MBTI Types and Salary, Education, and Population - Page 3

MBTI Types and Salary, Education, and Population

Hello Guest! Sign up to join the discussion below...
Page 3 of 19 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 13 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 188
Thank Tree198Thanks

This is a discussion on MBTI Types and Salary, Education, and Population within the Articles forums, part of the Announcements category; Originally Posted by VinnyCrow Just the way that the strengths and weaknesses are listed makes it hard for me to ...

  1. #21

    Quote Originally Posted by VinnyCrow View Post
    Just the way that the strengths and weaknesses are listed makes it hard for me to take this seriously. I could be wrong, but at a glance this looks like it relies excessively on extrapolations of behaviour and a fairly shallow application of MBTI. The SJ and SP descriptions at the top also sounded questionably simplistic and belittling in contrast to the Ns, as if those types aren't even quite understood.
    NFs are extremely simplistic too: loving and caring ? Affectionate ? Communicative ? Don't all people do that stuff ?
    When you look at NT though: highly intelligent, imaginative and creative, excellent with money.
    As I read it NFs make excellent housewifes/husbands, wonderful, yet another heavily biased MBTI "thing", for lack of better word. Meh.

  2. #22

    Although it looks thorough, no sources are cited. Where are these numbers coming from? I imagine the NTs might be on the short end of the education spectrum (really, settle for an associates?), because many might be caught up in the indentured servitude of a PhD program or postdocs.

  3. #23

    Quote Originally Posted by viri_rdz_2000 View Post
    Although it looks thorough, no sources are cited. Where are these numbers coming from? I imagine the NTs might be on the short end of the education spectrum (really, settle for an associates?), because many might be caught up in the indentured servitude of a PhD program or postdocs.
    Quote Originally Posted by Great_Thinker View Post
    So where was research paper done for this study? I'd like to investigate this for myself.
    Infographic is from MBTI Personality Types Socioeconomic Infographic.

    Sources listed are:

    typologycentral.com
    statisticbrain.com
    thegreatofficeescape.com
    myersbriggs.org
    Out0fAmmo, Sequestrum, viri_rdz_2000 and 1 others thanked this post.

  4. #24

    Would like to see the following before I come to any conclusions:

    1.) Sample/Population Size; how big/representative was the population used to gather data?
    2.) Typing Methods; i.e. how did they determine the types of the individuals?

    I mean, this information tells us nothing, other than pointing toward already "known" correlations between type, degree, etc. Anybody have a link to the report?

    @MBTI Enthusiast?

    Edit 1: Yeah, I just saw the post above. I'm just going to conclude that this is dichotomy nonsense that used the test. Ah, well. MBTI can try to reach the normal pseudoscientific expectation from pyschology.

    Edit 2:

    Quote Originally Posted by VinnyCrow View Post
    Just the way that the strengths and weaknesses are listed makes it hard for me to take this seriously. I could be wrong, but at a glance this looks like it relies excessively on extrapolations of behaviour and a fairly shallow application of MBTI. The SJ and SP descriptions at the top also sounded questionably simplistic and belittling in contrast to the Ns, as if those types aren't even quite understood.
    Agreed. Smells like dichotomies to me.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kyusaku View Post
    NFs are extremely simplistic too: loving and caring ? Affectionate ? Communicative ? Don't all people do that stuff ?
    When you look at NT though: highly intelligent, imaginative and creative, excellent with money.
    As I read it NFs make excellent housewifes/husbands, wonderful, yet another heavily biased MBTI "thing", for lack of better word. Meh.
    I think you're thinking a little too simplistically as well.

    Quote Originally Posted by viri_rdz_2000 View Post
    Although it looks thorough, no sources are cited. Where are these numbers coming from? I imagine the NTs might be on the short end of the education spectrum (really, settle for an associates?), because many might be caught up in the indentured servitude of a PhD program or postdocs.
    No. Just because an individual is an xNTx, does not mean that they're more inclined to pursue a Ph.D/postdoc program.

  5. #25

    Quote Originally Posted by Raawx View Post
    Would like to see the following before I come to any conclusions:

    1.) Sample/Population Size; how big/representative was the population used to gather data?
    2.) Typing Methods; i.e. how did they determine the types of the individuals?

    I mean, this information tells us nothing, other than pointing toward already "known" correlations between type, degree, etc. Anybody have a link to the report?

    @MBTI Enthusiast?

    Edit 1: Yeah, I just saw the post above. I'm just going to conclude that this is dichotomy nonsense that used the test. Ah, well. MBTI can try to reach the normal pseudoscientific expectation from pyschology.

    Edit 2:



    Agreed. Smells like dichotomies to me.



    I think you're thinking a little too simplistically as well.



    No. Just because an individual is an xNTx, does not mean that they're more inclined to pursue a Ph.D/postdoc program.
    Simplistic, sure, at the same time that article seems extremely biased and its purpose to validate biased people into their beliefs. When you state that some cognitive functions imply a higher level of intelligence or NFs are love dispensers, how can it even be taken seriously. It spreads further misconceptions about types.
    Raawx thanked this post.

