# About DaveSuperPowers .....???



## providence (Aug 27, 2017)

Wanted to hear your perspectives on this...


There is a YouTube Channel called DaveSuperPowers. The videos on this channel are like MTBI on steriods, and just about anywhere you start watching will lead you to other videos they have that explain other aspects of their personality typology. The more you dig in the more complex this expanded version of MTBI seems to be. 

I am starting to run into some issues with how they are expanding on Meyers Briggs that I wanted to share and hear your opinion on their approach. 

A few points to tee this up:

1. Meyers Briggs is considered to be "Trash" to psychological professionals for a number of reasons. Professional Psychological testing is far more robust and accurate. These tests use a much more sophisticated psychometric approach to actually provide meaningful information and a much higher level of accuracy. Contrast that from Meyers Briggs which most people spend 10 mins taking an online test that spits out 4 letters along with a laundry list of really poor quality descriptions and a billion websites that will also give you bad information. 

2. The VALUE of Meyers Briggs though, is that is FAR more accessible to the average person, and while mistyping and poor descriptions are a major flaw, if you spend some time digging in you will often times be able to learn something meaningful about yourself or someone else. When you combine the accessibility and the ability to draw some meaningful information from it, the UTILITY of Meyers Briggs is nothing to write off. 


So with those two points made, here would be my concern with how DaveSuperPowers is approaching personality typology:

1. Meyers Briggs is not the best model to build upon as it's widely known there are some major flaws with it. 

2. The VALUE of Meyers Briggs is how approachable it is. I get the idea of using is as a springboard into a more complex personality typology, but that familiarity is deceiving, because if you dig into their videos their description of types and personality functions are so much more expanded that you need to relearn it all from their perspective. I have found very little that they use that translates directly out of meyers briggs into their model. 

3. The UTILITY of Meyers Briggs is found in how simplistic it is. You take the test, it spits out 4 letters and you can learn some stuff about yourself. If you want to know more, it's not a huge leap to dig deeper in how it explains the functions and how they work together etc. DaveSuperPowers IMO is removing that utility by making typology EXTREMELY COMPLICATED. While his expansions make it much more thorough, it begins to become so fragmented that it loses most of it's utility. After digging through a bunch of videos to explain one expanded aspect of Meyers Briggs they were proposing, I found it too complex to be useful. 



I believe they sell like a course or training to learn their model, and I want to be clear that I am not saying there isn't anything valuable or accurate about what they are doing, I just am getting the impression they are unfortunately exchanging what makes Meyers Briggs valuable and useful in order to attain something more robust and that it's not even a great model to build something like that off of.


But that's just my opinion, interested to hear your thoughts!


----------



## LonelySpaceEmperor (Jan 4, 2018)

Whatever DaveSuperPower's system is and what it is measuring, it is not MBTI and neither is it the Cognitive Functions! He incorporates things like the Cognitive Functions, things from the MBTI and some of Jung's theories, but he has reshaped these ideas so much that he has begun measuring something different that only slightly touches on what the MBTI and Cognitive Functions touch upon. Sure, he talks about things like "The Scientific Method" and "Objectivity", but a reliable system does not really matter when it is measuring something else. 

He also claims that an individual is unable to type himself because he is unable to look at himself from an outside perspective and that we believe ourselves to be the exact opposite of what we really are. This is false; it's true that we have biases and lie to ourselves which may result in a person typing themselves as something they are not out of desire, but that is easily avoided by learning to look at oneself objectively and being honest. He also has his own method of typing people The only way to truly find one's DaveSuperPowers type is to subscribe to his content at a fee, and even then you will still not be able to type yourself according to him so the only real way to find your type is to have someone else who has studied his theories or have him type you which he offers to do at a high price. 

Also, the MBTI isn't trash, it's just that a lot of people don't know what they're talking about when it comes to it.


----------



## Red Panda (Aug 18, 2010)

Here's a good review I found out a while ago, which I agree with
https://medium.com/@greg_p_kennedy/a-critique-of-objective-personality-72989099a4f2


----------



## Stevester (Feb 28, 2016)

LonelySpaceEmperor said:


> that we believe ourselves to be the exact opposite of what we really are. This is false;.


