# Zodiac Astrology and MBTI



## Sauwelios

After some thinking, I have come to the following table of correspondences between the Zodiac signs and the MBTI.


Aries - N
Taurus - SJ
Gemini - TP
Cancer - F
Leo - NJ
Virgo - SP
Libra - T
Scorpio - FJ
Sagittarius - NP
Capricorn - S
Aquarius - TJ
Pisces - FP


What do you think?


----------



## L'Empereur

I don't think there is any correlation between the two...


----------



## Danse Macabre

*Me neither. 

Also, I'm a Libra and I'm an F, my sister is the same. 
My mum is Cancer, and shes ISTJ....*


----------



## Psilocin

You fail to account for Ascendants and Descendants, as well as all the other complicated shit that goes along with Astrology...


----------



## Sauwelios

That's not what I meant. Of course I'm not saying that every Leo, for instance, is an NJ; but Leo (the sign) is _itself _NJ.

S, N, T, and F are traditionally associated with the elements Earth, Fire, Air, and Water, respectively. And as the Zodiac signs are divided evenly among the same elements, there is definitely a correspondence. The only thing I've added is the distinction between Cardinal, Fixed, and Mutable signs.


----------



## OctoberSkye

I don't see how FJ fits Scorpio in the slightest.


----------



## Sauwelios

Psilocin said:


> You fail to account for Ascendants and Descendants, as well as all the other complicated shit that goes along with Astrology...


I never mentioned the term "Sun sign".


----------



## Sauwelios

OctoberSkye said:


> I don't see how FJ fits Scorpio in the slightest.


Well, Scorpio is definitely an F, as it's a Water sign. And all the J means is that it's an Extroverted Feeler.

I think the qualities connected with its being a Fixed sign correspond perfectly with the Judging preference.


----------



## waterviolet

Doesn't make sense in my case either. Virgo, and I'm an INFJ.


----------



## Sauwelios

waterviolet said:


> Doesn't make sense in my case either. Virgo, and I'm an INFJ.


If astrology is to be believed in, what my table of correspondences is saying is that your Sun sign's being Virgo gives an SP _influence_ to your character---just as all the other signs (your Moon sign, Rising sign, Chinese signs, etc.) are factors codetermining your character.

INFJ is a _resultant_ of all the factors codetermining your character. For instance, if Sun sign Virgo is 2, and the other factors are -1 and 4, then the resultant would be 2 + -1 + 4 = 5. So what you've said is, "I'm not a 2, I'm a 5!" But I never said you were a 2, only that your _Sun sign_ was 2.


----------



## WickedWitch

Astrology makes no sense. I'm a Taurus INTJ. (And I'm not talking about the car!)


----------



## MilkyLatte

Sauwelios said:


> After some thinking, I have come to the following table of correspondences between the Zodiac signs and the MBTI.
> 
> 
> Aries - N
> Taurus - SJ
> Gemini - TP
> Cancer - F
> Leo - NJ
> *Virgo - SP*
> Libra - T
> Scorpio - FJ
> Sagittarius - NP
> Capricorn - S
> Aquarius - TJ
> Pisces - FP
> 
> 
> What do you think?


I'm a virgo but I'm INFP. I can see how the virgo-horoscope could be SP. Then again, I don't relate to descriptions of my zodiac and I never have. That leads me to not believe in astrology - at all!


----------



## joyrjw

I accidently posted it twice.


----------



## joyrjw

> After some thinking, I have come to the following table of correspondences between the Zodiac signs and the MBTI.
> 
> 
> Aries - N maybe
> Taurus - SJ yes
> Gemini - TP yes
> Cancer - F yes
> Leo - NJ yes
> Virgo - SP yes
> Libra - T yes
> Scorpio - FJ yes
> Sagittarius - NP maybe
> Capricorn - S yes
> Aquarius - TJ yes
> Pisces - FP yes
> 
> 
> What do you think?


I have scorpio sun virgo moon gemini rising

so I would be SFP.

It might correlate more with a persons moon sign rather than there sun since it has to do more with mental/emotional traits. 
Just a though.


----------



## spifffo

Sauwelios said:


> After some thinking, I have come to the following table of correspondences between the Zodiac signs and the MBTI.
> 
> 
> Aries - N
> Taurus - SJ
> Gemini - TP
> Cancer - F
> Leo - NJ
> Virgo - SP
> Libra - T
> Scorpio - FJ
> Sagittarius - NP
> Capricorn - S
> Aquarius - TJ
> Pisces - FP
> 
> 
> What do you think?


I'm an ENFP. I've got six planets in Capricorn (sun, mercury, venus, saturn, uranus, and neptune), and I am very much not S. My asc and mars is in Taurus. The only thing that fits is my Pisces moon (29 degree in the 12th house, square sun...so verrrry Piscean.)


----------



## cappuccinocool

What am I? An INFP? 

I'm a pisces. Dammit


----------



## Gaminegirlie

waterviolet said:


> Doesn't make sense in my case either. Virgo, and I'm an INFJ.


Exactly.

No correlation whatsoever, therefore I think, you should go back and do some more thinking. I think you think you've thought this out quite well too, obviously your thought is highly flawed.


----------



## Andrea

those willing to type cartoon characters for fun can't see the point in typing astrological signs? maybe they're just stupid, idk. but i guess it's ok as long as declaring "astrology is a fraud" makes you think you're smarter than everyone else. hey, guess what, water is wet! what do i win?


----------



## kaycee

I think astrology is a pseudoscience. That's what I think.


----------



## napoleon227

If we could all choose our astrological signs then there might be a correlation, but since we can't, there really is none.


----------



## Just_Some_Guy

rousse said:


> No, you tried goading me instead.
> 
> Harass me again and I'll report you. You're a troll in this thread.


I'd say you're presenting yourself as troll bait when you claim to be an expert in a subject while at the same time insisting that you can't/won't say anything about it. 

"I know the real story, but I can't say anything about it."

What did you expect?


----------



## U-80

EmotionallyTonedGeometry said:


> I'd say you're presenting yourself as troll bait when you claim to be an expert in a subject while at the same time insisting that you can't/won't say anything about it.
> 
> "I know the real story, but I can't say anything about it."
> 
> What did you expect?


Excuse me? I specifically offered to discuss the topic with anyone who is interested, via PM. It is my prerogative to discuss astrology only with people who have a genuine interest in the subject.

Astrology, in case you didn't know, is not a religion. Astrologers don't go around trying to convert people.


----------



## Fenrir317

*MBTI/Zodiac Correlations*

This is a draft for a project I was working on (with the help of @MrShatter on the element to letter info) not to long ago and I thought it would be interesting to post. This is relationships I've noticed between MBTI types/functions and Zodiac signs/elements based around descriptions of each as well as observations I've made. 

