# Eating Disorders, Self-Harm, and Myers Briggs



## FlightsOfFancy (Dec 30, 2012)

reckful said:


> Well, at least you're sorry. :tongue:
> 
> Once again, I find myself facing a deep chasm between the facts and somebody's flightsoffancy.
> 
> ...


Sorry = sarcasm. I still find your argument completely moot as statistics can be doctored quite easily, which is why people depend on multiple studies. How coincidental is it for an MBTI practitioner to find a correlation? 

Scientific conjecture is all that can be made when dealing with pseudoscience. There has been no significant studies linking MBTI to DSM-related illnesses; the DSM makes no mention of this. At the end of the day, all this "I will poke holes in your logic" is shat on by the fact that the DSM does not recognize such traits.

If you, yourself, and other cohorts would like to find articles, sure. There are articles that are debunked all the time; some endure for quite a long time before they are replaced (e.g. DSM revisions). 

Psychology has not appropriated MBTI as a guide, yet it has done so with the DSM. Thus, the annals of psychology do not link MBTI to DSM, which is a statistical book. 

Whatever correlations you find in literature are obviously not replicated enough for them to list 

--probably INTP with High RLUEI traits. 

Ergot, it is not done by the leading body. I don't care about a few articles. I can easily find articles that say being gay is a mental disorder and try to find correlation, yet it is not accepted as a diagnostic criteria as just this is not.

Don't try to convince me; convince the DSM because it doesn't agree with you at all.


----------



## LadyO.W.BernieBro (Sep 4, 2010)

FlightsOfFancy said:


> I don't care what Jung said; the correlation has not been made to a scientific conjecture. MBTI is NOT Jung; it's an adaptation of Jung. The MBTI and Big Five are poorly correlated, and the correlations are anecdotal and imposed by MBTI enthusiansts. The MBTI measures cognitive patterns; whereas, the Big 5 measures traits. The Big 5 does not champion the MBTI as a cohort, whatsoever.
> 
> What does that result show? Nothing. *Those "MBTI disordered" individuals may very well have been disordered and answered in a way consistent with their disorder; e.g. I have an affective disorder, ergot I am an F*.


Thiis is exactly what l've wondered about the studies correlating certain disorder and type, especially the most serious disorders.



lt's pretty easy to say that Ni is in essence, very similar to the root of psychotic delusion for example, especially when you see those studies. 

This leads people to believe that healthy Ni types may have something in common with a population *who may or may not have initially typed that way* before developing an illness.

l'm not really concerned with a definitive link as much as l think that speculation done for entertainment purposes is misguided.


reckful said:


> Jung himself described the types as being prone to different kinds of mental disorders.
> 
> And, as noted in this post, a number of studies over the past 40 years or so have found significant correlations between the MBTI (and Big Five) and various psychological disorders.
> 
> ...


This happens here all the time, l just saw a thread speculating about NPD and NTJ types.

The usual ''Am l sociopath'' threads are INTP or INTJ related, along with Asperger's being exploited and casually conflated with both INTJ and INTP as one in the same.


----------



## reckful (Jun 19, 2012)

FlightsOfFancy said:


> Don't try to convince me; convince the DSM because it doesn't agree with you at all.


The "DSM" doesn't agree with me?

What on earth is that supposed to mean? The studies I cited — and, as I noted, they were just a handful of examples — involved professional psychologists investigating correlations between DSM disorders and the MBTI.

What source are you thinking of where "the DSM" somehow takes the position that there are no correlations between DSM disorders and MBTI preferences? You say "the DSM makes no mention of this," but the fact that the DSM manual itself _doesn't discuss the issue_ of MBTI-disorder correlations is a very different thing from the manual saying _there aren't correlations_. Do you really not understand that, or are you just wasting my time?


----------



## FlightsOfFancy (Dec 30, 2012)

reckful said:


> The "DSM" doesn't agree with me?
> 
> What on earth is that supposed to mean? The studies I cited — and, as I noted, they were just a handful of examples — involved professional psychologists investigating correlations between DSM disorders and the MBTI.
> 
> What source are you thinking of where "the DSM" somehow takes the position that there are no correlations between DSM disorders and MBTI preferences? You say "the DSM makes no mention of this," but the fact that the DSM manual itself _doesn't discuss the issue_ of MBTI-disorder correlations is a very different thing from the manual saying _there aren't correlations_. *Do you really not understand that, or are you just wasting my time?*


The DSM would list it; you quoted me, not the other way around. I didn't even know who the fuck you were or anything about you. If you disagree, then get them to put it in the DSM. The DSM is the bible of diagnosis and it does not list MBTI preferences. There are correlations between the Big Five moreso, but even that is currently debated as the cause-effect relation is unknown. The DSM shies from ambiguity, hence why such preferences are not listed.

If you are wasting your time, leave. Again, I didn't quote you. Now go coddle your MBTI and think "shitty NF logic!" for all I care. At the end of the day, this is a nebulous theory without enough statistical backing to enter mainstream psychology. We aren't NT/NF; we think they apply to us. Could just be the Forer effect, as just it could be for MBTI-disorder relations.


----------



## FlightsOfFancy (Dec 30, 2012)

OMG WTF BRO said:


> Thiis is exactly what l've wondered about the studies correlating certain disorder and type, especially the most serious disorders.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



YES SOMEBODY GETS IT

That's the issue; I spoke to Vicky Jo once wanting a consultation, and she said she will only work with disordered individuals showing no symptoms.

For example, it's possible to lump all asperger's traits to NT if you pain the brush wide enough. I don't see the benefit in these type of threads at all.


