Hey Dave. I met an MB Expert last year. I told him my type and he proceeded to tell me about my type......NOBODY, in my entire life (even intimate friends and partners), has Ever "gotten" me before. This guy nailed my essence in 5 minutes! Left me with my jaw on the floor. I've read all the other types, all the horoscopes, etc. They are never in alignment. These are all made as guidelines, not an exact science. =)
I would like to hear your thoughts on Dario Nardi's work, he used neuroscience technology and was able to match the functions with certain brain regions/zones/states, AND he has within over a decade repeated this experiment hundreds of times by now. A question I have is if you and him would type a person the same type?
Btw guys I found the link on his channel to his website, objectivepersonality.com His discovery is that there are 32 Jungian types. I'm an ENFP, I've always identified with it. But my real 'subtype' as he's going to discuss is Ne/Te. Obviously that doesn't cover everything about me. You can layer the big 5 and 'if' you match a profile, the Enneagram over it if you want a more full perspective.
Sigh.... Ok. 1. You suggested that the Myers Briggs theory could predict psychosis. The MBTI has never bore fruit in the diagnosis of mental illness. 2. You made a claim so I asked for proof. In science the burden of proof is on the person making the claim. 3. You're trying to be poetic on UA-cam with bad grammar. I'm suspicious you're just a troll because what you just said was so incomprehensible and vague I'm not sure your being serious. I enjoy arguing so I'll humor you. I have a multiple choice question for you. Do you believe...: a) Jungian typology is incorrect in general? b) speculation about MyersBriggs types is true? Meaning there is a necessity of an persons first function to followed by a function of the opposite orientation (intoverstion/extroverstion). Which would mean I couldn't prefer Te over Fi more often than not because it would make me psychotic? c) it is more fun to try to provoke anger than have honest discussions about typology?
Hi I love learning from your videos and I find them very helpful and interesting, could you do a video on ENFP's and how to develop our Te and Si, and perhaps a bit about us being gatherers and our fears. Sorry if that's a lot... :S
No, I've tried socionics. Relationships are far more complicated, you can't just apply an equation to everyone of this type and everyone of that type. You could say, "Well Dave has been saying it's subjectively true." but it's different. It can make you prejudice were you shouldn't be and show favor to someone hasn't really proven that they are the trust worthy or actually compatible.
I think Socionics and specifically the intertype relations are useful when only considering how each type's functions relate to other types' and their functions (for example, conflict = the 1st function in the Ego block for one type is the same as the Vulnerable function for the other type) but I wouldn't use them for figuring out actual relationships.
Hey Dave, got an interesting insight this morning. I think at some point, it would be really cool to see videos that depict stories of the different types back in "tribal times." I notice Jordan Peterson talks through things in stories so often because people can resonate and understand how they may fit within those stories. It would be cool to eventually have those doodles or drawings illustrate these stories as well. I think depicting a story of the various types and their downfalls, or pitfalls can help people better see it within themselves and their own lives, based on tribal times or past stories of course. Never seen anyone do this, but I am very sure it could work extremely well.
How are you personally, applying the “science” part? I think that people expect science, behavioralism, and data from something that is deeply rooted in Philosophy are always going to be disappointed or led astray. Because they are milking it for something that it’s not worth.
This is an old comment before Dave has elaborated through his website and videos. I think that Dave has done a good job as of late about his quest for objectivity. *claps hands*
Oh, this is so me!
How are these videos not more popular? They are amazing.
Hey Dave. I met an MB Expert last year. I told him my type and he proceeded to tell me about my type......NOBODY, in my entire life (even intimate friends and partners), has Ever "gotten" me before. This guy nailed my essence in 5 minutes! Left me with my jaw on the floor.
I've read all the other types, all the horoscopes, etc. They are never in alignment.
These are all made as guidelines, not an exact science. =)
This really speaks to me
I would like to hear your thoughts on Dario Nardi's work, he used neuroscience technology and was able to match the functions with certain brain regions/zones/states, AND he has within over a decade repeated this experiment hundreds of times by now. A question I have is if you and him would type a person the same type?
Solid question
Btw guys I found the link on his channel to his website, objectivepersonality.com
His discovery is that there are 32 Jungian types.
I'm an ENFP, I've always identified with it. But my real 'subtype' as he's going to discuss is Ne/Te.
Obviously that doesn't cover everything about me. You can layer the big 5 and 'if' you match a profile, the Enneagram over it if you want a more full perspective.
Based on what evidence? Just speculation you heard.
Sigh.... Ok.
1. You suggested that the Myers Briggs theory could predict psychosis. The MBTI has never bore fruit in the diagnosis of mental illness.
2. You made a claim so I asked for proof. In science the burden of proof is on the person making the claim.
3. You're trying to be poetic on UA-cam with bad grammar.
I'm suspicious you're just a troll because what you just said was so incomprehensible and vague I'm not sure your being serious. I enjoy arguing so I'll humor you.
I have a multiple choice question for you.
Do you believe...:
a) Jungian typology is incorrect in general?
b) speculation about MyersBriggs types is true? Meaning there is a necessity of an persons first function to followed by a function of the opposite orientation (intoverstion/extroverstion). Which would mean I couldn't prefer Te over Fi more often than not because it would make me psychotic?
c) it is more fun to try to provoke anger than have honest discussions about typology?
The only reason I pointed out the grammar is because I seriously can't understand what you're saying.
Is English your native language?
Lol, wut?
Hi I love learning from your videos and I find them very helpful and interesting, could you do a video on ENFP's and how to develop our Te and Si, and perhaps a bit about us being gatherers and our fears. Sorry if that's a lot... :S
Dave, what are your thoughts on socionics? Is that scientific?
No, I've tried socionics. Relationships are far more complicated, you can't just apply an equation to everyone of this type and everyone of that type. You could say, "Well Dave has been saying it's subjectively true." but it's different. It can make you prejudice were you shouldn't be and show favor to someone hasn't really proven that they are the trust worthy or actually compatible.
I think Socionics and specifically the intertype relations are useful when only considering how each type's functions relate to other types' and their functions (for example, conflict = the 1st function in the Ego block for one type is the same as the Vulnerable function for the other type) but I wouldn't use them for figuring out actual relationships.
Hey Dave, got an interesting insight this morning. I think at some point, it would be really cool to see videos that depict stories of the different types back in "tribal times." I notice Jordan Peterson talks through things in stories so often because people can resonate and understand how they may fit within those stories.
It would be cool to eventually have those doodles or drawings illustrate these stories as well.
I think depicting a story of the various types and their downfalls, or pitfalls can help people better see it within themselves and their own lives, based on tribal times or past stories of course. Never seen anyone do this, but I am very sure it could work extremely well.
Yeah, after several years of experiencd with mbti this is definitely me. Right here
How are you personally, applying the “science” part?
I think that people expect science, behavioralism, and data from something that is deeply rooted in Philosophy are always going to be disappointed or led astray. Because they are milking it for something that it’s not worth.
Have you visited Dave's website by any chance?
This is an old comment before Dave has elaborated through his website and videos. I think that Dave has done a good job as of late about his quest for objectivity. *claps hands*
I'm pretty sure Derren Brown got a few INFx for that trick though ;f