  6. #26

    Looking at demographics can be interesting. But I am still stuck on seeing tendencies to be manipulative, or can be manipulative as a weakness. Yes it can be bad to have someone controlling your office from behind the scenes, but in some jobs, especially sales job, manipulation can help if done correctly.

    Also I kind of want to see the mode and median of the education averages. In my opinion that would paint a clearer picture than whats probably the mean.

  7. #27

    Laid back, not demanding... really? Who wrote this shit?
    juilorain thanked this post.

  8. #28

    I think this is all jacked up. I don't want to see how successful I'll be compared to an ENTJ or something. Anyway, my dad (INTJ) is the provider for our family, and his income is much above the top of that scale. So how do rich people affect the scale of this? Are the families with little to no money being counted more or less in this? Anything that shows how successful you will be in life is really just not reliable. And it makes people feel like failures. Your personality type is set in stone, so why would you want to see your failure life ahead of time if that's what the majority of your people are doing? Seriously this is messed up who would do this to people. I'm rethinking my ESFP life now thanks to your system. It also seems a *bit* focused towards ENTJs. I mean, I guess they can climb the business ladder, but look at INFP! I guess Myers Briggs is the extremely heartless test it was a minute ago before I wrote this, and with that many stereotypes, there is bound to be something like this. Thanks a lot, now everyone knows what a failure they'll be. *slowly claps* Ok rant over sorry guys.

  9. #29

    Quote Originally Posted by Kyusaku View Post
    NFs are extremely simplistic too: loving and caring ? Affectionate ? Communicative ? Don't all people do that stuff ?
    When you look at NT though: highly intelligent, imaginative and creative, excellent with money.
    As I read it NFs make excellent housewifes/husbands, wonderful, yet another heavily biased MBTI "thing", for lack of better word. Meh.
    I'd like an example of a simplified NF description that actually matches what you're describing.

    "Idealists are abstract in speech and cooperative in pursuing their goals. Their greatest strength is diplomatic integration. Their best developed intelligence role is either mentoring (Counselors and Teachers) or advocacy (Healers and Champions).

    As the identity-seeking temperament, Idealists long for meaningful communication and relationships. They search for profound truths hidden beneath the surface, often expressing themselves in metaphor. Focused on the future, they are enthusiastic about possibilities, and they continually strive for self-renewal and personal growth.

    Idealists strive to discover who they are and how they can become their best possible self -- always this quest for self-knowledge and self-improvement drives their imagination - and Idealists yearn to help others make the journey too."
    Kyusaku, Rainbow Catfactory and INFJalltheway thanked this post.

  10. #30

    Quote Originally Posted by 1yesman9 View Post
    I'd like an example of a simplified NF description that actually matches what you're describing.

    "Idealists are abstract in speech and cooperative in pursuing their goals. Their greatest strength is diplomatic integration. Their best developed intelligence role is either mentoring (Counselors and Teachers) or advocacy (Healers and Champions).

    As the identity-seeking temperament, Idealists long for meaningful communication and relationships. They search for profound truths hidden beneath the surface, often expressing themselves in metaphor. Focused on the future, they are enthusiastic about possibilities, and they continually strive for self-renewal and personal growth.

    Idealists strive to discover who they are and how they can become their best possible self -- always this quest for self-knowledge and self-improvement drives their imagination - and Idealists yearn to help others make the journey too."
    Thanks, that's a good description because it is general enough without being superficial (and it is actually pretty accurate).

    Well, my previous message was inspired by the listed NF strengths, the descriptions are so tiny it's hard to take them seriously anyway. That "loving and caring" part annoyed me most of all. That's strengths that help others, not ourselves, tell me how I can benefit from those things ? Second, that's so hypocritical, if anything, that's being seen as naive and idiotic by most people, which is proven by the fact we earn the least money from all the types. We are being used and taken advantage of, because of our lack of "ambition". So we should be happy to be of use to others ? Yeah, either that or I'm going to save trees and fulfill my life... Color me enthusiastic here.


     
Page 3 of 19 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 13 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 19
    Last Post: 10-28-2016, 02:12 PM
  2. MBTI ISxx types, what is your MBTI and socionics types
    By The Exception in forum Socionics Forum
    Replies: 35
    Last Post: 05-01-2016, 12:19 PM
  3. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 07-25-2014, 10:07 AM
  4. MBTI and the Future of Education
    By thekang in forum Education & Career Talk
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 06-16-2014, 02:03 PM
  5. Percentages of each MBTI type in population
    By Flatlander in forum Myers Briggs Forum
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 05-04-2013, 03:54 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:28 AM.
Information provided on the site is meant to complement and not replace any advice or information from a health professional.
© 2014 PersonalityCafe
 

SEO by vBSEO 3.6.0