----------



## reckful (Jun 19, 2012)

@OMG WTF BRO —
@FlightsOfFancy said "People will click this thread and think ... 'Oh noes, I have Fe inferior so I'm a sociopath,'" and I accused him of straw-manning and asked him, "Has anybody in this thread said anything like, 'If you're this type, you'll have X disorder?'"

And you've replied:



OMG WTF BRO said:


> This happens here all the time, l just saw a thread speculating about NPD and NTJ types.
> 
> The usual ''Am l sociopath'' threads are INTP or INTJ related, along with Asperger's being exploited and casually conflated with both INTJ and INTP as one in the same.



So... if it "happens here all the time," I assume you won't have any trouble quoting a couple of PerC posts where somebody says, "If you're this type, you'll have X disorder."

But honestly... even if you _are_ able to dredge up an example or two of that kind of silliness, why would that be a reason to shut down discussion in a thread where nobody's made that kind of post?



FlightsOfFancy said:


> The DSM would list it; you quoted me, not the other way around. I didn't even know who the fuck you were or anything about you. If you disagree, then get them to put it in the DSM. The DSM is the bible of diagnosis and it does not list MBTI preferences. There are correlations between the Big Five moreso, but even that is currently debated as the cause-effect relation is unknown. The DSM shies from ambiguity, hence why such preferences are not listed.


So you acknowledge that there are Big Five correlations with DSM disorders but note that they "are not listed" in the DSM manual while simultaneously asserting that, if there were MBTI correlations with DSM disorders, "the DSM would list it" — and therefore that their absence from the manual supports your assertion that there are no MBTI correlations.

Your performance in this thread continues to impress.


----------



## FlightsOfFancy (Dec 30, 2012)

@_reckful_ I'm wasting your time, right?. A good INTJ values his time. Maybe it's time to consider another type? please stop responding to me as I find it long-winded, repetitious, and equally vapid.

Take your issues up with http://www.nimh.nih.gov/site-info/contact-nimh.shtml. Thanx.


----------



## LadyO.W.BernieBro (Sep 4, 2010)

reckful said:


> @OMG WTF BRO —
> 
> @FlightsOfFancy said "People will click this thread and think ... 'Oh noes, I have Fe inferior so I'm a sociopath,'" and I accused him of straw-manning and asked him, "Has anybody in this thread said anything like, 'If you're this type, you'll have X disorder?'"
> 
> ...


l assume you'll have no trouble conducting your own research, like l assume you're going to find yourself in the minority regarding your lack of knowledge concerning said threads.

My apologies if you're not that active here , l may have been premature in assuming that you'd be aware of what's commonly posted.

edit:nobody said the discussion was going to be shut down, merely that it was tiresome 
There is no formal accusation here, rather an expression of distaste :wink:


----------



## LittleFuryThings (Jan 5, 2013)

Types are different. That's why there are separate types in the first place. Doesn't it make sense that some types would be _more likely _(note this phrase) to develop certain psychological problems than others? I really don't understand why this is so difficult for some people to wrap their heads around.


----------



## reckful (Jun 19, 2012)

OMG WTF BRO said:


> l assume you'll have no trouble conducting your own research, like l assume you're going to find yourself in the minority regarding your lack of knowledge concerning said threads.


Ya, I can't say I'm too surprised that, even though it "happens all the time," you can't manage to come up with a single quote.



OMG WTF BRO said:


> edit:nobody said the discussion was going to be shut down, merely that it was tiresome :wink:


What FlightsOfFancy said was...



FlightsOfFancy said:


> I wish I could report threads like these because they are a breeding ground for toxic information. There is no correlation.


and...



FlightsOfFancy said:


> Please stop.


Even if there hadn't been any scientific studies about MBTI/disorder correlations, I don't think there'd be anything wrong with someone starting a thread asking if anyone knew anything about that or had any anecdotal experience to share. The vast majority of PerC threads about MBTI types are about anecdotal experience, after all.

But in this case, as previously explained, there have actually been quite a lot of scientific studies done, and they've found significant correlations between MBTI (and Big Five) personality dimensions and various psychological disorders. And particularly against that background, FlightsOfFancy's impassioned plea for people to stop making threads like this — and on the grounds that there is "no correlation" between disorders and the MBTI — seemed, and continues to seem, more than a little silly to me.


----------



## LadyO.W.BernieBro (Sep 4, 2010)

So you essentially strawman anyone who deviates from your viewpoint by taking the entire situation out of context to make it appear as if people who are tired of '*'threads like these*'' (implying they've seen them before) need to* prove * something to you with formal documentation. ls this a federal case?

l'm not sure what significance FoF's post about reporting holds?

Nothing was reported, and nothing would be done about it anyway as these threads don't violate any rules.


----------



## FlightsOfFancy (Dec 30, 2012)

reckful said:


> Ya, I can't say I'm too surprised that, even though it "happens all the time," you can't manage to come up with a single quote.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


A true INTJ doesn't waste his time? No? That Te is failing:
NIMH · Contact Us


----------



## FlightsOfFancy (Dec 30, 2012)

OMG WTF BRO said:


> So you essentially strawman anyone who deviates from your viewpoint by taking the entire situation out of context to make it appear as if people who are tired of '*'threads like these*'' (implying they've seen them before) need to* prove * something to you with formal documentation. ls this a federal case?
> 
> l'm not sure what significance FoF's post about reporting holds?
> 
> Nothing was reported, and nothing would be done about it anyway as these threads don't violate any rules.


I've never reported anyone here, and I realize this. I just wanted him to get the point that no1cares for his opinion which he thinks is seasoned with fact.


----------

