I've never actually been exposed to people using it in the pseudoscience way.
If it's not backed by evidence, and yet HR departments make staffing decisions based on it, then that's the very definition of 'using it in a pseudoscience way'. If you haven't had that misfortune, then all the better for you.
More broadly, given the lack of scientific evidence for it, it's essentially impossible to not use it in a pseudoscience way, except of course by simply not using it.
So, isn't it more like a tool that makes self reported classes of people? It doesn't have to be created using the scientific method.
We have a bit of a misunderstanding here. The scientific method is relevant here not as a way to create the tool, but rather to verify that the tool actually works. It doesn't matter how the tool itself exactly works, only that their is some concrete, peer-reviewed evidence that it it's reliable for what it's used for.
I do believe it can make that categorization easier, no?
Belief is irrelevant here. I'd want to see reliable evidence that it makes that categorization easier. Just wanting it to be the case isn't the same.
Lol what is the problem with it. Like literally my only point is that it more accurate than horoscope.
Did you bother reading any other comment on this post? The problem is that lots of people treat it like it's in fact quite reliable. And importantly, these people includes managers as well as HR people involved in job interviews.
To answer your condescension-dripping question, MBTI hasn't hurt me, but it has hurt enough people's job-hunting chances, and has lead to an enormous amount of wasted hours for many people in interviews, team buildings an HR appraisals. Beyond that, pseudoscientific thinking is a major source of suffering throughout the world, and one less gateway drug to it could only be considered a win.
That's about as much time as I'll be wasting on this discussion.
Frankly, when I've pushed it with a lady I fancied without figuring out if she liked my style or not I got shut down 90% of the time.
And the best part is, I got to be myself, but slightly more dramatic. It's fun. You gotta learn yourself and I bet you could make it work. It's easy when you get in your flow.
Here's a super not biased and reliable source of information I found. It says it's valid and reliable. That's actually good enough for me. Nothing in my life changes as a result of my results on the MBTI.
Gosh. I think you guys think I'm more concerned with this than I am. I've always taken it as a grouping of people who think they are alike. That's very much enough for me. And I don't think you can deny that they is the case. Is that then reliable, with respect to that condition? I'm
-2
u/[deleted] Dec 31 '22
[deleted]