Element/Letter Preference:
*Fire* - N and T tendency (represents mental freedom and creativity) Ne/Ti
*Air* - N tendency (represents emotional freedom and personal guidance) Ni/Fi
*Earth* - S tendency (represents physical security and prowess) Se/Si
*Water* - F tendency (represents emotional security and desires) Fe/Te

Sign/Type:
*Aries* - INTJ, ESTJ (when singular focus one projects is strong) INTP, ENTP (when energetically embracing new projects at once)

*Taurus* - ESFJ, ENFJ, ISFJ, (when committed to steady harmony) ESTJ (when more agressive forward pushing stance is taken)

*Gemini* - ENTP, ENFP, (when creative energy is allowed to flow unfettered taking in everything at once) INTP, (when a controlled and patient approach is taken) INFP (when emotional duality is most prevalent)

*Cancer* - ENFJ, ESFJ, (when emotions are mostly based around appreciation of/from others) ESFP, (when emotions mostly occur based on events in present moment) INFP (when emotional security is heavily based around defence of personal ideals)

*Leo* - ENFP, ENTP, (when creative and inspiring nature is embraced) ENTJ, (when need to control and lead dominates personality) ESTP (when desire for physical prowess and activity is greatest)

*Virgo* - ISFJ, ESFJ, (when centered around responsibilty and order) ISTP, ISFP (when focused mostly on self and solving problems)

*Libra* - ENFJ, INFJ, INFP, (when strong importance is placed on morality) ESFP (when social life falls closer to heart)

*Scorpio* - INFJ, INTJ, (when intuitive abilities and personal ideals are greatly applied) ISFP, (when emotions are expressed mostly in artistic fashion) ISTJ (when blatant skeptism and negativity are common traits making personal drive care not for others)

*Sagittarius* - ENFP, INFJ, (when creative and inquistive yet easy going attitude is strongly evident) INTJ, INTP (when desire to explore and map life is evident but so is blunt/frankness in social situations)

*Capricorn* - ISTJ, ESTJ, (when methodical attitude to life is fully approached) ESTP, ENTJ (when possessing perserverant possibly brash attitude in attempt to rise to the top)

*Aquarius* - ENFP,(when being the embodiment of unusual eccentric idealism and external innovation) INTP, INTJ, INFP (when ideals and innovation often are based inward and is often misunderstood by others)

*Pisces* - ISFP, (when artistic nature is seen by others as erratic or disorganized) ESFP, ENFJ, (when reliable and compassionate personality is established) I/ENTP (when pinnacle of own creativity and purpose is reached though possibly not seen as fully by others)

_Note:_ _The Zodiac/astrology signs do not encompass your entire personality and are often more general that the 16 types so your sign just as your type does not determine the depth and nature of your soul. Any sign can be any type I just based this of connections and similiarities between certain signs and certain types. It is all in good fun. _

Sources for type and sign info:
Astrological Personality Traits
My MBTI Personality Type - MBTI Basics - The 16 MBTI Types


----------



## Naama

zodiac signs is a pseudoscience, so no there isnt a correlation. only one person whos mbti type and birthdate i remember fits that thing


----------



## youngandbaroque

Lol, how is MBTI not a pseudoscience?


----------



## Naama

youngandbaroque said:


> Lol, how is MBTI not a pseudoscience?


it has high enough validity to not being seen as pseudoscience..


----------



## Promethea

youngandbaroque said:


> Lol, how is MBTI not a pseudoscience?


Just because they are both pseudo-science doesn't mean they are nearly the same kind though. I would hesitate to even call astrology pseudo-science actually, because in the development of it, there was no actual measurement of traits in people - rather, its assumed simply by their birth date. Astrology is more mysticism in my opinion, than pseudo-science, because its not actually based on qualities within people, but assumed by their date of birth. MBTI studies actual personality preferences in people, to then explain a sort of framework for that type of personality. And sure, its not hard science, but rather a personality theory - certainly based on more than 'whats your dob? lol.'

Oh, and astrology certainly seems like bs to me. I'm a taurus and an intp. There goes ops theory I guess. Anyway, I'm too lazy to google the reasons why astrology is bologna, but I have before, and I recommend it to anyone who actually believes in it. : P


----------



## Promethea

Also, OP, I saw a theory with the elements there, but it would combine them. For example, N is air, and T is fire, NT is air with fire. NF is air with water. S would be earth, ST would be earth with fire.. and so on. I can't remember where I read this though.


----------



## MuChApArAdOx

I'm an Aries hothead, so does this mean i have to change my type to INTJ, or ESTJ Lol.


----------



## Proteus

Get back to me when you can make a correlation between types and Chinese astrological symbols. I get my horoscope from the placemats at Wang's Kitchen and would like to know how well being an INTP fits in with being born in the year of the cock.


----------



## Naama

Promethea said:


> Just because they are both pseudo-science


according to our personality psychology lecturer MBTi is not a pseudoscience. there is alot of evidence supporting its validity, including EEG and other brain scans..


----------



## Promethea

Naama said:


> according to our personality psychology lecturer MBTi is not a pseudoscience. there is alot of evidence supporting its validity, including EEG and other brain scans..


Links to this scientific evidence for mbti please? New to me.


----------



## Naama

Promethea said:


> Links to this scientific evidence for mbti please? New to me.


i cba to find those for you, use google scholar(if you dont have access to better search engines where you can get access to copyrighted full texts and find studies that you cant google). i got loads of studies on my computer, but those are copyrighted, so i cant post them. studies that i could post, you can get from google scholar if you know how to look for them.


----------



## Promethea

Naama said:


> i cba to find those for you, use google scholar(if you dont have access to better search engines where you can get access to copyrighted full texts and find studies that you cant google). i got loads of studies on my computer, but those are copyrighted, so i cant post them. studies that i could post, you can get from google scholar if you know how to look for them.


scientific evidence for myers-briggs - Google Search

http://epublications.bond.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1026&context=hss_pubs

Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI):
Some Psychometric Limitations
GREGORY J. BOYLE
Bond University
The present paper critically reviews the psychometric adequacy of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI). 
Although the instrument is extremely popular in applied settings, there is an urgent need for the development 
of valid and comprehensive local norms, in order to increase its predictive validity and utility within the 
Australian context. In addition, there are a number of psychometric limitations pertaining to the reliability 
and validity of the MBTI, which raise concerns about its use by practitioners. In view of these serious 
limitations, routine use of the MBTI is not recommended, and psychologists should be cautious as to its likely 
misuse in various organisational and occupational settings.
The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator or MBTI (Briggs-Myers & Briggs, 1985) is an extremely popular 
personality inventory which has received widespread use over the last 30 years (Carlyn, 1977). The 
MBTI is a self-report questionnaire designed to quantify non-psychopathological personality types 
as postulated in Jung's psychodynamic type theory (see Myers & McCaulley, 1985).
Each individual's personality type is described in terms of a four-letter code, a brief descriptive 
interpretation of which is provided on the back of the report form. For a simple (four-dimensional), 
straightforward description of one's personality make-up, use of the MBTI would seem an 
appropriate choice. The instrument is ipsatively scored, and predominantly utilises forced-choice 
(true/false) items. Four dichotomous dimensions classify individuals either as extraverted (E) or 
introverted (I), sensing (S) or intuitive (N), thinking (T) or feeling (F), and judging ( J) or perceiving 
(P). Combinations of the four preferences determine personality types. Each individual is classified 
in terms of one of 16 possible four-letter codes (such as ESFJ, ENFP, INTP, and ISFJ). Each type is 
said to define a specific set of behavioural tendencies, reflecting differences in attitudes, orientation, 
and decision-making styles. All materials, including the manual, test booklets, answer sheets, and 
score keys, are professionally produced.
The Jungian construct of extraversion is embedded within a somewhat different conceptual 
framework than either Cattellian or Eysenckian interpretations. The E-I dimension does not pertain 
to shyness versus gregariousness, but focuses on whether one's general attitude towards the world is 
actively oriented outward to other persons and objects, or is internally oriented (Sipps & Alexander, 
1987). The S-N dimension describes the individual's characteristic perceptual style. Sensing is 
viewed as attending to sensory stimuli, whereas intuition involves a more detached, insightful 
analysis of stimuli and events. Somewhat reminiscent of the field dependence-independence 
distinction, for the T-F dimension, thinking involves logical reasoning and decision processes, while 
feeling entails a more subjective, interpersonal approach. Thomas (1983) reported a correlation 
between field independence and thinking of 0.37, suggesting a small amount of commonality. The JP dimension distinguishes between the judging attitude associated with prompt decision making 
(often before all facts are at hand), while perception involves greater patience and waiting for more 
information, before making decisions (cf. Thomas, 1984). The individual is typed as either one or 
the other (each dimension is discontinuous, rather than continuous). Willis (1984, p. 483) indicated 
that the J-P dimension determines which of two function preferences is dominant and which is 
auxiliary (S or N versus T or F). The auxiliary style is used only in unusual situations; such as when 
an introverted child is required by the school system to "play the role" of an extraverted individual. 
DeVito (1985, p. 1030) asserted that"the dominant and auxiliary function is not well developed in Jung's writings (see McCaulley, 1981, pp. 301-302) and is the most controversial aspect of Myers' 
interpretation of Jung". To date, the validity of the dominant and auxiliary functions has not been 
tested empirically.
The four main MBTI dimensions can be placed within the context of modern thinking about 
personality theory concerning the major dimensions of Neuroticism, Extraversion, Openness, 
Agreeableness, and Conscientiousness (see Digman, 1990; Goldberg, 1992). Additionally, in the 
most comprehensive higher-order factor analytic study of personality dimensions to date, Krug and 
Johns (1986) carried out a scale factoring of the 16PF on well over 17,000 individuals, and 
crossvalidated their findings across sex. They reported six second-order factors labelled: 
Extraversion, Neuroticism, Conscientiousness, Tough Poise, Control, and Intelligence. These 
dimensions have been verified independently in a higher-order factor analysis of the Cattell, 
Comrey, and Eysenck scales by Boyle (1989). The E-I dimension of the MBTI relates directly to the 
Extraversion-Introversion higher-stratum factor; the S-N dimension appears to relate to Tough Poise 
– Sensitivity (i.e., sensing individuals may exhibit scepticism and tough poise, whereas intuitive 
persons appear to be more sensitive); and both the T-F and J-P dimensions appear to relate 
somewhat to Conscientiousness, Control, and Intelligence, and to the Openness dimension in the 
Norman Big Five, as implemented in say the NEO-PI (Costa & McCrae, 1992). The MBTI appears 
to measure about 30-35% of the normal personality trait variance. However, it clearly places a 
proportionately greater emphasis on cognitive styles than do most other personality instruments.
Current Forms of the MBTI
The 126-item Form G which is now the standard version of the MBTI (cf. Leiden, Veach, & 
Herring, 1986) was constructed from the 166-item Form F, with nine items slightly reworded to 
reduce reading level, and with 38 experimental items and two other items removed. Only the first 95 
items need be answered to score the instrument. As Coan (1978, p. 973) pointed out, inclusion in 
Form F of the experimental items (not used for scoring purposes) serves only to increase testing 
time, and provides no relevant information for standard use of the instrument. Misunderstanding of 
items is potentially problematic. As well, an abbreviated version (A V) also exists, comprising only 
50 items. The manual provides normative data for high school and university student samples, but 
data for the general adult population is notably lacking. There is little empirical information on 
minorities or working-class populations.
Scoring of the Instrument
Scoring of the MBTI is either in terms of preference or continuous scores. According to the manual, 
continuous scores are appropriate for research purposes only.
1
As stated by DeVito (1985), use of 
continuous scores is not emphasised. Jungian theory underlying construction of the MBTI asserts 
that an individual's dichotomous preference scores symbolise fundamental differences between types 
(e.g. introverts versus extraverts). However, most psychometricians regard personality dimensions 
such as extraversion-introversion as continuous, and normally distributed. According to Wiggins 
(1989, p. 538), "The principal stumbling block to more widespread acceptance of the MBTI lies in 
the structural model of bipolar discontinuous types to which the test authors are firmly committed." 
Consequently, use of dichotomous forced-choice items greatly limits both the theoretical and 
statistical import of the MBTI. Wiggins argued that there is no evidence to support Jung's theory of 