Exactly. We all know there are tons of Sensors who mistype as Intuitives, but it's not because of lower function envy as he says. It's because of those online description and general Intuitive bias amongst the MBTI community. There's no way a real INFJ woman for instance would mistype as ISTP, like no. That being said, my obvious ESTP friend typed himself as ENFJ, so point one for Dave there. But normally when I see people mistype themselves, it has nothing to do with flipping the functions upside down. 

Maybe it's because I'm Si dominant so I don't like to tinker with what's not broken, but between Dave and CS Joseph, I get a little bit annoyed at these supposed scholars who come up with new add ons and spins on cognitive function theory and then act like this is gospel.


----------



## UltimaRatio (Jan 31, 2019)

For me it's a bit the opposite trend...



LonelySpaceEmperor said:


> He also claims that an individual is unable to type himself because he is unable to look at himself from an outside perspective and that we believe ourselves to be the exact opposite of what we really are. This is false; it's true that we have biases and lie to ourselves which may result in a person typing themselves as something they are not out of desire, but that is easily avoided by learning to look at oneself objectively and being honest.


I thought I was ISTP during 1 year (despite my INTJ results). Essentially because of job stereotypes. I make decisions based on a synthesis of all external data. Which explains a lot of this choice. But ISTPs and other types convinced me it's impossible. So not totally wrong: the external view is important.

I also read the source, Jung, who was the confirmation.

As far as I'm concerned if the data are false, the result is false. It's important to improve within the MBTI and its descriptions.


----------



## Elwinz (Jan 30, 2018)

Stevester said:


> Exactly. We all know there are tons of Sensors who mistype as Intuitives, but it's not because of lower function envy as he says. It's because of those online description and general Intuitive bias amongst the MBTI community. There's no way a real INFJ woman for instance would mistype as ISTP, like no. That being said, my obvious ESTP friend typed himself as ENFJ, so point one for Dave there. But normally when I see people mistype themselves, it has nothing to do with flipping the functions upside down.
> 
> Maybe it's because I'm Si dominant so I don't like to tinker with what's not broken, but between Dave and CS Joseph, I get a little bit annoyed at these supposed scholars who come up with new add ons and spins on cognitive function theory and then act like this is gospel.


I don't quite agree with that, maybe not always upside down, but overestimating tertiary and taking it as dominant is fairly common mistake. ISxP mistyped as INXJ, ESXJs mistyped as ENXP, EXFP mistyped as ENTJs etc. I have seen ENFJs mistyped as ESTP as well.
While being SI dom myself, I also don't see how one would mistype that way, but i have noticed ISTJ function stack makes typing yourself on level easy basically.
Despite not fitting bullshit descriptions i still typed myself easily. Was confused for a long time how people are years here and still not figured that out, but i learnt their function stack doesn't make it easy. Poor ENXPs forever in doubt.


Re topic Joseph and DSP are nuts. They got few things right, but in general "iluminati of the typology"


----------



## Ocean Helm (Aug 25, 2016)

They are selling a false hope.


----------



## 74893H (Dec 27, 2017)

I like some of his videos but they can be pretty wobbly and I do wonder where he gets a lot of his information from. Like the idea that someone of an MBTI type can have their tertiary function as their secondary function - This makes sense in my head, but where is he sourcing that? I can't find anything about it anywhere. And his videos never seem to address the actual point of the video, they're always about something vaguely similar and it gets really frustrating.

I like how he trims all the fat off of functions, his explanations that get to the root of what they actually are made me much less confused about them, but past that I don't really rate his videos all that much.

I don't really know much about his objective personality typing though, I tried to watch his videos about it and I couldn't really pay attention. The fact that he's selling courses on it makes me very sceptical though. I don't think MBTI is something anyone should have to pay for, since there's no way of knowing for sure that what you're saying is true. You could just be selling more misinformation. That's a scam in my eyes.

