# The Religion of MBTI



## NotSoRighteousRob (Jan 1, 2010)

Now I'm sure some may find it offensive to have the MBTI compared to religion, but I am going to show you why I've started to see it this way.

Sure, there may not be a God or gods, but not all religions focus on a higher power, some state that the higher power is in us, and talk of seeking a path to better understanding and enlightenment. 

When it comes right down to it, what is a religion except for faith in an idea? Well, the MBTI is really just an idea, people are placing their faith in tests and in what they believe to be the "truth" about themselves.

There are many religions, just as there are many types, types that often stick with their own, sort of like protestants, or Catholics, or Jewish people. Sure there may be interaction between the different assemblies. But I have seen so many thread titles and posts that already lump different types together, the same way different religions lump different faiths together.

You have your prophets, your "wise" men. You have your idols. 


You have your believers and your non-believers, your atheists and your agnostics, and your faithful.


Maybe because I lack faith, I can not believe in the MBTI.


----------



## Nearsification (Jan 3, 2010)

Uhhhhhh? I'm not sure what to say. People put faith and believe in many things does not mean its a religion.


----------



## Kevinaswell (May 6, 2009)

This is the exact reason I prefer to think of differing temperaments in terms of the Big 5.


----------



## TurranMC (Sep 15, 2009)

Jonnystorm10 said:


> Uhhhhhh? I'm not sure what to say. People put faith and believe in many things does not mean its a religion.


Pretty much this. Using this backwards logic you could argue Science is a religion because people put faith into it.


----------



## Marino (Jun 26, 2009)

Kevinaswell said:


> This is the exact reason I prefer to think of differing temperaments in terms of the Big 5.


And why I am an apersonalityist. 
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## fiasco (Dec 25, 2009)

I think it's a pretty valid comparison. A little extreme, I guess, but valid nonetheless. Some people can get pulled into the "cult of personality" if they aren't careful. If the mbti system can be compared to a religion, however, I'd like to think most people involved are -- rather than faithful devotees -- simply theologists.



RighteousRob said:


> You have your prophets, your "wise" men. You have your idols.


This made me laugh, because I thought of how someone called out Grey in their thread title :laughing:
(Please don't take that seriously, hahaha)


----------



## NotSoRighteousRob (Jan 1, 2010)

well science is based on actual facts, most of it. but I agree, it is one of those things that can be twisted into meaning whatever you like. Some people do take science to the point of religion, and I was not implying everyone did this with MBTI, but I believe under the right circumstances this could be transformed into a cult, but what couldn't nowadays :laughing:


----------



## MNiS (Jan 30, 2010)

RighteousRob said:


> well science is based on actual facts, most of it. but I agree, it is one of those things that can be twisted into meaning whatever you like. Some people do take science to the point of religion, and I was not implying everyone did this with MBTI, but I believe under the right circumstances this could be transformed into a cult, but what couldn't nowadays :laughing:


You do realize that in science what is accepted as fact today was once theory and speculation, right? 

But yeah, I agree to a small extent that if MBTI is taken too seriously it could be viewed as a religion. Fortunately no one on this forum seems to take it that seriously, so it's a non-issue.


----------



## Nearsification (Jan 3, 2010)

MisterNi said:


> You do realize that in science what is accepted as fact today was once theory and speculation, right?
> 
> But yeah, I agree to a small extent that if MBTI is taken too seriously it could be viewed as a religion. Fortunately no one on this forum seems to take it that seriously, so it's a non-issue.


We should hope no one takes it that seriously. If not we have a problem.


----------



## NotSoRighteousRob (Jan 1, 2010)

I'll be honest, for some reason this thought came to me as I slept and it sounded like an interesting discussion. I am well aware that most people on this forum are rational beings, I just found it amusing to picture things taking a turn towards something along the lines of the MBTI cult. In fact I think someone even posted a suggestion thread about starting cults not too long ago:crazy:


----------



## Nearsification (Jan 3, 2010)

RighteousRob said:


> I'll be honest, for some reason this thought came to me as I slept and it sounded like an interesting discussion. I am well aware that most people on this forum are rational beings, I just found it amusing to picture things taking a turn towards something along the lines of the MBTI cult. In fact I think someone even posted a suggestion thread about starting cults not too long ago:crazy:


Commandments of MBTI-ism? :laughing:


----------



## fiasco (Dec 25, 2009)

Jonnystorm10 said:


> Commandments of MBTI-ism? :laughing:


16 commandments to follow the Supreme Circle of the 16 types.
And 7 leaders because 1 + 6 is 7.




lol.


