I changed DRASTICALLY after SRS/transition, but then that was to be expected! I lived most of the first 24 years of my life being severely inhibited by my supposed sex, socially, personally, emotionally, etc., that when the inhibition was removed, I exploded like a wildflower after a spring rain. There was no comparison between the 'before' and the 'after' - they were polar opposites.

INFJ for both times I have taken such a test. Regardless of results as best as I have been able to discern I am far more a recluse now than I ever was before. But, events in my life other than transition ("awakening" in an "otherkin" context) most assuredly have something to do with that. In addition I REALLY do not find myself passable let alone attractive an that has something to do with it as well...

INTJ

Quote from: Nichole on July 29, 2008, 10:28:26 AM

Quote from: Claire de Lune on July 29, 2008, 10:02:41 AM
One of it's great flaws is that it's built on the dubious ideas of Carl Jung.  Jung was a fascinating guy and had very interesting ideas but like Freud, they are based on his limited experience of the world. 

Now that is a defining characteristic that covers everyone. Or are you of the opinion that some of us have "unlimited" experiences of the world? I know you are not. Your point is a good one about any psychological-based or any other-based personality inventory, Claire. But, it's a rather universal commentary on them all. Ken Wilbur's own opinions about his own work notwithstanding!!

And just as Freud has been re-defined and updated and changed by his followers, so has Jung. James Hillman and to a great extent Thomas Moore come to my mind. The archetypal structure doesn't appeal to everyone, but there are things in Jungian psychology that certainly make as much sense as the strictly behaviorist/utilitarian leanings of most American branches.

One may always integrate. In fact one probably should.

N~

I certainly don't believe anyone has unlimited experience or perfect knowledge for that matter.  One might hope though that ideas that are generalized to Western Civilization are based on more than one man's anecdotes on observations of upper-middle class Central Europeans of the late 19th, early 20th century.  There is no empirical basis for any of Jung's ideas or the Meyers-Briggs instrument.  Moore and Hillman are more theologians than anything, which is fine.  They are deep thinkers and I'm all for using metaphor as means of understanding a complex reality.  I just have a hard time believing in the MBPI.

Quote from: Claire de Lune on July 29, 2008, 09:50:56 PM
There is no empirical basis for any of Jung's ideas or the Meyers-Briggs instrument.  .....  I just have a hard time believing in the MBPI.

For Jung, certainly you are right, though I personally like some of his ideas.  But for the MBTI this is just not accurate.  There is empirical data out the wazoo which has been collected since 1962.  And that is just the "official" data.  More interesting to me is the data that has been kept for years by private clinics and centers who do work directly with clients.  Although it is not considered in the official results, it is very extensive.  One problem with the MBTI today is that there is almost too much data.  As culture changes, some of these ideas should change as well.  But there is no way to account for this.

In that light, I much favor the Birkman Method in our day.  To me it is a far more useful instrument.

Kristi

But valid as to what?  The underlying ideas are of dubious origin.  How do we know there are introverted thinkers and extroverted thinkers?  Because Jung says there are.

The instruments themselves measure things that the subject has told the investigator.  The subjects own thoughts are then regurgetated back in the report along with some generalities that could apply to most people.  What use is the information other than to provide amusement?  Unfortunately there are enough people out there that believe this stuff and use it to make decisions that affect the lives of others.  I don't believe that people fall into a mere 16 categories of personality.  There are more personality disorders than that!

I have become much more social, outgoing and confident, but I think it was more a combination of coming out and my psychology sessions.

Quote from: Claire de Lune on July 29, 2008, 11:01:08 PM
But valid as to what?  The underlying ideas are of dubious origin.  How do we know there are introverted thinkers and extroverted thinkers?  Because Jung says there are.

The instruments themselves measure things that the subject has told the investigator.  The subjects own thoughts are then regurgetated back in the report along with some generalities that could apply to most people.  What use is the information other than to provide amusement?  Unfortunately there are enough people out there that believe this stuff and use it to make decisions that affect the lives of others.  I don't believe that people fall into a mere 16 categories of personality.  There are more personality disorders than that!

You mean to say that 1 disorder should equal 1 personality trait, Claire?

Sorry, I think the late 19th first half of the 20th century Swiss man has got you beaten on that logic!! 

There are more communicable diseases than you have bodies as well. How many communicable diseases have you had?

The evidence for Meyers-Briggs has been accumulated through interveiws with subjects. Where would you imagine that the data from all those personality disorders you mentioned has been gathered?

As has been pointed out before around here psychology and social science aren't science in the same ways that biology and chemistry are science.

You don't like the ideas of Jung & the Meyers-Briggs inventory? Well, you've a perfect right not to like them, use them or support their usages for anything at all. That being true, spoz you might let this one go now as being a matter of preference and opinion rather than a meaningful argument in the culture wars that one or another person must win?

Thanks so much,

Nichole

Give me a break, Nicole.  No one uses Meyers-Briggs as a diagnostic or research tool.  Your Swiss man eschewed emperical methods and stated on numerous occasions that his own anecdotal observations provided superior evidence.  That atitude seems to have gravitated towards Ms. Briggs, the one with a degree in poli sci from Swarthmore as her sole academic credintial.

My Meyers-Briggs assesment reads much like my Scorpio, Virgo Rising natal chart interpretation.  That surely wouldn't disturb Dr. Jung who also had a keen interest in astrology.

Quote from: Claire de Lune on July 30, 2008, 09:27:14 AM
Give me a break, Nicole.  No one uses Meyers-Briggs as a diagnostic or research tool.  Your Swiss man eschewed emperical methods and stated on numerous occasions that his own anecdotal observations provided superior evidence.  That atitude seems to have gravitated towards Ms. Briggs, the one with a degree in poli sci from Swarthmore as her sole academic credintial.