bimodal distributions of preference scores, and that evidence of stability of types is lacking. Thus, as 
Wiggins pointed out, the four-variable types remaining stable across measurement occasions exceeds 
50% only rarely. Another problem is "considerable redundancy in the scoring operation because the 
two contrasting scales of each pair are scored on the basis of essentially the same items". (Coan, 
1978, p. 974).Item Homogeneity
Use of preference scores (with concomitant restriction in variance) requires computation of phi 
coefficients if both variables represent true dichotomies (Gorsuch, 1983, p. 296). According to 
Willis (1984), median phi estimates of item homogeneity for Form Fare .60 (E-I), .69 (S-N), .59 (TF), and .71 (J-P), and median tetrachoric correlations (if the dichotomous variables actually represent 
continuous dimensions) are .76 (E-I), .87 (S-N) , .78 (T-F) , and .80 (J-P). The inconsistency of these 
dichotomous preference score estimates has been alluded to by Carlyn (1977).
Item homogeneity estimates based on the continuous scores are .79 (E-I), .81 (S-N), .78 (T-F), and 
.82 (J-P). Nevertheless, item homogeneity estimates based on continuous scores may be 
inappropriate given the assumption underlying the MBTI of dichotomous dimensions (even though 
continuous scores provide greater precision than do dichotomous scores). These estimates suggest 
moderately high levels of item homogeneity, and the possibility of associated item redundancy and 
narrow breadth of measurement (Boyle, 1987, 1991; Cattell, 1978).
Test-Retest Reliability
McCaulley (1981) has investigated the test-retest reliability (stability) of the MBTI. Estimates of the 
proportion of preferences reclassified into the same categories ranged from 61 % to 90%. For 
continuous scores, median stability coefficients are .78 (E-I), .78 (S-N), .69 (T-F), and .74 (J-P),over 
intervals from five weeks to 21 months. For Form G, the corresponding Spearman-Brown corrected 
estimates (cf. Ferguson, 1981) are .73 (E-I), .69 (S-N), .64 (T-F), and .69 (J-P). Likewise, for the 
abbreviated version (Form A V), the corresponding Spearman-Brown corrected estimates are .52
(E-I), .47 (S-N), .42 (T-F), and .42 (J-P). However, little direct information for Forms G and A V is 
available (Carskadon, 1979, 1982). Clearly, Form G is less reliable than Form F (because of the 
reduction in number of items), and Form A V is considerably less reliable than Form G. These testretest estimates for the current forms of the MBTI indicate some instability. For enduring personality 
dispositions, stability estimates should be in the 0.8 to 0.9 range (see Boyle, 1985).
Validity
Reviews supportive of the validity of the MBTI have been provided, for example, by Carlyn (1977), 
and Carlson (1985). According to Carlson (p. 357), "literature on the scale (one bibliography lists 
approximately 700 references) reflects largely successful efforts to apply it in a large variety of 
educational, clinical, counselling, business, and research settings." Despite these claims, the 
psychometric limitations of the MBTI raise concerns about the validity of the instrument.
Using continuous scores, the instrument has been correlated with several well known psychological 
inventories(Corman & Platt, 1988; Schurr, Ruble, & Henriksen, 1988). Yet there has been little 
attempt to ascertain inter-battery relationships via multiple regression procedures. Evidence 
concerning the interrelationships of the MBTI with other well known personality inventories remains 
mostly at the simple correlational level. Interpretations of concurrent validity based solely on 
correlations are likely to be biased due to the unreliability of correlation coefficients (Detterman 
1979).
There have been several factor analyses of the MBTI (e.g. Sipps, Alexander, & Friedt, 1985; 
Thompson & Borrello, 1986a, 1986b; Tzeng, Outcalt, Boyer, Ware, & Landis, 1984) - (see Carlyn, 
1977, for a summary of earlier factor analytic studies). In general, these factor analyses have 
followed variants of the "Little Jiffy" procedure (principal components plus orthogonal varimax 
rotation, an inadequate method of exploratory factor analysis; see Boyle, 1988, pp. 742-745; 
Gorsuch, 1983; McDonald, 1985). Therefore, the results of these analyses which claim to support 
the independence of the four MBTI dimensions are unsatisfactory, and in part may be a statistical artifact due to (a) extraction of at four factors, and (b) use of inappropriate orthogonal rotation. More 
appropriate confirmatory factor analyses of the MBTI dimensions remain to be undertaken (e.g. via 
LISREL, COSAN, EQS). The question is not whether other structures can be found for the MBTI (a 
common result from exploratory factor analyses), but whether the purported structure of the 
instrument is valid-a confirmatory rather than an exploratory issue (cf. Joreskog & Sorbom, 1989). 
Undue reliance on exploratory factor analyses of the MBTI to the exclusion of confirmatory methods 
has undoubtedly resulted in theory conflation, rather than more appropriately discriminating between 
hypotheses.
Regarding predictive validity, Myers (1962, p. 77) recommended that the MBTI is best viewed "as 
affording hypotheses for further testing and verification rather than infallible expectations of all 
behaviors". Since the MBTI types are not "source traits" verified factor analytically (i.e., "causal" 
psychological dimensions), predictions based on these "surface traits" (discontinuous types) are 
inevitably less powerful and remain somewhat speculative. On a different note, there are no scales 
built into the MBTI to detect the effects of random responding, response sets such as social 
desirability, or either conscious or unconscious response distortion. Social desirability response set 
appears to influence scores on the EI and JP scales (McCaulley,1981, p. 339). Also, there is no 
control for the mood of the respondent, which may greatly affect responses (Howes & Carskadon, 
1979). Consequently, the issue of motivational distortion in the MBTI responses needs to be 
addressed.
Conclusions
The MBTI is one of the most frequently used instruments for personality assessment. However, as 
Bjork and Druckman (1991) pointed out, the instrument's popularity is not consistent with research 
evidence. Furthermore, the MBTI manual does not provide norms based on continuous scores. Much 
of the supporting evidence provided in the manual is of questionable validity (Coan, 1978). Reliance 
on dichotomous preference scores rather than continuous scores unduly restricts the level of 
statistical analysis (such as assigning frequencies to the 16 types). As DeVito (1985, p. 1032) 
indicated, "The issue regarding type vs. continuous scores will probably remain most unsettling for 
those espousing traditional test construction standards and procedures." Empirical evidence does not 
strongly support the Jungian notion of discrete or "true" dichotomies.
As well, there are problems in using MBTI preference scores to predict behavioural or occupational 
outcomes. In addition, test-retest estimates raise doubts about the stability of MBTI-type scores. 
Some investigators (e.g. Anastasi, 1990) have suggested that all personality questionnaires have 
dubious psychometric standing. Certainly, the problems associated with item transparency, and 
concomitant response distortion ranging all the way from lack of self-insight to deliberate faking, as 
well as the effects of response sets in general, apply universally to self- report questionnaires (Boyle, 
1985).
Bjork and Druckman (1991) asserted that most of the extant studies of the MBTI are defective and 
that there is insufficient research into the utility of the MBTI in organisational settings. They further 
