# Myers-Briggs



## Ban (Jul 31, 2019)

Free personality test | 16Personalities

It has been asked some years ago, but I'm once more curious what the average Myers Briggs types are on this forum. I'd imagine a majority of us would in the intuitive section, and would be very surprised if this were not the case, but besides this I have no expectations.

I personally score consistently as INFP and occassionally as INFJ. Strong imagination, focused on the feel of things over the substance, quick to fall in and out of passion, private and ... kind of terrible with critique. Feels accurate to me, and reading through the descriptions gives me chills from time to time due to the accuracy. These people are spying on me, I know it.

Finally, just to be certain, let me state that these tests are of course never perfect and your result can change depending on the mood you are in. As personality tests go, Myers-Briggs is reputable and has been used professionally, but you should never take the results for gospel.


----------



## Devor (Jul 31, 2019)

I'm an INTJ.  The _mastermind_.  Yay for scheming!


----------



## Ban (Jul 31, 2019)

I thought INTJ was called the architect.

Is this a scheme to give yourself a cooler title? Dastardly fire bird.


----------



## pmmg (Jul 31, 2019)

I've done these tests a number of times. Most often I draw INTJ-Mastermind. Today, I drew INFJ-Advocate. I think INTJ is more accurate, but occasionally I get a different result. I think these test are no longer useful (or accurately measuring) because I can now anticipate where the answers are going. Could be I have changed a little over time.

Reading through the Advocate Personality, very little of it rings true with me. I'll stick with Mastermind. That was my original result way back when anyway.


Devor only thinks he is a mastermind, but I can out mind him


----------



## Devor (Jul 31, 2019)

pmmg said:


> Devor only thinks he is a mastermind, but I can out mind him



That's probably true because I really don't mind it at all.


----------



## Firefly (Jul 31, 2019)

I'm also an INTJ.



Ban said:


> I thought INTJ was called the architect.
> 
> Is this a scheme to give yourself a cooler title? Dastardly fire bird.



I think maybe they changed it and not all the pages for updated? Or something like that. I've also been tripped up by that before.
Shame. I agree, Mastermind was cooler.


----------



## Ban (Jul 31, 2019)

INTJ was the most popular one last time around as well I believe. I wonder if it is coïncidence, or if INTJ types are disproportionally attracted to fantasy writing.


----------



## Firefly (Jul 31, 2019)

From other writer-discussions I've seen, it seems as though most of us are IN-somethings, but those were all general and not genre-specific. Any ideas on why thinking/judging would be more common in fantasy?


----------



## Ban (Jul 31, 2019)

Perhaps an analytical mindset is more tuned to stories with intricate detail and the need to be fully built?


----------



## Devor (Jul 31, 2019)

Introverted comes with the alone time required in writing.
INtuition comes with a sense of seeing something "hidden" and different that makes a good story.
Thinking comes with all the laborious thought work that goes into the planning and prose.
Judging comes with the millions of decisions you have to make in every sentence.

I could see how some of the others would have advantages as well, but I'll leave that to someone else.


----------



## Firefly (Jul 31, 2019)

Devor said:


> Introverted comes with the alone time required in writing.
> INtuition comes with a sense of seeing something "hidden" and different that makes a good story.
> Thinking comes with all the laborious thought work that goes into the planning and prose.
> Judging comes with the millions of decisions you have to make in every sentence.
> ...



Hmm. My explanation for all the intuitives was just that the Sensing types are not into the whole abstract/imaginary thing. Totally agree with all the others though.


----------



## Maker of Things Not Kings (Aug 1, 2019)

INFJ-Advocate

I took this test maybe ten years ago and don't recall what I was then. . . but I do recall having many more extreme agree/disagree answers then compared to what I chose now. I've definitely eased off of my fanatical side.   And I'll usually do the test for any main characters in my longer fiction too. It can help me get a framework sense of them to build upon and to turn to when I'm unsure how they might react in a complex situation.


----------



## skip.knox (Aug 1, 2019)

*shrug*  
I resist being told I *am* any one thing. Humans are too shifty (and shiftless). I am both the same as I was when I was twenty, and not the same as I was yesterday. 