I think MBTI is great, you just need to approach it with a critical mind and cut through all the misinformation that gets thrown around about it. I don't think there's an objective way to study MBTI because it isn't rooted in anything concrete, the only evidence we have for it is that it just seems to fit, and how well it fits in with what we observe in ourselves and others and how accurately it tends to describe how people work is good enough for me. But no, it's not a substitute for real, in-depth, professional psychological testing. Everyone's different in their own ways, there's more to people than just their MBTI type.


----------



## Stevester (Feb 28, 2016)

And don't even get me started on the whole _''Sleep, blast whatever..''_ thing. Like I said in my previous post, I'm okay with people expanding on the science, but I'm not okay with them selling it like it's the new absolute truth. 

Going back CS Joseph again. I don't mind that he's enthusiastic about the interaction styles, but he uses it to flat out dismiss cognitive theory. _''This person is clearly Fe/Si, but in this 2 sec random interview clip with zero context, they clearly showed they are movement/responding, therefore ESFP and ESFJ is out the window 100%'_' So annoying...

I swear some of these_ ''experts''_ are so full of themselves sometimes, they not only think they are the next Jung, but better than him.

That's why I still insist Michael Pierce is the best one because he respects the original theory and stays as objective as possible even if does over-intellectualize and makes long-winded analysis.


----------



## Elwinz (Jan 30, 2018)

Joseph struck me as Te user tbh
At this point i am stuck to Michael Pierce and Meghan Levota only from youtubers.


----------



## Red Panda (Aug 18, 2010)

Stevester said:


> And don't even get me started on the whole _''Sleep, blast whatever..''_ thing. Like I said in my previous post, I'm okay with people expanding on the science, but I'm not okay with them selling it like it's the new absolute truth.
> 
> Going back CS Joseph again. I don't mind that he's enthusiastic about the interaction styles, but he uses it to flat out dismiss cognitive theory. _''This person is clearly Fe/Si, but in this 2 sec random interview clip with zero context, they clearly showed they are movement/responding, therefore ESFP and ESFJ is out the window 100%'_' So annoying...
> 
> ...


CSJ cant even type himself properly
from the little I managed to tolerate, seems like he initially typed INJ in MBTI but didn't like it as much as the idea of being ENTP, so he subscribed to Linda Berens' theory about having multiple types in your personality so now he can say he uses his INTJ shadow to assist him and thus why he appears like an NTJ. lol


----------



## Figure (Jun 22, 2011)

DSP has been around for ages. I admit, the most I'm familiar with from him was just seeing those YouTube thumbnails of him holding up venn diagrams with functions on them. As a former MBTI Youtuber, I roll my eyes at those who "sell typology." 

My problem with typology at large, especially online, is the _need to reify archetypes and models. _There is nothing to date that proves anything in the DSP, MBTI, Jungian, Enneagram, and Socionics universe is a concrete thing. They are models, archetypes, mappings, and structures. They may convey or expose psychological patterns or truths, but they in of themselves are at best designed to always point to the same real thing. 

When it comes to Jung, there are a lot of people who don't realize how vague and undeveloped Jung's work truly is. The functions were intended to be archetypes, but so many theories treat them as though they are singular, narrowly-defined, hard and fast mental processes. What we bucket as "Fi" could very well be an amalgam of many processes outside of Jung, or even not even the process itself but an output of something else. So when DSP, or anyone here says "I use Fi more than I use Ti" or "When I say X, I'm using Te" no, you are aligning with an archetype, not using a function. ​
I am a typology Originalist. I wouldn't expect anyone else to necessarily share this belief, but I really do passionately believe that type theories should *always* be interpreted as closely as possible to the way the author interpreted them. Definitions and terminology are the main way we understand type theory, and when they get contorted or misunderstood, we get offshoot theories that aren't impactful, or lead people to bizarre conclusions.


----------



## Shrodingers drink (Nov 30, 2018)

Elwinz said:


> Poor ENXPs forever in doubt.


Lol, thats just Fi relating to everthing, Us ENTPs dont have that problem. Other than I/E there is nothing an ENTP could be mistaken for.


----------



## Stevester (Feb 28, 2016)

Elwinz said:


> Joseph struck me as Te user tbh
> At this point i am stuck to Michael Pierce and Meghan Levota only from youtubers.