argued (p. 99) that, "At this time, there is not sufficient, well-designed research to justify the use of 
the MBTI in career counseling programs. Much of the current evidence is based on inadequate 
methodologies. "
Overall, the MBTI provides a psychometrically simple description of Jungian personality types. 
Although this brief characterisation may be useful in some applied contexts (such as in predicting an 
individual's characteristic style of behaviour, intellectually and interpersonally), there are evident psychometric limitations of the instrument. With further research and refinement, the MBTI may 
serve a more useful role in applied psychological assessment. Certainly, development of valid and 
comprehensive local norms (including relevant motivational distortion scales, e.g. Faking Good; 
Faking Bad) should increase its predictive validity within the Australian context. Given the lack of 
appropriate local norms, it would seem prudent for practitioners to be alert to its possible misuse, 
and to be cautious in undertaking personality assessments with the instrument. The current 
enthusiasm for the METI is certainly not warranted on psychometric grounds.
Footnote
1. This viewpoint is contentious. Psychometrically, a continuous scoring system should be used with 
at least four to five response options per question (cf. Joreskog & Sorbom, 1988).
References
Anastasi, A. (1990). Psychological testing (6th ed.). New York: Macmillan.
Bjork, RA., & Druckman, D. (1991). In the mind's eye: Enhancing human performance. 
Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Boyle, G.J. (1985). Self-report measures of depression: Some psychometric considerations. British 
Journal of Clinical Psychology, 24, 45-59.
Boyle, G.J. (1987). Review of the (1985) "Standards for educational and psychological testing: 
AERA, APA, and NCME". Australian Journal of Psychology, 39, 235-237.
Boyle, GJ. (1988). Elucidation of motivation structure by dynamic calculus. In J.R Nesselroade & 
R.B. Cattell (Eds.), Handbook of multivariate experimental psychology (pp. 737-787). New 
York: Plenum.
Boyle, GJ. (1989). Re-examination of the major personality-type factors in the Cattell, Comrey, and 
Eysenck scales: Were the factor solutions by Noller et al. optimal? Personality and Individual 
Differences, 10, 1289-1299.
Boyle, GJ. (1991). Does item homogeneity indicate internal consistency or item redundancy in 
psychometric scales? Personality and Individual Differences, 12, 291-294.
Briggs-Myers, I., & Briggs, K.C. (1985). Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI). Palo Alto, CA: 
Consulting Psychologists Press.
Carlson, J.G. (1985). Recent assessments of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. Journal of 
Personality Assessment, 49, 356-365.
Carlyn, M. (1977). An assessment of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. Joumal of Personality 
Assessment, 41, 461-473. 
Carskadon, T.G. (1979). Test-retest reliabilities of continuous scores on Form G of the MyersBriggs Type Indicator. Research in Psychological Type, 2, 83-84.
Carskadon, T.G. (1982). Sex differences in test-retest reliabilities of continuous scores on Form G 
of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. Research in Psychological Type, 5, 78-79.
Cattell, R.B. (1978). The scientific use of factor analysis in behavioral and life sciences. New York: 
Plenum.
Coan, RW. (1978). Review of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. Eighth Mental Measurements 
Yearbook, 1, 973-975.Corman, L.S., & Platt, R.G. (1988). Correlations among the Group Embedded Figures Test, the 
Myers-Briggs Type Indicator and demographic characteristics: A business school study. 
Perceptual and Motor Skills, 66, 507-511.
Costa, P.T., & McCrae, R.R. (1992). NEO Personality Inventory. Psychological Assessment, 4, 5-
13.
Detterman, D.K. (1979). Detterman's laws of individual differences research. In Sternberg, R. & 
Detterman, D.K. (Eds.), Human intelligence: Perspectives on its theory and measurement (pp. 
165-175). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
DeVito, A.J. (1985). Review of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. Ninth Mental Measurements 
Yearbook, 1, 1030-1032.
Digman, R.M. (1990). Personality structure: Emergence of the five-factor model. Annual Review of 
Psychology, 41, 417-440.
Ferguson, G.A. (1981). Statistical analysis in psychology and education (5th ed.). Singapore: 
McGraw-Hill.
Goldberg, L.R. (1992). The development of markers for the Big Five factor structure. Psychological 
Assessment, 4, 26-42.
Gorsuch, R.L. (1983). Factor analysis (5th ed.). New York: Plenum.
Howes, R.J., & Carskadon, T.G. (1979). Test-retest reliabilities of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator 
as a function of mood changes. Research in Psychological Type, 2, 67-72.
Jareskog, K.G., & Sarbom, D. (1988). PRELIS: A program for multivariate data screening and 
data summarization: A pre-processor for LISREL. Mooresville, IN: Scientific Software. 
Jareskog, K.G., & Sorbom, D. (1989). LISREL 7: User's reference guide. Mooresville, IN: 
Scientific Software.
Krug, S.E., & Johns, E.F. (1986). A large scale cross-validation of second-order personality 
structure defined by the 16PF. Psychological Reports, 59, 683-693.
Leiden, LJ., Veach, T.L., & Herring, M.W. (1986). Comparison of the abbreviated and original 
versions of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator personality inventory. Journal of Medical 
Education, 61,319-321.
McCaulley, M.H. (1981). Jung's theory of psychological types and the Myers-Briggs Type 
Indicator. In P. McReynolds (Ed.), Advances in Personality Assessment (Vol. 5, pp. 294-352): 
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
McDonald, R.P. (1985). Factor analysis and related methods. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Myers, LB. (1962). Manual: The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing 
Services.
Myers, LB., & McCaulley, M.H. (1985). Manual: A guide to the development and use of the MyersBriggs Type Indicator. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
Schurr, K.. T., Ruble, V.E., & Henriksen, L.W. (1988). Relationship of Myers-Briggs Type 
Indicator personality characteristics and self-reported academic problems and skill rating with 
Scholastic Aptitude Test scores. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 48, 187-196.
Sipps, G.J., & Alexander, R.A. (1987). The multifactorial nature of extraversion-introversion in the 
Myers-Briggs Type Indicator and Eysenck Personality Inventory. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 47, 543-552.
Sipps, G.J., Alexander, R.A., & Friedt, L. (1985). Item analysis of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. 
Educational and Psychological Measurement, 45, 789-796.
Thomas, C.R. (1983). Field independence and Myers-Briggs thinking individuals. Perceptual and 
Motor Skills, 57, 790.
Thomas, C.R. (1984). Regression of Myers-Briggs Type scales. Psychological Reports, 55, 568.
Thompson, B., & Borrello, G.M. (1986a). Construct validity of the Myers- Briggs Type Indicator. 
Educational and Psychological Measurement, 46, 745-752.
Thompson, B., & Borrello, G.M. (1986b). Second-order factor structure of the MBTI: A construct 
validity assessment. Measurement and Evaluation in Counselling and Development, 18,148-
153.
Tzeng, O.C.S., Outcalt, D., Boyer, S.L., Ware, R., & Landis, D. (1984). Item validity of the MyersBriggs Type Indicator. Journal of Personality Assessment, 48, 255-256.
Wiggins, 1.S. (1989). Review of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. Tenth Mental Measurements 
Yearbook, 1, 537-538.
Willis, C.G. (1984). Review of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. Test Critiques, 1, 482-490.