At the same time, we do love naming things and categorizing things and seeing patterns everywhere. Hence the eternal attraction of astrology ... oh, pardon me, Myers-Briggs & Co. <wink>

It's like when people talk about being right-brained or left-brained. I prefer whole-brained, though sometimes I'm merely brained. Which means I have a whole in my head.


----------



## Ban (Aug 1, 2019)

Oh Skip, I knew someone would come around and say it, which is why I had added this portion to the initial post 



Ban said:


> Finally, just to be certain, let me state that these tests are of course never perfect and your result can change depending on the mood you are in. As personality tests go, Myers-Briggs is reputable and has been used professionally, but you should never take the results for gospel.



Personality tests are of course nothing to base a life around, but if something feels eerily accurate to a lot of people, I think it is also silly to simply reject it as akin to astrology.


----------



## skip.knox (Aug 1, 2019)

But that phrase "personality test". It implies there is this thing called a personality and you can test for it, like a litmus test. 

Of course people find it is eerily accurate. They (not necessarily the same individuals) have same reaction to a baker's dozen of other personality tests, and also to the four humors, to Tarot readings, numerology, and so on. This is what we do as humans, we put things--including ourselves--into categories. It helps us make sense of the world. 

I don't reject any of it. I find the scientific stuff less interesting because it aims at objectivity. Palm reading, to grab an example at random, is fascinating because it involves human beings on both sides. But I also don't take them too seriously. Nor ought folks take me too seriously, either!


----------



## Ban (Aug 1, 2019)

I'd disagree with that. If it were but a gimmick, I would be able to find myself in any of the other personality types presented to me. An astrology or humor reading is so vague and general that all types can fit all molds, with the user's own personal desire for the test to work being the determinant for its accuracy. This is simply not the case with this test, therefore the analogy is contrived.

And yes, it being a personality test does imply that it tests one's personality, which is exactly what it does, with surprising accuracy. That said there is no problem with people not caring for it, but placing it in the same category as your examples is disingenuous in my opinion.


----------



## Devor (Aug 1, 2019)

I mean, these things are pretty straightforward.  Identify a trait - extroversion - and then ask a bunch of questions that are just subtle ways of asking "How extroverted are you?_"_  Give both ends of the spectrum a fancy name and roll with it.  Take all the traits you test for and look what kind of person you have when you put them together.

It's true, it's _not _your entire personality.  It's only a cursory look at the different combinations of four different traits.  There are countless traits in a complete personality.

Myers-Brigg is a bit dated.  It's main fault is that it strives to maintain an equilibrium between the personality types, which is fine for what it is, but severely limits the scope of what a personality test can tell you.  A test that asked "Are you a hard worker?" - a trait known in psychology as conscientiousness - comes out with results like "You're a lazy bum who fails to live up to your potential."  That's not as fun of a test.

I prefer the _Strengthsfinder 2.0_ test which produces a list of 5 different strengths.  If you read carefully you can tell that some strengths are better versions of others, and there are too many combinations for them to try and produce a write up for the full combination. It's also positive without trying to praise both ends of the spectrum - if you take a test and there's nothing about how you interact with others in the result, well, you can figure out what that means. It's also geared more towards working styles.  But overall it gives you a pretty accurate assessment of your abilities.


----------



## pmmg (Aug 1, 2019)

Totally agree that these tests are more of a curiosity than defining, I am a little concerned that perhaps they carry a danger along the lines of 'these should not be open to the general public and should be a tool of psychologists', but I would not really know. I think that they can serve a harmful purpose of defining one as a way of giving permission to an individual to behave a certain way because they found they identified with the results, and not continue to try to be their better selves (did that make sense). For me, I found the results interesting a long time ago, eye opening in adding more insight into things I knew were true but could not articulate as well, and educational about other personalities I come across. I had the same reaction with the strengths finder test.

Not that I would expect anyone here to know, but my most defined strength was identified as Strategy, or Strategic thinking (or something like that). I was not surprised, I am very strategic. I am very good at board games and almost never lose. But I also approach most problems that way, and sometimes it is quite limiting. I rarely have emotional reactions and more often approach things with the concept or what is the most likely outcome and which approach can most likely achieve the best outcome. That is great, but sometimes it needs to be turned off and I have trouble with that.