----------



## Nearsification (Jan 3, 2010)

fiasco said:


> 16 commandments to follow the Supreme Circle of the 16 types.
> And 7 leaders because 1 + 6 is 7.
> 
> 
> ...


We must elect a leader for every type. Suggestions?


----------



## MNiS (Jan 30, 2010)

1. T H O U shalt not mistype!!!!!!!!!!

Edit: aww what the heck, allcaps is disabled???


----------



## NotSoRighteousRob (Jan 1, 2010)

thou shall not covet thy neighbors type


----------



## Grunfur (Oct 23, 2011)

NotSoRighteousRob said:


> well science is based on actual facts, most of it. but I agree, it is one of those things that can be twisted into meaning whatever you like. Some people do take science to the point of religion, and I was not implying everyone did this with MBTI, but I believe under the right circumstances this could be transformed into a cult, but what couldn't nowadays :laughing:


I disagree with your argument. At one point, the MBTI seemed inevitably faith to me as well. However, religion cannot base its evidence off anything, because there is no evidence for a religion. Though MBTI doesn't have neurological evidence, it is working towards MORE proof. It seems that with the fundamental knowledge of MBTI, personality types can be linked up into a description very accurately. This is strictly based on observance and does not in anyway associate with the psyche of individuals. Many of the literature on the MBTI I admit has very poor persuasion, but from my own speculation I have been able to characterize so many personality types based on the third edition of the MBTI: Keirsey. Myers-Briggs I believe came across a lot of errors in categorizing people and put it to vague use, however Keirsey was somehow able to correct those errors and put it into what is know as _preferred functions_, an ordering system based on individual's preferred traits. With the *strongest *observable points of energy within individuals - typically leading up to a consensus that this fits them - we can form a basis as to what type they are. It is not certain, but it seems to play a role in most of their behavior, therefore we assume that certain tendencies will occur within an individual. When this goal is practiced, it is usually correct. It is correct for the foundations of their personality type and NOT on certain descriptions of that type. This is where skepticism may come in. The literature describes personality type based on what *might* occur within the population. It is not reasoned with *why * it might occur. With understanding of why it may occur, we can form a conclusion of how an individual fits into that category. I believe that the MBTI can be very accurate with its foundation of why individuals act as they do, but still has a lot to be discovered. The whole testing system in MBTI is completely inaccurate. It is horribly generalized and again, only describes what might occur, but not why. There are various stages an individual of a personality type hasn't achieved that others of that type has. This is where people within a population of type may vary. It is also based upon strength of personality type. I think that personality type is not dichotomous, but based on acquired strengths over cognitive periods of time. This is why children typically should not take the test. With that said, at full adulthood it is much easier to type an individual, I've noticed. The whole foundation of the MBTI still needs improvement, but it may have some hidden meaning behind it, because it works. It is not religious at all and has more factual supports than religion. It is possible that those who believe in the *misconceptions* of MBTI are religious. The MBTI though is not similar to religious positions or aligned to faith in any way.

You haven't justified your position really and only made claims that MBTI is religious. I am simply trying to interpret what I assume you meant, but maybe a little support or reasoning for your decision might be helpful.


----------



## Owfin (Oct 15, 2011)

NotSoRighteousRob said:


> thou shall not covet thy neighbors type


Thou shall not bear false witness against thy S or E neighbors.


----------



## PhaistosDisc (Dec 17, 2011)

Get back to me when people start killing in the name of typology. To compare religion which is a social institution to a theory about cognitive functions, one would assume you do not understand why religion was created or nothing about the study of how the brain works.


----------



## RobynC (Jun 10, 2011)

@NotSoRighteousRob



> Sure, there may not be a God or gods, but not all religions focus on a higher power, some state that the higher power is in us, and talk of seeking a path to better understanding and enlightenment.


You could theoretically place science under that provided you considered science the path to a better understanding and critical thinking, and knowledge to be the path to it. Regardless, I don't think science should be a religion _(I do believe there need to be strong ethical standards in the field, however)_



> There are many religions, just as there are many types, types that often stick with their own, sort of like protestants, or Catholics, or Jewish people.


I think you mean sects. If the MBTI is a religion, than the types are sects. Regardless, I don't tend to hang out with those who have the same type as me _(though, admittedly, I don't really place much stock in the MBTI)_



> You have your prophets, your "wise" men. You have your idols.