----------



## Fleetfoot

Pisces...ESTP. Not a winner.


----------



## Naama

Promethea said:


> ...


lol you used noob search term, picked up first review paper that you count on. looking at one study tells you nothing. i got 10+ studies on computer that say that MBTI has high enough validity. have you thought that this particular review paper might look at some old invalid studies? also have you considered the fact that, this paper might be reviewing one version of MBTI test, not the theory itself..

do you know anything about scientific research?


----------



## Fenrir317

Promethea said:


> Also, OP, I saw a theory with the elements there, but it would combine them. For example, N is air, and T is fire, NT is air with fire. NF is air with water. S would be earth, ST would be earth with fire.. and so on. I can't remember where I read this though.


I agree with astrology being mostly mysticism but it interests me nonetheless. That makes sense especially with moon/sun signs. I should've taken that into consideration when working on this but hey its the thought that counts haha.


----------



## Promethea

Naama said:


> lol you used noob search term, picked up first review paper that you count on. looking at one study tells you nothing. i got 10+ studies on computer that say that MBTI has high enough validity. have you thought that this particular review paper might look at some old invalid studies? also have you considered the fact that, this paper might be reviewing one version of MBTI test, not the theory itself..
> 
> do you know anything about scientific research?


Instead of trying to insult me, you could provide some of this evidence you are talking about. I picked those links and that paper because its what came up in the search. And even related articles showed nothing. I would think that if there was any scientific evidence it wouldn't be so hard to find considering many people have been looking for it for a long time.

And its pretty ironic that you would ask me if I know anything about scientific research when you are saying that theres scientific evidence for mbti. This makes me doubt that you understand the term 'science' at all. 

So, are you ready to post some evidence yet? Hehe.


----------



## Promethea

Fenrir317 said:


> I agree with astrology being mostly mysticism but it interests me nonetheless. That makes sense especially with moon/sun signs. I should've taken that into consideration when working on this but hey its the thought that counts haha.


Find a way to tie in the tarot cards, and the chakras. ; )
Actually I posted a thread a while back trying to come up with correlations between the enneagram types and chakras.


----------



## Fenrir317

Promethea said:


> Find a way to tie in the tarot cards, and the chakras. ; )
> Actually I posted a thread a while back trying to come up with correlations between the enneagram types and chakras.


interesting I'd like to see that if you find it :happy: I have heard that ennegram relates to chakra before but I've never quite understood completely.


----------



## ims1213

CleanLiterMine CLM said:


> *1. INTP
> 2. 5w4, 1w2, 4w5 sp/so/sx
> 3. Leo - July 26
> 4. Male*


How do you know what your TriType is?


----------



## CleanLiterMine CLM

ims1213 said:


> How do you know what your TriType is?


The enneagram personality test gave me the results.

(The one from the top of the page.)

I truly never looked into it.


----------



## dagnytaggart

1. ESTJ (albeit one with more Ni than Si)
2. 8w9, 3w4, 7w8 sx/so
3. Scorpio
4. Madam

I'm an intense motherf*cker.


----------



## Nomenclature

ISTP
3w4 1w2 7w8 SX/SO
July 19, Cancer + Rising Sagittarius, though Gemini and Libra fit me, not Cancer
Female-bodied androgyne


----------



## Dental Floss Tycoon

1. INFJ or INTJ
2. 1w9
3. Pisces, March 8
4. Male


----------



## Paradigm

1. INTJ / INxP
2. 6 or 9, 6-9-4 sp/sx
3. Aries/Cancer - April 12
4. Androgynous (genderqueer, not-cis-female, etc.)


----------



## MrShatter

Paradigm said:


> 1. INTJ / INxP
> 2. 6 or 9, 6-9-4 sp/sx
> 3. *Aries/Cancer *- April 12
> 4. Androgynous (genderqueer, not-cis-female, etc.)


Whaa (?) :laughing:

*EDIT:* Oh are you meaning the 2010 change thing? Ignore it, it's only for people who were born in 2010.

Educate Paradigm about a minor facet of Astrology: *Check!*
To do list: *Finished*


----------



## Paradigm

MrShatter said:


> Whaa (?) :laughing:


Lol, sorry. 

Sun sign: Aries
Birth time... moon sign... thing: Cancer

Yeah, I don't remember the name, it just has to do with what sign was... dominant or whatever at the time you were born. Apparently it affects your behavior more than the sun sign. But I never got into astrology much, so... *shrugs*


----------



## MrShatter

Paradigm said:


> Lol, sorry.
> 
> Sun sign: Aries
> Birth time... moon sign... thing: Cancer


oh ok, :laughing: no worries!


----------



## L'Empereur

1. INTJ
2. 5w6, 3w4, 1w2 at the moment
3. Taurus + May 9th
4. Male


----------



## Riy

1. xNxP
2. 7w6 (6w7), 3w2, 9w8.
3. Scorpio
4. Male


----------



## Consistently Inconsistent

1. ENTP
2. 7w6-9w8-3w2 sp/so
3. Capricorn 
4. Male


----------



## jbking

1. INTJ - NiTe
2. 1w2, 1w2-2w1-5w6, sp/so/sx
3. Gemini, wood rabbit - May 25th
4. Male


----------



## Dabri

*MBTI and Astrology any connections? I am an ENFP and an Aries.*

I was wondering if there was any possible link between the two. I am an ENFP as well as an Aries, I was hoping people would post their personality types as well as their astrological sign, to see if certain personality types and zodiac signs are more common.


----------



## Naama

Thousands of similar topics on the forum and the answer is no, also astrology isnt real. Only use i can really find for it is that it can work as a tool to bring out some stuff from your unconsciousness to surface, since unconsciousness is looking for suitable moments(in external world) of expressing itself and if you believe in astrology, it might fool your unconsciousness into thinking that this is suitable moment to pop onto consciousness.

I wouldnt wonder if winter and summer would have some effects on personality of newborn child(or fetus developing in womb).

And to answer your question, im libra(INTP), so is INFP, ENTP and ISFJ i know. Cba to list more people, but MBTI and astrological signs doesent simply match, this has been discussed several times and i can see it in real life too.


----------



## clicheguevara




----------



## Murnando

Astrology is not real, as it is not based around any kind of evidence or research. How could the time of year that somebody is born ever determine characteristics? This may not sound like a very INFP thing to say, but I don't see much reason to believe in a concept with no validity, proof or logic to support it. If you think that they're real, then that's fine, you're entitiled to your beliefs, but there's no getting around the fact that star signs have no grounding in reality.
(Yeah, sometimes I think I'm INTP as well.)

Astrology often looks real or can be seen as accurate descriptions of you because the descriptive terms used are extremely general. It's called cold reading, the act of using vague terms that are applicable to almost everybody and allowing other people to read their own truths into them. It's a very commonly used tactic among psychics, and people that claim they can talk to the dead.


