Is life for INTJ supposed to be suffering?
I don't think I've ever met anyone similar to myself, or its at least very rare.
Its like everyone else is an NPC

>>33200920 (OP)
>>33200920 (OP)
no idiot these are bullshit, your attitudes and personality are partially formed from your familial relationships and the way you internalized the world. you think no one is like but many other people think that. you aren’t unique (this is a spectacular thing) and the way to fix this is by connecting with other people.

>>33200920 (OP)
>I don't think I've ever met anyone similar to myself, or its at least very rare.
Ironic considering it's the easiest type to spot for everyone else.

Astrology for men?

>>33201167
Yes

>>33201156
except they just see it was weird loner schoolshooter

>>33200920 (OP)
MBTI is not even remotely validated in any rigorous way. Like a lot of "new paradigm" stuff, it was studied briefly a few decades ago then dropped as it was found to have little merit.

The only people who prop up this shit now are generally I/O (Industrial/organizational) "psychologists" who really, really need some sort of team dynamic sorter to justify their own paychecks.

>>33201167
100% correct

>>33200920 (OP)
so rare that everyone on the internet also happens to be one.

>>33201167
it's very trendy among women in korea

>>33201167
I have more faith in astrology than I do in fucking Myers Briggs types. I don't even get consistent results on MBTI tests.

>>33200920 (OP)
Based and npc miner.

>>33200920 (OP)
MBTI is legit. Yes INTJs have it harder but you have the strength to objectively evaluate the situation, find direction and improve what you need to.

>>33204081
>MBTI is legit
Will you change your mind if you realised it was made up by two stupid cunt women? Who had no formal education on psychiatry at all, and plagiarised Carl Jung’s typology work? The same work that Jung himself dismissed as non-accurate and pointless?

Pic related, the two inbred women whose retarded personality typying you think are ‘legit

>>33204081
>MBTI is legit
Nah. Even astrology is much more legit than mbti

Ok smart guys, if myer briggs was 100% false, than that would imply people's personalities are 100% random at any given time.

MBTI is a best guess at categorizing the typical behavioral patterns of any given human. If you think it's impossible to categorize personalities, then reply to this post with your reasoning.

>>33200920 (OP)
Sorry to hear that op, my brother is an INTJ and we got really lucky that way (I'm an INFJ). He and I are really good friends. You gotta go meet people.

>>33205529
>Ok smart guys, if myer briggs was 100% false, than that would imply people's personalities are 100% random at any given time.

No, it wouldn’t. Just because Myers Briggs is bullshit does not mean personalities are random. Myers Briggs didn’t invent the concept of personalities lol. Reality is fine without it. Personalities happen not from randomness, but from causality, through upbringing factors primarily.

>MBTI is a best guess at categorizing
No, its a pretty shit guess at it. Because it doesn’t account for disagreeable or antisocial traits. You notice how every reading is positive and feel good? Its cuz its bullshit. Negativity and disagreableness is 50% of anyone’s nature, and MBTI outright excludes it. So thats half-wrong right out the gate.

>If you think its impossible to categorize personalities, then reply to this post

It’s not impossible. But if you are an adult and your entire personality can fit into categorization, its bad news. It signifies emotional arrested development, a lack of growth, and a cyclical pattern of behaviour. Aka a personality disorder.

>>33204119
In other words it is exactly as legitimate as all sociology

>>33205529
Basically this. The majority of MBTI-phobes are S's and don't understand that an imperfect model can still map onto useful distinctions and insights.

>>33205560
>Reality is fine without it
yeah I guess we'd be fine without science too. No point in trying to understand what's happening I guess. We should just agree it's causality and stop there.

>You notice how every reading is positive and feel good?
false, picrel. Pretty sure even astrology has "negatives" that come with it so what you said is puzzling at best.

>But if you are an adult and your entire personality can fit into categorization, its bad news. It signifies emotional arrested development
Why would it indicate lack of growth? Do people need to have multiple personalities now to "grow?" This is psycho.

I'm starting to think the universe is just a game of gambling, shitty odds included.
I was classified as Intj in middle school. But because my parents were wealthy, i was forced to go through excellent private schooling, forced to go through sports for years, forced to attend social events attending from the prior two. Forced to get an advanced degree, forced to get married have a kid and get an "elite" job. All because the gateways to these things was paid for by my parents. I say forced because I'd rather just be on my own, playing videogames. But I'm smart enough to realize i need to act normal to afford the lifestyle i need to be an autist in my free time and not be easy shatteringly lonely

>>33205740
>yeah I guess we'd be fine without science too. No point in trying to understand what's happening I guess. We should just agree it's causality and stop there.

First of all, stop the passive aggressive shit, it's womanly. Second of all, MBTI is not comparable to conventional science. In fact MBTI is not a science at all. There is no scientific method used to measure any of the personality types, it's all from self reporting. Self reporting is not a qualifiable metric for any science at all. And yes we should agree it's causality, because that's exactly what science is based on, without it, no one would know anything. Causality = Z happened. How? Because Y happened. How? Because X happened, and so on. It explains the process of reality and how one thing affects the other. Nothing is random. 'random' is intellectual lazy observation.

>False, picrel
Weakness =/= negative/antisocial traits. Those MBTI 'weaknesses' are usually namby pamby bullshit. I am talking on being negative as a strength, not a weakness.

>Do people need to have multiple personalities now to "grow?" This is psycho.
No, you idiot. No one said anything about multiple personalities. You seem to think personality is a static, 2-dimensional thing. It's not. It's something in constant flux and growth over age, over time, over experience. It never stays the same. That's why who you are at 18 is completely different to who you are at 5.

