Subject:
|
Re: Is this an overreaction and a violation of rights?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Mon, 23 Sep 2002 19:11:48 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
436 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler writes:
> > In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Frank Filz writes:
> >
> > > > What's an ENFP?
> > >
> > > http://www.recruit-china.com/Career/MBTI/ENFP
> > >
> > > You can find hundreds of descriptions on the web. This was the first
> > > which had an extensive description.
> >
> > Thank you for the link; I'd never even heard of "ENFP" before, so it was
> > all news to me. But at a quick run-through, the test seems problematic.
> > Consider these questions:
>
> Oops! Disregard most of that--I looked at the wrong test. The correct one
> on that site is apparently: http://www.recruit-china.com/Career/MBTI
>
> However, aside from the precise questions, the methodology seems equally
> suspect. The user is asked for a series of bafflingly simple personal
> summations, after which the test points the user to a more elaborate,
> seemingly holistic encapsulation of the user's persona. My concern remains:
> is this test actually used for anything? It seems fundamentally flawed
> except as a brief diversion, and certainly it should be used as any serious
> yardstick for plotting one's limitations and potentials. By its very nature
> the test is irretrievably subjective, and the "4 letter acronym" is a
> classic example of the aforementioned "subjective validation."
>
> > as described here: http://skepdic.com/forer.html
>
> Browsing the SkepDic site, I came upon the following likewise useful link:
> http://www.skepdic.com/myersb.html
>
> I absolutely support your right to assess your potential by whatever
> yardstick you choose, but I urge you very strongly not to embrace such
> pseudoscientific methods as this Myers-Briggs stuff. This is especially
> true if are undertaking a serious evalutation of your debating/interacting
> style!
>
> Dave!
Thanks for the link! I skimmed thru it now, and I'll give it a more
throrough read tonite after work.
I concur you shouldn't make any life-changing decisions on the basis of
these types of tests. I liked them because, well, I was Extrovert,
iNtuitive, Feeling, Perceiver--which I thought hit the nail on the head. As
I get older, I become a little more Introverted but oh well.
But Dave! Your ability to, what's that called, something like how Holmes
can take seemingly irrelevant pieces of data and come up with an hypothesis
and solution--critical thinking... That I would like to explore more.
I have done *some* (not much) reading on critical thinking, but any
direction you may have to lead me in a good direction would be, by me,
appreciated.
Dave K.
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
62 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