----------



## quadrivium

You will find there is no connection.
I'm an INTJ Sagittarius. A very conflicting pair.


----------



## MCRTS

I'm an ISFJ Taurus. I personally feel it fits. Taurus are described as quiet, traditional, conservative, stable, nurturing and homely. BUT I wouldn't put too much stock into it, as there are many ISFJs who score as other astrology types.


----------



## Zerosum

Im an ENTP leo and I know quite a few ENTPs who are different astrological types...


----------



## No09

*well.*

Well, I'd like to say that I'm INTP and Cancer. What, it doesn't match? 
Is too simple to say "I'm X and I'm a certain sign it doesn't match!!" Man, 12 signs are like, NOTHING. Only 12 for the entire population!
But we are talking about solar signs. When you look at a complete chart, I can say it does fit. I do not know if astrology is true or not - I'm not risking and saying it is one thing or another. But I think it needs to be studied, not only looking at it in the newspaper and saying "meh it isn't real". I hate the astrology section of newspaper because of this. Astrology is a lot more than using general words about every sign and matching signs for teenage girls in love. Damn. I wouldn't say it is a science, but FOR SURE isn't something easy as balls.

Talking about my type and my sign: Sure I'm a cancer and also a Intp. But if we look at my sun conjunct mercury at the 9th house, and I'm not even talking about my fucked up moon, it doesn't seem so unbelievable. Like I said before, I'm not saying astrology is right or wrong, or if one thing relate to other(or not), all I'm asking is to learn a little more about it before saying anything. I wish I was a better astrologer so I could study it a little more. This subject is delicious.

If I'm not wrong, there was one astrologer making some kind of test about this - I did some personality test and also information for him to make my natal chart.


----------



## kittychris07

I don't think we can say astrology is very accurate if the astrologers just added a sign to the mix to make the number of signs 13.


----------



## LibertyPrime

All 3 have one thing in common... they are scientifically unproven.


----------



## QueCueYew

INFP and aquarius. 


Aquarius + traits: 
• Friendly and humanitarian
• Honest and loyal
• Original and inventive
• Independent and intellectual 

Aquarius - traits:
• Intractable and contrary
• Perverse and unpredictable
• Unemotional and detached

Aquarius Likes : fame and recognition, personal privacy, rainbows, dreams, magic, change for its own sake, eccentricity, surprises, and living within their means despite the many temptations which constantly surround them every waking moment.

Aquarius Dislikes : emotion and intimacy, people who show off, being taken for granted, being pinned down, violence and fighting, and senseless or purposeless extravagance of any sort.



INFP traits:
- Not very realistic and practical
- Original dressing style
- Nurturing and supportive
- Hate conflict and criticism
- Very flexible
- They find day to day activities unfulfilling





PERSONAL TRAITS:
*difficulty verbally expressing emotion/ideas
*natural affinity for writing, often clear thought forms compared to verbal 
*a loner disposition, prefers to be alone or with a small group of close and familiar friends
*refrains from acting in a way which would go against emotional/philosophical grounding
*^ open for new interpretations on life, if logically compatible and sound, often employed in personal outlook
*refrains from popular mainstream consumption of goods, media, and trends
*honesty irrelevant, what would the lie/truth affect compared to what would be the ideal outcome
*finds dishonesty (hypocritical), blatant hate, antagonistic tendencies abhorrent 
*avoids conflict in whatever form

(aquarius checklist) likes: personal privacy, rainbows, dreams, magic, change for it's own sake, eccentricity, surprises, recognition (i was going to dislike this one but i can honestly see how this would fit in with who i am currently), emotion and intimacy.

(aquarius checklist) dislikes: fame, people who show off, being taken for granted, being pinned down, violence and fighting, senseless and purposeless extravagance of any sort.






so there it is. i don't really put much faith in the astrological system... but this discipline did allow for nostradomus' centuries and quatrains. this remains dead and buried in modern times with the rigor of the scientific discipline, which has all but obsoleted this ancient art. i'd like to meet a doctorate equivalent practitioner of this form of divination.


----------



## No09

kittychris07 said:


> I don't think we can say astrology is very accurate if the astrologers just added a sign to the mix to make the number of signs 13.


Nope. They found a new constellation, a fuckton of time ago. Signs are not the same thing as constellations - signs are geometric slices of 30° each one, constellations are a lot of stars that some guy high as fuck connected and claimed to be some kind of thing.


----------



## qwerty21

its what starsign was in the sky [above you ] at the time of your birth, i think


----------



## qwerty21

"Aquarius + traits: 
• Friendly and humanitarian
• Honest and loyal
• Original and inventive
• Independent and intellectual 

Aquarius - traits:
• Intractable and contrary
• Perverse and unpredictable
• Unemotional and detached"
*seems contraditary, humanitarian and unemotional??
i agree zodiac stuuf is rubish
*


----------



## Deus Absconditus

Astrology was designed by man great thinkers a long time ago by looking up at the skies at the stars. The stars brought about constellations, which borough about our signs. The thing about astrology is its relative to time. The Galaxy moves and spins due to gravity. The objects in the galaxy imitates this Same movement all at different speeds due to gravity. 

When the ancient astrologers were getting their information from the sky, where the constellations were in relevance to where the sun and earth along with where the planets were positioned are much different today. This also goes for the individual stars, their constellations, also. I've gotten into studying astrology recently and learned its principles. Many if not all astrologist today don't follow the principles but follow the teachings not realizing the teachings were relevant to that time period, those teachings are not static. If you want truth you need to follow accuracy and the principles of a system. Btw Ophiuchus is part of the ecliptic meaning the sun rotates through it, making it a constellation part of our current day astrological zodiac. Also Aries isn't part of the ecliptic any more, and was replaced by Cetus which is on the ecliptic line.

Another great fact. The triplicity system organized used by traditional astrologers uses/d the Zodiacal elements in reference to the constellations that were enacted during to its corresponding season. So at a time in history, the summer months consisted of Aries, Leo, Sagittarius. So these modern day astrological system are behind time, and have forgotten the systems principles making it really inaccurate. I believe there may be a correlation between cognitive functions and the astrological state, for we do come from the universe and are relative to it. We need to reconstruct the whole system though making it contemporary in comparison to what's on the ecliptic as of today and, re change everything besides the principles to keep it consistent with what the system was suppose to be. I started to do this on my spare time because I have nothing else to do haha.


----------



## AstralSoldier

When it comes to the mutable signs this gets tricky; they're changeable by nature and present an aspect of detachment/change in their temperament, so it's harder to find a definitive 'yes' or 'no' definition to their temperaments. It makes me question the overall correlation/compatibility between the Zodiac and the MBTI standard.