Really funny you should mention this, because I suspect he's a closeted ISTJ. He repeats himself incessantly, he refuses to budge from his opinions, he lists his videos as _''Season X, episode X''_ in a very serious manner (what Ne Dom does this? seriously) and he becomes super critical whenever he talks about ISTJs which can be interpreted as signs of self-loathing... He brushes up on books and then takes them as gospel and uses those same techniques and arguments he read about in a very hardcore fashion. He also mentioned that he was extremely religious until his mid 20's or something, which definitely sounds like a typical ISTJ life path.

I'm not crapping on him, I actually enjoy his videos and for the most part, find them insightful. I'm just saying there's something ''off'' about him.


----------



## Elwinz (Jan 30, 2018)

I do crap on him, he gets some things right, but in general he is insane.

He craps on ENFPs the most to be honest, that ENFP video was super weird. I don't see him as TP at all, Te copy - no Ti.
I could see broken ENFP for him. Not ISTJ please ..


----------



## Stevester (Feb 28, 2016)

Elwinz said:


> He craps on ENFPs the most to be honest


Maybe I need to re-watch his videos on ENFPs, but I seem to remember him thinking very highly of them BUT he constantly re-inforce the point that they are (can be) manipulative conmen?? Like, what?? ENFPs (like every type) can be criticized for a lot of things, but them being manipulative con people is definitely not a thing. I do remember that _''Who are the ENFPs?''_ video being really off.


----------



## Ocean Helm (Aug 25, 2016)

Stevester said:


> Maybe I need to re-watch his videos on ENFPs, but I seem to remember him thinking very highly of them BUT he constantly re-inforce the point that they are (can be) manipulative conmen?? Like, what?? ENFPs (like every type) can be criticized for a lot of things, but them being manipulative con people is definitely not a thing. I do remember that _''Who are the ENFPs?''_ video being really off.


I think any E type is pretty likely to be a manipulative conman but I don't think ENFPs should be singled out. Probably more the ExTx's if anything.


----------



## L P (May 30, 2017)

Stevester said:


> Exactly. We all know there are tons of Sensors who mistype as Intuitives, but it's not because of lower function envy as he says. It's because of those online description and general Intuitive bias amongst the MBTI community. There's no way a real INFJ woman for instance would mistype as ISTP, like no. That being said, my obvious ESTP friend typed himself as ENFJ, so point one for Dave there. But normally when I see people mistype themselves, it has nothing to do with flipping the functions upside down.
> 
> Maybe it's because I'm Si dominant so I don't like to tinker with what's not broken, but between Dave and CS Joseph, *I get a little bit annoyed at these supposed scholars who come up with new add ons and spins on cognitive function theory and then act like this is gospel.*


Amen.


----------



## Elwinz (Jan 30, 2018)

Stevester said:


> Maybe I need to re-watch his videos on ENFPs, but I seem to remember him thinking very highly of them BUT he constantly re-inforce the point that they are (can be) manipulative conmen?? Like, what?? ENFPs (like every type) can be criticized for a lot of things, but them being manipulative con people is definitely not a thing. I do remember that _''Who are the ENFPs?''_ video being really off.


ENFPs can be manipulative very much so. I recall even one (legit) ENFP saying that EXFP can get really manipulative and even worse than FJs without even noticing it. Because they exert their Fe and they don't really have Ti to balance it.
I even know one ENFP in real life, who made her boyfriend's not meeting his best friend anymore and told it to me like she was proud of making him staying at home all time.

No way that this Joseph is an ISTJ. He is not direct to the point at all, his videos are super long because he is going off topic a lot .. PE way ...not sure on his type. Not a Ti user( unless inferior), not Inferior Pe imho. ENFP makes sense. His last vid "Si heroes stop being motivated by fear and be motivated by faith". Entire that video (On ISXJ) sounds very ENFP to me and by entire i mean I am quitting at 20 minutes, because i can't listen to his Fi rumbling.



Shrodingers drink said:


> Lol, thats just Fi relating to everthing, Us ENTPs dont have that problem. Other than I/E there is nothing an ENTP could be mistaken for.


