Blog post image

No, The MBTI Isn’t Real Science. But Here’s How You Can Save It

  • Published: 07-10-2016 Edited: 12-31-1969
  • Photograph credits: Mr McGill

    Once in a while an article pops up ready to claw at the MBTI. The field of psychology is strongly critical of the MBTI. Science has already proven multiple times that the MBTI doesn’t work, and therefore, many argue that it’s meaningless. However, just because something is scientifically invalid, that doesn’t mean that it’s meaningless. The MBTI is not just driven by money and the collective blindness of the stupid majority. There are multiple people that still find the MBTI a meaningful theory. However, the critics are correct in asserting that the MBTI has many major problems. We need to fix those problems. We need to reform and modernize Carl Jungs theories if we want to survive in the 21th century. And we started out doing this by studying neuroscience.

    If we want to survive this legitimate criticism, there’s three major things that need to be done. We need to:

    How should the personality tests change?

    The classic MBTI test doesn't work. We all know it. It asks you to pick between two options, whichever you identify with the most, but in reality, most times you probably identify with both, and often, the statements are even totally unrelated to each other! Sometimes you identify more with one than the other, other days you relate more to others. A real, scientific test, must let you decide for yourself how much you identify with each statement.

    A scientific test must prove that the traits they measure for really are opposed to each other, and that you really prefer one than the other. The test should then confirm that people actually get statistically significant, meaningful results. 1% more on introversion than extroversion should not mean you are an introvert. And if employers want to adapt their workspace to introverts, and they try to fit you in that box, their solutions may not work on you, because you don't really have a clear preference.

    We need to stop boxing people in

    Some statements are written to be so general that anyone would identify with them, other traits are so specific they risk boxing people in. As we began working with neurobiology it became clear to us that people actually have a free will. Personality type doesn’t stop you from being able to act in any way you want. So personality became something different to us than to the classic MBTI. To us, your personality is who you are when you are in a state of flow. So we started screening for what people prefer to do, rather than just measure their visible behavior, or what they currently do. This means we can also help people who behave in ways that make them unhappy. We can now give advice that help people enjoy their lives more.

    No, not everyone falls naturally into one of the sixteen types

    It’s way more complex than we thought. By all our estimations and all the science we have found, not everyone can be divided neatly into one of the sixteen types. There are genes that suggest people are in between on Judging and Perceiving. There’s strong possibilities that ambiversion is a very real trait. Coaches, human relations workers, and people who want to provide meaningful tools for understanding should by all means consider improving the tools.

    Four years ago we started a journey to try to save and improve on Carl Jungs and Isabella Briggs theories. What we ended up with was the Neojungian Type Indicator and the first ever scientific Jungian personality test. The bonus is, anyone who’s fascinated by neuroscience, like me, can use our theories to read up on the latest neuroscience. The brain is truly fascinating. We encourage anyone to come explore this big world with us, there’s so much left to learn. And we encourage anyone working on independent projects in the MBTI to take the above criticism to heart. We believe the people who are able to solve the MBTIs inherent problems will become the top most requested people in the field of personality psychology. You can stand at the top as one of the people with the most scientific and meaningful versions of personality psychology. All you have to do is be smart enough to question your old assumptions.