I'm a Virgo, and I'm naturally more intuitive/feeling/rational. I fluctuate between NF/NT and even moments of introversion and extroversion depending on the surrounding environment and whether it presents a motivation for extroversion or introversion; I'm not introverted because I'm shy, it's usually because I'm bored with the environment as it may provide the kind of stimuli that doesn't spark my interest. I don't like rules or following them 'to the T' like it's believed that most Virgos tend to do, because I don't believe that that will always yield good results when you don't consider conceptual information and theory that can be tested to find a new avenue for testing and discovery.


----------



## Lesley Drakken

I'm a Scorpio/Ascending Capricorn INFP, but I also have several peripheral signs with negate or even out right invalidate the more intense and overbearing aspects of Scorpions. I fit my sign to a certain degree, but I've always been softer and less blazingly impassioned then the usual descriptions; we're also supposed to be seductive and sensual by nature which is the exact opposite of myself. According to what I've read, the Capricorn Ascendent also increases artistic capacity, which seems to fit.

I've always been really intrigued by the fact that N is traditionally associated with fire, as (being a primary water elemental sign) it's the element I associate with the least, combined with a strong affinity for earth (From Capricorn) and neutrality towards air.

I like your list though, it does seem to make sense based on the personalities the Astrology signs set forth. roud:


----------



## ToonLady

I'm an INFJ Libra and my moon is/was in Leo. Don't know exactly what all the other crap is about, but I know I have a lot of air and Virgo in my chart. Is there a correlation? Perhaps, but I firmly agree that there are _way_ too many variables to take into account. Still, it's an interesting concept. *shrug*


----------



## Felidire

I think he smacked Pisces bang on the head with the FP.


----------



## Devalight

I am not sure, to answer your question, but I would like to see a complete chart, then maybe I could give you some indications. I need date, time (not just day, but hour as well) and place of birth.

In general you cannot get an accurate picture of a person in any way with just the sun sign. You must have complete information and then an understanding of how to interpret it. At minimum, the sun, moon and rising signs. To know the rising sign, you must know the time of birth. The more accurate, the better.


----------



## AriesLilith

What I posted on another thread:



> As for those who are skeptic about astrology, sure, it is ok to be skeptic as believing in everything is not good. But just coz one thing is not yet proven by science, it doesn't mean that it's not possible, unless proven as such. Also, some might argue about Forer effect, but for those who are familiar with astrology, they do know that there are evidences that are very real. But I won't argue this with people, since as someone who researched about astrology already, me trying to explain this to an unfamiliar skeptic would be like a university student explaining the concepts to a 7th grader. All I can say is, if you are skeptic about its validity, then also be skeptic about its invalidity, as science as not yet proven its invalidity.


Just wanted to add about the evidence that I'm speaking of - it is something that only someone that understands at least the basics of the astrological symbolism when looking at a chart can understand how Forer effect is not the case.

And astrology can be very accurate - it depends a lot on the capacity and experience of an astrologer using the tools thought.

For the complete post I posted on the other thread:
http://personalitycafe.com/critical...strological-signs-mbti-personality-types.html


----------



## Kyandigaru

Me being a gemini, i dont have a 'TP' i have a 'FP'...so thats wrong for me at least.


----------



## SailorStar

Sauwelios said:


> After some thinking, I have come to the following table of correspondences between the Zodiac signs and the MBTI.
> 
> 
> Aries - N
> Taurus - SJ
> Gemini - TP
> Cancer - F
> Leo - NJ
> Virgo - SP
> Libra - T
> Scorpio - FJ
> Sagittarius - NP
> Capricorn - S
> Aquarius - TJ
> Pisces - FP
> 
> 
> What do you think?


I am a Sagittarius and an ENFP.


----------



## TheBackwardsLegsMan

Well, I'm an INFJ with a lot of Gemini in my chart, although I have no idea what any of this means. All I know is I definitely don't match the typical description of a Gemini.

Sun: Gemini
Moon:Gemini
Mercury:Gemini
Venus:Gemini
Mars: Gemini 
Jupiter: Capricorn 
Saturn:Aries 
Uranus: Aquarius 
Neptune: Capricorn
Pluto: Sagittarius
Lilith: Cancer
Asc Node: Libra
Ascendant: Sagittarius
II: Capricorn
III: Pisces 
IV: Aries
V: Taurus 
VI: Taurus
VII: Gemini
IX: Cancer
Midheaven: Libra
XI: Scorpio
XII: Scorpio


----------



## shakti

Sauwelios said:


> After some thinking, I have come to the following table of correspondences between the Zodiac signs and the MBTI.
> 
> 
> Aries - N
> Taurus - SJ
> Gemini - TP
> Cancer - F
> Leo - NJ
> Virgo - SP
> Libra - T
> Scorpio - FJ
> Sagittarius - NP
> Capricorn - S
> Aquarius - TJ
> Pisces - FP
> 
> 
> What do you think?


Well it fits me to a tee - Leo with Scorpio rising, which makes me the xNFJ I am :crazy:

Though I would describe Aquarians as very P...and nobody is as J as Virgos me thinks


----------



## Kincsem

I'm a Pisces. I find it to be fairly accurate.
My mom took the MBTI and she too is a INFJ, and she was born two days prior to me. Two Pisces, two INFJs. Schnazzy.

-Anna


----------



## BlackGarca

There some cool archetypical correlations between both systems. people i can remember that has accumulation of an archetype i see as very anecdotal. Someone must have already pointed how different systems uses undifferentiated terminology tho..

A friend of mine who is an engineer programer deals with a similar problem: to make two complete different softwares to predict the same traffic pattern for future urban engineering.. 

Are there any group organised or institutionalised attempt on syncretism? 

It might scape the subject but maybe not so i'll share my recent and humble attempt on syncretism, of course considering they are all valid systems. It's an analogy for it's sake:

*Personality maps as in analogy to a computer system with the overall priority or resulting product to win in life*. 
In this analogy MBTI is how we function. Zodiac astrology is why we function. Chinese astrology is the 'publicity aspect' of the human enterprise. For example:
An ESTJ-CAPRICORN-BUNNY would be a very directive machine (estj) aimed to social growth (capricorn) who is perceived as soft and gentle (bunny). 
Then a ISTJ-ARIES-OX would be an inspector machine (istj) aimed to be the playful starter of new ventures (aries) with a somewhat sloow and kinda sentimental speach (ox).
INFJ-PISCES-ROOSTER would be a a reserved deep insightful person aimed to feel and transmit the feeling of being on with the universe with a cocky posture.

MBTI : hardware 
Zodiac astrology : software 
Chinese astrology : interface

Sun sign : facade running software
Moon Sign : system operating software
Rising Sign : programming/product/objective

Chinese synastry : attending performance
Astrology synastry : teaming performance
Socionics synastry : co-producing performance


​


----------