My Meyers-Briggs assesment reads much like my Scorpio, Virgo Rising natal chart interpretation.  That surely wouldn't disturb Dr. Jung who also had a keen interest in astrology.

Claire, you are simply entitled to your opinions. For that you need no break. I'm kinda surprised about the virulence. You sound like a Skinner-prof I had in Psychology in 1970!!

You don't like or use a thing? Fine, I can see where in your part of the work that MBPI wouldn't be a first or even last resort to working with the cases you work with. But, I think that hardly merits the sort of downright harsh stuff you've managed in the last two posts.

As for Jung. Yes, I'm sure that just like other humans he had flaws and blind-spots. In fact, I'm well aware that he did. That I enjoy his ideas and reading some of his works, like Aion & Archetypes & the Collective Unconscious, I simply enjoy having read them. Is that okay with you or should I unread them?

Please try to gear-down a few notches. OK. 

As I am sure you are aware, having a poly sci degree from Swathmore doesn't invalidate anyone's knowledge or instrument. Instead that sort of comparison almost surely shows the sense of the accuser that she has a virulent reaction to the entire thing. *sigh*

That being said, there's hardly any reason to argue. I find Jung interesting reading. That you don't is just fine with me. But, could you please tone it down a notch? He's been dead for 45 years!

Best,

Nichole

Quote from: Claire de Lune on July 30, 2008, 09:27:14 AM
No one uses Meyers-Briggs as a diagnostic... tool. 

That is a rather sweeping claim, one which I know to be incorrect.

Quote from: Claire de Lune on July 30, 2008, 09:27:14 AM
My Meyers-Briggs assesment reads much like my Scorpio, Virgo Rising natal chart interpretation.

If you say so. 

So why the animosity here?  These are ideas and concepts, not really a cause for losing any sleep.  I enjoy reading things, even when I do not agree with them.  I find myself challenged and strengthened in my own beliefs for having done so.  For me, being willing to be stretched is one difficult part of maturity, but mostly it is a good thing.   I just try not to get so open minded that my brain falls out.


Kristi

If you look at my OP I was generally complimentary to Jung and his ideas.  I was challenged and I responded.  I love to argue and debate.  It's fun and I never turn personal when doing it.  That said, why do you want to silence me, Nicole?  I have as much right to express my opinions as anyone and to respond when challenged.

Kristi, you're right I don't know that no one uses MBPI as a dignostic tool.  I do know that it's not used by any clinicians in SFDPH Community Behavioral Health Service or The UCSF Dept. of Psychiatry, both of which are nationally respected mental health service providers and physician training centers. 

I thought the MMPI was used, while the other one was more of an 'education' class or internet deal.  But there is very little double or triple checking like MMPI has going on in it.

Quote from: Claire de Lune on July 30, 2008, 04:31:23 PM
If you look at my OP I was generally complimentary to Jung and his ideas.  I was challenged and I responded.  I love to argue and debate.  It's fun and I never turn personal when doing it.  That said, why do you want to silence me, Nicole?  I have as much right to express my opinions as anyone and to respond when challenged.

Kristi, you're right I don't know that no one uses MBPI as a dignostic tool.  I do know that it's not used by any clinicians in SFDPH Community Behavioral Health Service or The UCSF Dept. of Psychiatry, both of which are nationally respected mental health service providers and physician training centers. 

Claire, did you REALLY hear me trying to silence you?  Asking if you'd tone-down some of the more "Rottweilerian" jabs you toss in is hardly asking you not to express your opinions. It's merely asking if you cannot tone them down a bit, not for silence sake, but to bring down the level of the tone a bit?

Umm, last I checked fighting or even disagreeing with a lot of passion over any of this is simply not the same as say a knife-fight in 1850s Five Points!! 

Nichole

Quote from: Aiden on July 29, 2008, 10:23:55 AMOk well thought would try one of them tests, only probelm is one found asks me for my gender....   I don't know what to put...

For "gender" I put male unless I know they're asking me for medical reasons. Since this is a personality test, I'd select male.

An 1850s Five Points knife fight? Can I join in?  I have a little list.

Quote from: tekla on July 30, 2008, 07:01:20 PM
An 1850s Five Points knife fight? Can I join in?  I have a little list.

OK, serious face, arms akimbo.

Tekla Katrina West. That was not funny and NO!!!! You may not cut-up anyone on this forum!! 

You're cute, Kat.  But behave or you could make a couple of lists as well!! 

Nichole

Well Five Points circa 1850 is a lot like the current Barbary Coast.  Now all finance advisers and antique dealers it was far more interesting way back when.  I'd love to go back to the 1850 Five Points.  Its tragic that Martin Scorsese is as close as I'm going to get, though he did it very well.

Quote from: tekla on July 30, 2008, 07:27:39 PM
Well Five Points circa 1850 is a lot like the current Barbary Coast.  Now all finance advisers and antique dealers it was far more interesting way back when.  I'd love to go back to the 1850 Five Points.  Its tragic that Martin Scorsese is as close as I'm going to get, though he did it very well.

Hmm, never been to Tunisia or Libya, but it's still the way it was back in the 1810s?  > Scorsese had to go to Rome to find scenery that would be appropriate. I find it disgusting in terms of the violence, but yeah, I suppose Gangs of NY is a pretty good movie. Just wish Liam Neeson would
stop getting gutted in every part he plays anymore!! 

And another yes, it's nothing like that anymore. Gotta go elsewhere in the city for that.

Nichole

Oh I meant the Barbary Coast here in SF, once called 'the wickedest place on earth" - hence my fondness for it.  And it was the wicked place from the 1850s (following the Gold Rush) to WWI, when like Storyville in New Orleans and lots of other fun places it was shut down by people trying to clean up the army and navy.