You are not relating to other with third slot Fe?
I think you are projecting a bit here, good for you if you don't have doubt on your typing, but that NE usually looks for possibilities of being other type, for ENTPs as well.


----------



## Red Panda (Aug 18, 2010)

Elwinz said:


> ENFPs can be manipulative very much so. I recall even one (legit) ENFP saying that EXFP can get really manipulative and even worse than FJs without even noticing it. Because they exert their Fe and they don't really have Ti to balance it.
> I even know one ENFP in real life, who made her boyfriend's not meeting his best friend anymore and told it to me like she was proud of making him staying at home all time.
> 
> No way that this Joseph is an ISTJ. He is not direct to the point at all, his videos are super long because he is going off topic a lot .. PE way ...not sure on his type. Not a Ti user( unless inferior), not Inferior Pe imho. ENFP makes sense. His last vid "Si heroes stop being motivated by fear and be motivated by faith". Entire that video (On ISXJ) sounds very ENFP to me and by entire i mean I am quitting at 20 minutes, because i can't listen to his Fi rumbling.


My impression of him is that he doesn't understand how NPs work from first hand experience at all, in his videos about both NFPs, it seems he becomes annoyed about all the things that make them N+P and F. So I don't think he relates to being any of those preferences. He got pretty mad talking about how NFPs don't get stuff done and whatnot. Seemed like the typical ways NTJ-NFP can feel incompatibility, ime.


----------



## Shrodingers drink (Nov 30, 2018)

Elwinz said:


> You are not relating to other with third slot Fe?
> I think you are projecting a bit here, good for you if you don't have doubt on your typing, but that NE usually looks for possibilities of being other type, for ENTPs as well.


When comparing to energetic ESTPs we would think we are intoverted. Ne/Ti combo is usually in conflict with emotions so you don't relate F and particularly Fi. Throw in strong P preference, and the obvious Ne tangental thinking, and it should be pretty obvious your a NTP. Ne generates chaotic ideas that can be good, bad, or ugly, we rely heavily on Ti to sort through the junk, and Ti is very good at determinating the correct answer. Ne cant be trusted to make decisions, thats something Ni users could note.


----------



## ENIGMA2019 (Jun 1, 2015)

I think a lot of this is laughable. The two are not even on the same playing field.


----------



## Bot (Mar 17, 2019)

I think that Jungian personality stuff has something to it, but I think its kinda cultish when people push it too far. I think there is far more to a person than their type. A small list: experience, genetics, upbringing, lifestyle, life choices, IQ, education, moral values, faith adherence or non-adherence, and on and on.

I like the Big Five more.

Even if we totally figure out the human brain and personality or whatever, we still deal with death, which makes any human progress a lot slower. Death defines us more than life does.


----------



## Ocean Helm (Aug 25, 2016)

Bot said:


> I think that Jungian personality stuff has something to it, but I think its kinda cultish when people push it too far. I think there is far more to a person than their type. A small list: experience, genetics, upbringing, lifestyle, life choices, IQ, education, moral values, faith adherence or non-adherence, and on and on.
> 
> I like the Big Five more.
> 
> Even if we totally figure out the human brain and personality or whatever, we still deal with death, which makes any human progress a lot slower. Death defines us more than life does.


I would not put psychometrics (MBTI, Big 5, IQ) in the same category as actual shaping influences.


----------



## Kizuna (Jul 30, 2011)

Of the little bit I saw of one of their videos I say that they got the subtypes right, so, props for that! Otherwise, it looks unnecessarily convoluted to make me curious, not to mention asking for money...

I have one question to you guys: how come you (or rather, the MBTI community) went full-on crazy when Pod'lair was pushing its theory, but at worst skeptical about DSP? hehee


----------



## Ocean Helm (Aug 25, 2016)

Kizuna said:


> I have one question to you guys: how come you (or rather, the MBTI community) went full-on crazy when Pod'lair was pushing its theory, but at worst skeptical about DSP? hehee


Interesting question. My guess would be that it has to do with DSP's pseudoscientific presentation, while Pod-Lair is overtly mystical. People who like The Functions seem to be drawn to the false hope that they will somehow be "proven". In DSP's case, this has to do with the idea that everyone has One True Type that can be exposed with clarity. Nardi came up with no evidence for functions, yet people still put faith in him. After all he is Ph D Neuroscientist so using his name can make things seem more legitimate.