I don't have prophets, though there are some members who I think are particularly insightful. I don't think there's much correlation in MBTI.



> You have your believers and your non-believers, your atheists and your agnostics, and your faithful.


I'm largely a non-believer...


----------



## NotSoRighteousRob (Jan 1, 2010)

Grunfur said:


> I disagree with your argument. At one point, the MBTI seemed inevitably faith to me as well. However, religion cannot base its evidence off anything, because there is no evidence for a religion. Though MBTI doesn't have neurological evidence, it is working towards MORE proof. It seems that with the fundamental knowledge of MBTI, personality types can be linked up into a description very accurately. This is strictly based on observance and does not in anyway associate with the psyche of individuals. Many of the literature on the MBTI I admit has very poor persuasion, but from my own speculation I have been able to characterize so many personality types based on the third edition of the MBTI: Keirsey. Myers-Briggs I believe came across a lot of errors in categorizing people and put it to vague use, however Keirsey was somehow able to correct those errors and put it into what is know as _preferred functions_, an ordering system based on individual's preferred traits. With the *strongest *observable points of energy within individuals - typically leading up to a consensus that this fits them - we can form a basis as to what type they are. It is not certain, but it seems to play a role in most of their behavior, therefore we assume that certain tendencies will occur within an individual. When this goal is practiced, it is usually correct. It is correct for the foundations of their personality type and NOT on certain descriptions of that type. This is where skepticism may come in. The literature describes personality type based on what *might* occur within the population. It is not reasoned with *why * it might occur. With understanding of why it may occur, we can form a conclusion of how an individual fits into that category. I believe that the MBTI can be very accurate with its foundation of why individuals act as they do, but still has a lot to be discovered. The whole testing system in MBTI is completely inaccurate. It is horribly generalized and again, only describes what might occur, but not why. There are various stages an individual of a personality type hasn't achieved that others of that type has. This is where people within a population of type may vary. It is also based upon strength of personality type. I think that personality type is not dichotomous, but based on acquired strengths over cognitive periods of time. This is why children typically should not take the test. With that said, at full adulthood it is much easier to type an individual, I've noticed. The whole foundation of the MBTI still needs improvement, but it may have some hidden meaning behind it, because it works. It is not religious at all and has more factual supports than religion. It is possible that those who believe in the *misconceptions* of MBTI are religious. The MBTI though is not similar to religious positions or aligned to faith in any way.
> 
> You haven't justified your position really and only made claims that MBTI is religious. I am simply trying to interpret what I assume you meant, but maybe a little support or reasoning for your decision might be helpful.



Everyone has their own opinion as to what type another person may be, going as far as to not believe that person even if they should be typed. Our views are shaped by our accumulation of experiences. In this aspect it makes it possible for anything to be converted into a relgion if enough people decide that is what they would like to do. As far as the typology system even Western medical science is still majority guesswork and is only now reaching the areas where we understand causality. Any form of psychological science is likely to be heavily refined as time goes on. Even if not the fact remains individuals do vary regardless of percentages. No personality based system will be able to account for the whole of the human traits.

Tell me what is the medical diagnostic criteria for Jungian Typology? None really exists except for what Jung believed to be correct.
""While Jung's typology has proved fruitful as a therapeutic instrument, it has been an unqualified failure as a reliable method of establishing people's types. There has been no growing file of agreed-upon examples of different types, no growing body of knowledge about the characteristics of each type." (Tracking the elusive human; p. 207)

Also you should notice when a thread hasn't been touched in 2 years, and I believe the statement I made directly above your comment clearly displays my intentions behind the thread and its conception.

Hopefully this has been helpful in clarifying something if anything. If I had more time I'd continue.


----------



## CataclysmSolace (Mar 13, 2012)

I'm neither fully agnostic nor atheist. I support the arguments/ways of both though.


----------



## JungyesMBTIno (Jul 22, 2011)

The only people who are pretty much using MBTI like a religion would be those who try to define their lives by it and adhere to it's principles (this isn't an issue with Jung, because how can somebody *adhere* to Jung's principles, which are highly theoretical, I wonder...). For instance, I've seen those who think knowing their type is the answer to their life's problems and that "acting" like the type descriptions or whatever is the way to go, even thought they probably didn't act like that before they discovered MBTI - that creeps me out a bit, considering that people don't normally worship personas...until the persona becomes an MBTI persona. 0.0


----------