Knowing the label does not spare me the challenges. But its nice to have a label. It can help clarify things.


----------



## Ban (Aug 1, 2019)

I think there is great benefit in having tools like these to help identify yourself. While any such test will always be too simplistic to account for a full human, contradictions and all, I do believe we all have strong patterns that we can identify and use as an anchorage when needed. This brings the risk of people hiding behind these patterns as you say pmmg, but a healthy dose of scepticism should be able to mitigate that to my mind.

I also think that this test in specific is rather responsible in its analysis by telling people the downsides of their traits, and as such don't think it actually is trying to please all sides as Devor states. Each type is presented with positives and their respective negatives, and it is up to the individual to decide how much attention and care they lend to both.

And I also like labels when used responsibly. It's impossible to get to know all people in full, and likely impossible to fully get to know even one person who isn't you, so I'd say a convenient, balanced labeling system is a nice way to balance between individuality and understanding.


----------



## skip.knox (Aug 1, 2019)

'sfunny, but as a writer the main interest in these comes from helping me see faults and weaknesses I might otherwise overlook. Especially in thinking about faults for my protagonists.


----------



## Insolent Lad (Aug 1, 2019)

I hadn't done this in years—and don't recall what I got the last time—but came out as INFJ-T (turbulent advocate) this time. Interesting, I guess, but I don't know how valuable. I think maybe the 'Big Five' personality test is more useful.


----------



## Devor (Aug 1, 2019)

Ban said:


> I also think that this test in specific is rather responsible in its analysis by telling people the downsides of their traits, and as such don't think it actually is trying to please all sides as Devor states. Each type is presented with positives and their respective negatives, and it is up to the individual to decide how much attention and care they lend to both.



That's not really what I was saying.  It does present the pros and cons for each type.  But you still couldn't say being an _Advocate_ is better than being an _Architect_ based on Myers-Briggs.  The sixteen types are presented as equals of each other.  An honest and complete personality test would suggest, just for example, when a person is too impulsive and it's holding them back in life.  Or if someone is just too lazy to ever achieve their specific dreams.  Myers doesn't look for that kind of thing.  It presents sixteen personalities as balanced because both sides of the traits it tests for are relatively innocuous.  That's why the test is extremely limited in what traits it looks for.  That's also why the test is so popular.


----------



## Ban (Aug 1, 2019)

Sure but are these 'worse' traits not simply extreme forms of the negative traits presented by the test? It might not measure how bad one is doing, but it does showcase areas that may or may not need these improvements.

I do also like the Big Five test, but to be honest... it just lacks the flair of Myers-Briggs. Getting an archetype and talking about it is fun, though perhaps I am alone in this.


----------



## Devor (Aug 1, 2019)

Ban said:


> I do also like the Big Five test, but to be honest... it just lacks the flair of Myers-Briggs. Getting an archetype and talking about it is fun, though perhaps I am alone in this.



Ohh I hate the big five test.  It pretty much flips it around and only looks at traits that have a positive or negative.  It's designed for psychologists working with their patients so whether you're a thinker or a feeler doesn't really matter so much to your therapy.

But, I was talking about the StrengthsFinder 2.0 test before.  A few the possible strengths include Arranger, Deliberative, Analytic, Strategic, and others.  You'll note that those four strengths are all kind of similar points on the same line of mental traits.  By doing it this way it can give you results that are still upbeat (there's mostly pros and and a few cons listed for each), but are also more nuanced and honest.  Yes, you might go, "Ohh deliberative, that's not really a good one."  And when I took it at my old job the boss was really looking to chat with everyone who turned up "strategic." They're not equal. Some people won't have any intelligence-based traits turn up. That's just reality.

Myers-Briggs, on the other hand, doesn't even look at intelligence-related traits. It's hard to put "smart" and "stupid" on a spectrum and still say the resulting personalities are equal or balanced.  And again, the Big Five Test doesn't really care because whether you're suited for cutting grass or being a scientist isn't really the question with maintaining your mental health.


