How reliable is MBTI?

You must be an intp, i'm an intp too bro, we're too smart for this sort of shit, we see through everything.

>Most people would rather be called "thinkers" than "feelers" and "intuitive" rather than "sensory" driven

I don't think this is true. The descriptions of the other types are generally pleasant. Of course you wouldn't have a personality test this popular if it weren't agreeable to everyone and all results.

I'd also be willing to argue that almost anything is better than astrology to describe my personality. I'd take the MBTI's description of my personality over something completely arbitrary like the month/year I was born.

>tfw ENTJ but I grew up in homeschooled due to traveling, so my social skills are pretty shit

>completely arbitrary like the month/year I was born

Birth seasonality isn't an arbitrary factor for personality.

>We are born at a given moment, in a given place and, like vintage years of wine, we have the qualities of the year and of the season of which we are born. Astrology does not lay claim to anything more.

-Carl Jung AKA the guy whose work MBTI was subsequently modeled on

>The descriptions of the other types are generally pleasant.

Being a "feeler" and not a "thinker" isn't a pleasant label to get saddled with. As in "he's not much of a thinker, but he's good with people so we'll stick him in the call center." And calling some unintuitive but more sensory inclined is basically the same as calling them a stupid animal. As in "he's not too good with ideas, but he sure knows how to swing a baseball bat." In both cases you're calling the person stupid. It isn't a coincidence almost everyone on Veeky Forums calls themselves an INTP or INTJ when these threads pop up. Most people secretly think they're smart and everyone else is stupid.

Nah m8 that's bullshit, even self reported MBTI tests don't favor INTP/INTJ
Most people here are that because it's the autist personality, period.

ISFP here.

I feel you.

why did you save such a shitty jpeg

ESTP here

At least not autistic

>ST
>Not autistic

Pick one.

Not too much, the only thing I rely on MBTI are the functions, not the personality description itself

I got INTJ-A, also tried some other tests and always got INTJ, rarely INTP

The only thing I can tell it's that I am indeed the kind of person who lurks in the shadows until people are not fucking up so much I snap and decide to take control of something. Other than that, dunno, I like JRPGs and FE-like games, you can call them strategy I guess?

>do psychologists dispute it?

Why do you care about the opinions of pseudoscientists?

Isn't the autistic one INTP?
I have one INTP friend who's comically bad at love and quite literally runs away from girls because he would fall in love otherwise(he literally said that)

>S

Meaning you are hyper sensitive to sensory information which is what autists are.

>T

Meaning you have no empathy, cant sympathize and have no compassion for the fellow beings which is what autists are.

Psychologists don't give a fuck about it because social psychology is like a redheaded stepchild that makes a good trap.

I always thought it was INTP because their type can be described as
>fuck feels, I'd rather solve this math problem with 5 different ways just because I can
Or INTJ/INFJ, since high Ni generally means they can easily completely isolate themselves from the sensorial world while still being pretty sensible to pain/other physical sensations due to low Se

Intuitive Feelers aren't bad at all, especially ENFJ; it literally says that they can make people do what they want no matter what type they are, being in total control of feelings.

I can agree for Sensitive Feelers; it IS calling someone a fucking idiot.
At least Sensitive Thinkers can say they are indeed better at building shit

But there again, I get INTJ, so I am biased as fuck towards NF, since they are my most compatible partners

N's only comes in at like 20% of the population, so in my opinion as long as your a N your good with me.

It means you're assburger

slayerment.com/which-smartest-mbti-type

This dude pretty much says what makes certain mbti's stand out the most in intelligence is N vs S with N being "better".

Anybody who gets an S is pretty much a pleb.

By population

E (45-53%) I (47%-55%)

S (66-74%) N (26%-34%)

T (40-50%) F (50-60%)

J (54-60%) P (40-46%)

As we can see most of the letters are somewhere around 50% except for N vs S

INTJ is the worst type because it strongly correlates with taking the MBTI seriously

>he's trusting a fedora tipping autist to rank his intelligence based on a retarded "test"
Topkek, "science" board

>Birth seasonality isn't an arbitrary factor for personality.
While you give a plausible explanation, it does not follow that birth seasonality is a big factor (relative to f.e. making a yet to be born child listen to classical music, or exposure to heavy metals), nor does it replace the need to back up that it is a factor.

>Being a "feeler" and not a "thinker" isn't a pleasant label to get saddled with. As in "he's not much of a thinker, but he's good with people so we'll stick him in the call center." And calling some unintuitive but more sensory inclined is basically the same as calling them a stupid animal. As in "he's not too good with ideas, but he sure knows how to swing a baseball bat."
Having a "smart" job does not follow from being smart. You will surely find people who failed through college or school and yet consider themselves to be smart. Being a "thinker" does not mean you are blind to the feelings of other people. And your conclusions for SF typed people feel a bit shoehorned. What you are saying makes them seem stupid, but you can also make out unfeeling or non-sensory people to be critically retarded.

>Most people secretly think they're smart and everyone else is stupid.
People also like to see themselves as more empathic and the ones standing on the good or just side. I have both met people who consider themselves to be dumb or poor judges and yet I would agree that most people think they got the biggest slice of everything. But that does not, on its own, invalidate MBTI or type indicators in general, even though it is perfectly valid to point out bias which is present pretty much everywhere.

I am awful at all Mathematics and apparently I'm an INTP, I've done this test many times over a few years if I can remember correctly. I always knew I was a thinker along the likes of Einstein, Descartes and... Neo from The Matrix...

I'd agree on the neutrality, but seeing how some types are rather close to 50-50 (see ) I don't think MBTI suffers from that problem. Also, while you did not say that, we ought to be careful to bias a type indication system so that everything is balanced out as 50-50. That is not necessary: It can well be that some group is represented more in society than another.

its just for fun

>0.3 percent difference to an already insignificant metric
Yeah that's basically arbitrary senpai

Nah, it's just fun, you memer

this man is right