Jump to content

Recommended Posts

 Quote:
Originally posted by Ocean11:
I tried that test but I couldn't say definitely one way or another for most of the questions. How can y'all be so definite about whether you feel at ease in a crowd? Are you always at ease in a crowd? Do you never have quite desperate moments of unease in a crowd, even though normally you do OK in crowds? ...?
I think the tests are designed to compensate for small irregularities. I was unsure of some questions too but my profile fits me (scarily) well.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Ocean - that is one of the weaknesses of prospective employers administering these tests. I have only become confident in my answers as I have done it so many times off my own steam for my own interest. There are still instances where I am not a binary A or B. For me the 'comfort in a crowd' question is resolutely binary: in every variant of the question I am anti-crowd, pro side-of-the room and pro my own company. My less binary position is other areas. The above referenced book is worth reading if you want to get any benefit from understanding your personality vs others.

 

In terms of career, I also know that I am in the wrong place for happy working. I like to think that most people hit this realisation after about 10 years lol.gif . I use the 'personality profile' as a survival tool, to maximise what I can get out of my situation. If I were honest to myself and stopped selling myself out for cash, I would get the F out of here as fast as I could (patience, patience, all in good order and timing...). These days if I had to spend 60 hours a week working for a living and being answerable to a higher employer then I would rather be a field geologist or a rural cartographer or a scientist in bioenergy pursuits... but it seems not so many people actually do those jobs whilst plenty are trained for them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with O11. Those questions are not absolutes and it really depends when you take the test. After a busy stressfull day at the office or after a nice leisurely weekend up in the mountains.

I took the test 3 times and 3 different profile came out. The only variable to alwasy came back was thinking. (maybe I think too much to make this test work)

Link to post
Share on other sites

i find the problem with this test (which i've done a few times before - isn't the original one way longer? i don't remember that well - i did it a long time ago) and other similar ones is that it's so easy to tell which answers are going to point to which personality type.

 

i realize that you're supposed to just go with your instincts, but i just think about the questions too much (and mine came out as an "F", not a "T"!)...also, like what other people have been saying it totally depends on the situation and how i'm feeling, what events and environment are surrounding me at the time.

 

it is interesting though. i put more stock in astrology however... ;\)

Link to post
Share on other sites

What about blood types Nicole? Surely you don't doubt that the characters of every person on this planet can be categorized into four main groups according to their blood type?

Link to post
Share on other sites

The two aren't really comparable - one is proven, the other isn't.

The Babylonians invented astrology based on the position of the stars and planets in the sky. Since then, our position in the universe has changed, so even if there was something to Astrological theory, we'd probably be a different starsign than what astrology today says we are.

Link to post
Share on other sites
 Quote:
Originally posted by buckafuffalo:

it is interesting though. i put more stock in astrology however... ;\)
You should check out Rahul in the Earthquake thread then. ;\)

I'm not one of one for psychobabble, but I was really surprised by the result. I guess if you have a polar personality, then the results are likely to be clear cut. Otherwise, less so.

Something I have find curious are the "people" people who are intolerant of the "non-people" people. Given an appropriate pile of components, I can (and have) build a house, a car or a boat, no problem. I would choose to avoid the launch party. Too complex to deal with the social niceties, and their technical disabilities make them impossible.

Ex-wife has had No2 son diagnosed as autistic partly because of his "lack of social skills". He is not, because he is very sensitive to social situations and other's feelings. He is just not comfortable, and prefers to be in the back room, which is an entirely different thing. She's a people person, though, so she must be right.
Link to post
Share on other sites
 Quote:
Originally posted by nicole:
The two aren't really comparable - one is proven, the other isn't.
One is proven? Hardly - the test is based on psychology, psychology is not a strict science and there's more unknown about the working of the mind than is known. So conveniently (arrogantly) passing it off as science and classifying people under neat little titles, in boxes or otherwise is fraught with error.

The dodgy aspects of such metering is very much equivalent to astrology, which coincidentally has a longer lineage.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Science is a process of questioning, not a product, which is what differentiates it from religion. Scientists, by definition, are nibbling at the boundaries of our knowledge and understanding.

 

Science eats its parents. Einstein proved that Newton was wrong. Wrong or not, try stepping out of a canoe, and Newton's model works. Models are always wrong because they are simplifications and approximations of reality. The only test is whether they are useful or not. A professional practioner should be able to judge this.

 

No science is strict at the sharp end. Everything is uncertain. Psychology is not disqualifed from being science for being uncertain. It would be if it was astrology, which it is not.

Link to post
Share on other sites
×
×
  • Create New...