----------



## Ban (Aug 1, 2019)

I can see the use in that in the professional world, but outside of it such judgement is merely debilitative. For quickly understanding yourself or another person, and understanding/comparing personality traits, you don't need to know whether they're 'suited for cutting grass or being a scientist'. It has nothing to do with who they are, but instead describes their utilitarian worth. Seeing as this is a casual discussion on an online forum for fantasy writers, I really don't think it matters to measure intelligence or job proficieny.

I have to say though, judging a personality test for its utilitarian worth is suuuch an INTJ thing to do


----------



## Devor (Aug 1, 2019)

Ban said:


> I can see the use in that in the professional world, but outside of it such judgement is merely debilitative. For quickly understanding yourself or another person, and understanding/comparing personality traits, you don't need to know whether they're 'suited for cutting grass or being a scientist'. It has nothing to do with who they are, but instead describes their utilitarian worth. Seeing as this is a casual discussion on an online forum for fantasy writers, I really don't think it matters to measure intelligence or job proficieny.
> 
> I have to say though, judging a personality test for its utilitarian worth is suuuch an INTJ thing to do



But I didn't say anything about worth...?  Being smart enough to be a scientist, or better suited to cut grass, is still part of your personality, if you want a complete and accurate picture, isn't it?


----------



## Ban (Aug 1, 2019)

But you did. The worth I'm talking about is not moral, it's related to the workforce. If someone is ill-suited to a certain field, their utilitarian worth within that field is nihil. And regarding intelligence, I don't think it is. Someone's intelligence (although I don't believe it is a singular measurable thing), might enhance someone's ability to interact within the world, but it doesn't make them kind or creative or whatever. Just more intelligent.


----------



## Devor (Aug 1, 2019)

Ban said:


> But you are. The worth I'm talking about is not moral, it's related to the workforce. If someone is ill-suited to a certain field, their utilitarian worth within that field s nihil. And i don't think it is. Someone's intelligence (although I don't believe it is a singular measurable thing), might enhance someone's ability to interact within the world, but it doesn't make them kind or creative or whatever. Just more intelligent.



I don't understand what you're getting at.  The intelligence aspect was only one example of the kind of trait Myers Briggs can't measure because it would skew the 16-type balance.  Strengthsfinder includes strengths that cover kindness and creativity, as well as diligence, people skills, and more.  MyersBriggs just isn't a very robust system because it tries to keep the traits balanced.  If someone's personality leads them to be kind and inclusive, MB doesn't cover it, because the other end of the spectrum would suggest having personality types that are mean and selfish.  That's a weakness in their methodology.


----------



## Ban (Aug 1, 2019)

My point is that this depth is not necessary outside of the professional field when the goal of the test is simply to understand yourself and others in a positive, constructive light. If I want to know and be able to understand the rest of the website in a general light, I don't need to know whether they are suited to a career in the natural sciences.


----------



## FifthView (Aug 1, 2019)

From what I recall, I generally test out as* INTP*. There is another, with a single different letter, I sometimes get, but I don't remember which. (Maybe INFP?)

Since astrology has been brought into the conversation...Heh, I used to be "into" astrology, decades ago, and I always thought it interesting that I was both INTP and Aquarius, given the similarities. For what it's worth.


----------



## Firefly (Aug 2, 2019)

Whether or not it's flawed depends on what kind of information you want it to be giving you. For me, I like seeing insight into the different ways people might think. I agree that Myer-briggs is dated in a clinical sense and it doesn't measure a lot of value-sensitive things, but I don't want to take a personality test to find out what I'm good at, so I don't really care.


----------



## William Russell (Aug 3, 2019)

Apparently I am a Protagonist ENTJ-A.  Not sure what the A is for but it sounds ominous.  I will be starring in the next novel you write...ha ha!


----------



## anotherwriter2019 (Aug 5, 2019)

I've taken this test quite a few times and I've always tested as an INFJ. That probably explains why I love to write, yet hate to share anything I've written.


----------



## Firefly (Aug 5, 2019)

anotherwriter2019 said:


> I've taken this test quite a few times and I've always tested as an INFJ. That probably explains why I love to write, yet hate to share anything I've written.


Yeah, I've seen a lot of writers who are INFJs. I was surprised to learn that was one of the least common types, I feel like you guys are everywhere...


----------

