.
It isn't a multiple choice test. With four different answers it is more like a yes or no test. There are only two answers. One or the other. Most of the time it is both but it is whatever you do more.
Ceili wrote:Do you mean the Myers-Briggs thing?
Sorry. I answered a little wrong. It is similar but more accurate than Myers-Briggs.
Blue, I'm sure it didn't have any trouble classifying you.
I'm sure I wouldn't have any trouble classifying you.
Negative is a big trait of one of the major categories.