----------



## Kizuna (Jul 30, 2011)

Ocean Helm said:


> Interesting question. My guess would be that it has to do with DSP's pseudoscientific presentation, while Pod-Lair is overtly mystical. People who like The Functions seem to be drawn to the false hope that they will somehow be "proven". In DSP's case, this has to do with the idea that everyone has One True Type that can be exposed with clarity. Nardi came up with no evidence for functions, yet people still put faith in him. After all he is Ph D Neuroscientist so using his name can make things seem more legitimate.


I wonder if one day there will finally be a reliable, objectively verifiable method of determining type (and subtype). I crave certainty and the current type theories are anything but certain, all of them, although some are _way _ahead of the others.

I know type has a genetic component, so it's gotta be coded _somewhere _in the DNA (unfortunately the exact sciences are not my thing although I'd love to understand them).


----------



## Ocean Helm (Aug 25, 2016)

Kizuna said:


> I know type has a genetic component, so it's gotta be coded _somewhere _in the DNA (unfortunately the exact sciences are not my thing although I'd love to understand them).


I doubt it'd ever reach the point where you can predict someone's age-X MBTI right even 50% of the time. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9529660 MBTI scores weren't highly heritable here.

Identical twins should have the same DNA but their types are not that similar, meaning environmental factors play a huge role.


----------



## UltimaRatio (Jan 31, 2019)

Ocean Helm said:


> Identical twins should have the same DNA but their types are not that similar, meaning environmental factors play a huge role.


Maybe, but even the "real twins" still have different fingerprints.


----------



## Ocean Helm (Aug 25, 2016)

UltimaRatio said:


> Maybe, but even the "real twins" still have different fingerprints.


What does that have to do with anything? It's not DNA that causes that difference, just like it's not DNA that causes a lot of personality difference.


----------



## UltimaRatio (Jan 31, 2019)

Ocean Helm said:


> What does that have to do with anything? It's not DNA that causes that difference, just like it's not DNA that causes a lot of personality difference.


Do you really want I m to focus on DNA studies that show that true twins don't exist? And this apart from epigenetics? On the other hand, I don't deny what is acquired.


----------



## Ocean Helm (Aug 25, 2016)

UltimaRatio said:


> Do you really want I m to focus on DNA studies that show that true twins don't exist? And this apart from epigenetics? On the other hand, I don't deny what is acquired.


I fail to see the relevance of this to what I'm talking about. All I am saying is I don't think that we'll find reliable predictors of MBTI type in DNA. Which is consistent with the idea of "true twins" not existing...


----------



## UltimaRatio (Jan 31, 2019)

Ocean Helm said:


> I fail to see the relevance of this to what I'm talking about. All I am saying is I don't think that we'll find reliable predictors of MBTI type in DNA. Which is consistent with the idea of "true twins" not existing...


No it's not consistent.


----------



## Ocean Helm (Aug 25, 2016)

UltimaRatio said:


> No it's not consistent.


Well then you'd best explain yourself how it isn't.


----------



## UltimaRatio (Jan 31, 2019)

No, because now I am ISFP. I can be what I want when I want. The magic of functions... Let's play an FPS. Or no, better: _They Call Me Trinity_


----------



## letsrunlikecrazy (Sep 21, 2015)

I wish I had some kind of well thought out opinion, but actually I just watch his more theoretical videos and my brain goes "nah" and I don't watch them again. Consume, blast, sleep? Dawg. Trying to understand "extraverted sensing" and "introverted intuition" in cognitive theory was already plenty annoying, I don't want to learn more jargon. So I agree with OP that DSP's system is less accessible than the standard MBTI.


----------



## Aluminum Frost (Oct 1, 2017)

DSP still snorting blue pills up his anus I see.

Is this extraverted sensing?


----------

