Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
I agree entirely.  I've been subjected to M-B and similar tests on a number of occasions (mainly when I was briefly studying for a master's degree in education, an effort mercifully abandoned before it did too much damage) and have never found any of them terribly illustrative or insightful.  I don't think they measure what they purport to measure fairly well, and I personally don't easily fit into those boxes -- so at different times have gotten different results, especially on the T/F scale, but on the other ones as well.  Why on Earth would I want to think of myself as a certain "type" if I'm barely two percentage points away from being a different "type," especially when I haven't the faintest idea how to answer a good chunk of the questions because they're bizarrely worded?

The traditional approach to some tests (not necessarily M-B) even tends to view people who are "undifferentiated" as somehow dangerous, rather than as, uh, well-rounded.

by the stormy present (stormypresent aaaaaaat gmail etc) on Wed Jan 2nd, 2008 at 06:48:46 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Others have rated this comment as follows:


Occasional Series