 | | Re: Is this an overreaction and a violation of rights? —Dave Schuler
|
| | | (...) A fine question! Off the top of my head I'd say that too general a framework (as I perceive Myers-Briggs to be) isn't much more useful than no framework at all. As you've correctly stated, the user needs to be aware of the limitations of the (...) (22 years ago, 25-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | |
| | | | | My3rs-Briggs waste of time (was Re: Is this an overreaction and a violation of rights?) —Thomas Stangl
|
| | | | | ENOUGH already! This thread, as usual for many in .debate, no longer has a DAMNED thing to do with the Subject. If you are going to continue this tomfoolery, at least continue it under a new Subject, so people can easily set it on Ignore. I was (...) (22 years ago, 25-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | My3ers Briggs chatter (was Re: Is this) —Erik Olson
|
| | | | If you have questions about the test, READ THE BOOK it was originally published in, or one of the others (see note). Go to a library. It's good for you. The terms used in the test are defined in the book. The type indicator is not a general theory (...) (22 years ago, 25-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