This is why MBTI fails, it attempts to curtail and contain a phenomena that is in constant change. It's retarded.

>>33205740
what a fucking dork.

>>33207290
Our definition of personality is different. You think it is defined by the culmination of all our experiences from age 1 to present. You think it's something that is ever-changing and in "constant flux." I would define it as a person's behavior pattern. For example, likes, dislikes, how they tackle problems, how they react to stimuli.

>You seem to think personality is a static, 2-dimensional thing. It's not.
>There is no scientific method used to measure any of the personality types
Why do you act like human behavior can't be studied observationally? Is what goes on in the brain off-limits for some reason? We've already mapped out a fruitfly's entire neural pattern. You could put their "personality" in a box (I like fruit, I like flying, I'm afraid of fast moving things). A fruit fly doesn't usually grow past that. Why should humans be any different?

I think the difference between you and me is that you think people are clean slates and can be anything they want so long as they put the effort in. I would like to be more charismatic and enjoy talking to people more but that's not up to me. I find being alone and problem solving more enjoyable. I truly believe it's determined by genetics and upbringing. I am smarter than I was at 5, and you might argue that would be personality change/growth. But I would argue that's not personality change, just that I've become wiser and more experienced. I still like the same things I did back then.

>>33209500
>Our definition of personality is different
Try not to appeal to subjectivity, c'mon.

>You think it is defined by the culmination of all our experiences from age 1 to present.
Loosely speaking, sort of. The experiences carry influence over our personality, the influences are more important than the experiences. For example, the experience of having controlling helicopter parents will often result in someone developing introversion and asocial tendencies; they were conditioned to not go outside or act independently, so their personality follows suit.

>You think it's something ever-changing
Yes.

>I would define it as a person's behaviour pattern.
You're not wrong, but it's just the tip of the iceberg as far as personality. Face value personality. I'm talking more about the root of personality, the core of someone. That's always going to be from experiences beaten into them from formative upbringing. Those who lack much experience in childhood/teens typically lack that core personality, at least the sense of having one. That's how much more important core experience is Vs. behaviours as far as identifying personality.

>Why do you act like human behaviour can't be studied observationally
It can, but only for noticing behavioural patterns. And MBTI sucks at that. Because it just tells you face value shit, without going any deeper.

Take for example an INFP. Could be an ADHD, or, a BPD. Or none at all. Just tells us it's an introverted intuition feeling perceptive type. Doesn't tell you why they are like that. Behaviours are just the outward appearance of personality, tells us nothing of the internal.

>Clean slates who can be anything they want so long as they put effort in
Yes, but the effort doesn't come from ourselves, comes from adapting to external stressors or environs. That's part of humanity, adapting and adaptation. Without it, we'd be extinct. Yes humans can adapt and change personality but it takes time and a specific environment.

>>33209500
>>33209727
>Cont
Here's a quick way to know MBTI is bullshit, and how you can know for s fact personality is fluid and changeable if external stressors or environments are strong enough:

One single dose of LSD or Magic Mushrooms permanently changes specific attributes of personality. This has been studied and can be repeated no matter which individual, so it has scientific merit:

The attribute that changes is 'openness'. In psychology that's the trait that determines creativity and lateral thinking as well as seeking novelty and new experiences.

That shoots up by 1 while deviation point permanently - 1 deviation point is huge, psychologically speaking - after a psychedelic experience in individuals, and it's a permanent change too. So right there we can see personality can actually change if you give the mind a massive change via stimulation or stressor or environment, perception shifts occur, and when perception shifts, personality shifts with it.

MBTI doesn't account for any of life's occurrences that causes change, because MBTI has a cartoonish view on personality, this is because, again – Myers & Briggs, the two women who made this shit up, were fucking hacks. Who did not even study psychology at all.

>>33200920 (OP)
I've had different results for this test at different ages. I think life factors matter a lot.

>>33209727
>>33209771
>Try not to appeal to subjectivity
When I used the word personality, I was referring to A. When you used the word personality, you were referring to B. You even agreed that we had different concepts of what it meant. No fallacy present. It just means we were talking about 2 unique concepts that loosely fit the same label.

You've brought up a lot of good points. I've also heard about LSD changing peoples' perception of the world. But I still think a lot of what your arguing fails to discredit MBTI and even argues for it in some cases.

>Doesn't tell you why they are like that. Behaviours are just the outward appearance of personality, tells us nothing of the internal.
You're right that it fails to illuminate why certain behavior patterns exist, but I'd argue that it's besides the point. My argument is that MBTI is largely helpful because it provides labels for things that weren't labeled before. And once they're labeled we can begin to predict/model our world better. Even if it's not 100% accurate. I also believe you wildly underestimate it's accuracy in categorizing peoples' personalities.

You're notion that it's simply bullshit because it doesn't highlight the things you happen to be interested in is destructive. Attacking the women for not having "formally studied" is evidence of your belligerent criticism. It'd be like you calling the first humans to create fire "hacks" because they didn't understand thermodynamics.

>>33200976
>You aren't unique (and that's a good thing!)

>>33209727
>>33209771
>>33210068
>Cont
It seems like the big reason you don't like MBTI is because you fundamentally believe that when humans are born they are blank slates that are then molded by the environment. Even if this were true, MBTI would still be useful as a way to label and categorize a persons personality at any given point in time.

>>33200920 (OP)
That /r9k/ bulshit again? Just use the better, twice as accurate, but not too binary on its axes model.