Identity vs. Cognition

Thread posts

See all posts in this thread below.

  • User
  • Message
  • Actions
    • Published: 02-25-2014 12:52 pm
    • From Cejo's blog post:

      "I think MBTI basically took the work of Carl Jung and reworked it from being a categorization of cognition,Jung obviously intended the "psychological types" to be related to cognition instead of identity,
      but MBTI made a test that tests for identity and describes it of being a implicit extension to Jungs work."

      Indeed. Isabel-Briggs Myers kind of made the blind assumption that energetic psyche preferences could be reliably correlated with self-reported personality traits. Perhaps she had a deeper intuitive understanding of the configurations (though, I do think she probably misread I wouldn't give her too much credit) but the practical application of her work using a psychometric inventory would always prove to be a severely-limiting factor.

      "So when people hear the functions (for example Ni or Ne), they associate them semantically with identity-traits
      rather than cognitive traits because of the MBTI."

      Right. So what we get in a typical MBTI discussion group is people doing stuff like equating Ne with, "quirky inquisitive, outgoing, disorganized personality," and Ni with, "quiet, contemplative, methodical, organized, determined" personality. Looking at surface traits completely misses the point; not to mention that anyone with any degree of convincing acting abilities can pretty much mimic whatever traits they want in front of others.

      "Problem is, when people talk MBTI-types (for example INTJ, ESTP) they associate them semantically with identity
      instead of cognition, so it's not possible to discuss using Jung's terminology without people associating it with the
      MBTI semantics."

      Yes, this is a foundational flaw that is so deeply embedded into the entire MBTI (and typological, in general) approach. Character roles and the traits associated with them are really easy for the layperson to understand and relate to. Understanding different preferences of information processing, on the other hand, is a lot more nuanced and doesn't give the clear, easy answers that so many typology users crave.
    • Christian likes this post.
    • Published: 02-26-2014 01:26 pm
    • No serious cognitive tests rely on self-reporting, so even if Isabel-Briggs Myers
      had real intention of creating a cognitive personality test based on Jungs psychological types,
      the moment they introduced a self-reporting methodology the theory went from
      being a cognitive-personality theory to a identity-personality theory.

      It's unavoidable I think. If a typing involes self-reporting it must be a insignificant
      part of the typing-process, otherwise it's not possible to assume it measures cognition.
  • User
  • Message
  • Actions