# MBTI is an illusion of the ego



## Figure (Jun 22, 2011)

phoenixpinion said:


> Perhaps, but why do I feel controlled by it and why aren't you feeling controlled by it? Perhaps we have all gotten used to the feeling of complacency? Slaves who think they are free are still slaves. Just look at America.


I think it's important to look at the most common ways of vocalizing the system before making that sort of evaluation on the entire system, for everyone. Remember, most people here want the system to converge into something. They want an answer, a rationale, a sequence, a concretization - and maybe that's the start of liberation. Ever consider yourself slaved, for not being willing to imagine the value of that? Whether or not you use MBTI verbage to describe them, many people have different fixations to which they organize the everyday pursuits of what they think and do. 

I think it's important to realize that we indeed have defaults, and indeed communicate through them, sometimes forgetting that others do not share the same default. That - not "slavery" - is what's going on with this thread and forum, despite the fact that it also supports criticism of MBTI that actually _is _understood widely here. The numero uno conceptual principle to MBTI - the one that should override the type descriptions, functions, everything - is that a blue sky to you is not necessarily a blue sky to the guy sitting next to you.


----------



## phoenixpinion (Dec 27, 2012)

Acerbusvenator said:


> You don't *understand *MBTI, you need to *read up* on it.I don't feel controlled because I *understand *it. You think that the functions got *characteristics *when they are merely point out that some people prefer to do certain things *internally *and other things *externally*.I am not an INTJ as much as I *prefer *to introvert my intuition, extravert my thinking, introvert my feeling and extravert my sensing.You got Si, Fe, Ti and Ne, just like ISFJs.


No, you dont understand it. Like others have many times pointed out in different threads, your mbti type is like a finger blueprint. Intj's do not necessarily use Fi and Se, just as entp's do not necessarily use Fe and Si. There are many more of such unexamined minor fallacies, that we are now left with a big pile of rubbish. You say mbti is not a box, but a tool, which can be used for self-understanding. Agreed, but if the tool is broken, dont expect to get far. Broken tools are more like hindrance than anything else, hence can undeed trap you in a box. The spider can get caught in its own web.


----------



## Acerbusvenator (Apr 12, 2011)

phoenixpinion said:


> No, you dont understand it. Like others have many times pointed out in different threads, your mbti type is like a finger blueprint. Intj's do not necessarily use Fi and Se, just as entp's do not necessarily use Fe and Si. There are many more of such unexamined minor fallacies, that we are now left with a big pile of rubbish. You say mbti is not a box, but a tool, which can be used for self-understanding. Agreed, but if the tool is broken, dont expect to get far. Broken tools are more like hindrance than anything else, hence can undeed trap you in a box. The spider can get caught in its own web.


Actually, according to how MBTI has created their categories then INTJs do use NiTeFiSe.

You seem to fear MBTI strongly. Where knowledge lacks, fear takes its place.

You don't even seem to want to understand the use of MBTI, and so the question is: What are you doing here? Why do you go to an *MBTI community* to preach about how bad it is?
Your logic is like a *communist *going to the meeting point for *capitalists*, preaching as of why *capitalism *is a bad thing.

You use many ways to define people, you say they are male of female, old or young, got brown hair or white hair, brown skin or pale skin, an American accent or a German accent or equal form of measurement, MBTI and socionics simply do the same thing, but instead of blaming misunderstandings on shallow characteristics of a person then we understand that we simply process information differently.

Some call MBTI a box, some call it a tool and some call it slavery, but in reality then* it is what you make it*.
The system in itself without the added stereotypes and assumptions made by people is very hollow any extremely open, that is why it speaks of "*preference*".
MBTI functions are about subjective/introverted vs objective/extraverted. The characteristics that people give the different functions are just assumptions based on most people they've met.


----------



## phoenixpinion (Dec 27, 2012)

Your logic is highly flawed in that the nature of fear is that fear actually stops one from voicing his/her opinion, not the other way around. How silly.


----------



## phoenixpinion (Dec 27, 2012)

And no, knowledge does not replace fear, it buries it, exactly what the ego does.


----------



## Acerbusvenator (Apr 12, 2011)

phoenixpinion said:


> Your logic is highly flawed in that the nature of fear is that fear actually stops one from voicing his/her opinion, not the other way around. How silly.


Just google "fear of the unknown".
Now you are just trying desperately to disprove a fact of the human mind. Humans fear the unknown, it's a known fact. This is likely the reasons why so many fear the dark (since what is in the darkness is unknown).

All I have been saying is that you fear MBTI because you do not understand it, it is foreign, mysterious, out of your understanding. That explains why you fear it and hate what you think it is.


----------



## kitsu (Feb 13, 2013)

phoenixpinion said:


> MBTI is all about the ego (not the Freud ego). By definition the ego is the glasses through which you see the world. So you do not interact with the world directly, but first it gets filtered through your nice pair of glasses, developped throughout your entire lifetime. Therefore, the ego is a kind of tunnel vision, a bunch of belief systems, an imbalance of your consciousness.
> 
> This sounds incredibly like your MBTI type. MBTI was designed to build stronger ego's, to lock them in a small area of their brains, to which they self-identify, and ultimately to keep people from contacting their True Selfs (balanced type, balancing goes on into infinity), to which all is possible. Such people are easy to be controlled, just feed their ego/personality endless stuff (books/puzzles/science for thinkers, drama for feelers, professional sports for sensors, philosophy for intuitives, etc.) and they are content. It's like feeding your dog food, so he does not go disobeying. Likewise, the controllers of our world feed us constant mind food for the ego, so we do not rise up. Since without stuff to feed on, the ego cannot go on existing (glasses need repairs). MBTI lovers are a bunch of schizophrenics. They live in duality, the voice of their ego/MBTI type is subconsciously defined as good/right/strong, and the voice of their shadow/shadow MBTI type is defined as wrong/bad/weak. For example, a thinker gets fed up over stupid things like inconsistencies and illogicalities. It's like seeing a child go mad over a broken TV. They waste their lives chasing logic, thinking logic can fix the world. Logic is therefore the God of the thinker.
> 
> ...


I'm in love with you.


----------



## phoenixpinion (Dec 27, 2012)

Oh please. It's not because I know nothing of the mbti that i reject it, it's that I know it too well to realise it's a dead end. You see yourself as a self-proclaimed expert of mbti, therefore, if another guy comes along who does not succumb to your opinions, you automatically conclude that he must be ignorant, delusional, fearful of knowledge, or a combinations of these.But you are right, I am like a communist preaching to a bunch of capitalists. Ofcourse the capitalists do not want to hear the communist side of the story. But that is where you are wrong, plenty of capitalists are getting fed up with the dogma, and you as master capitalist refuse to see this. You think you speak for the whole mbti community, but you don't.


----------



## Acerbusvenator (Apr 12, 2011)

phoenixpinion said:


> Oh please. It's not because I know nothing of the mbti that i reject it, it's that I know it too well to realise it's a dead end. You see yourself as a self-proclaimed expert of mbti, therefore, if another guy comes along who does not succumb to your opinions, you automatically conclude that he must be ignorant, delusional, fearful of knowledge, or a combinations of these.But you are right, I am like a communist preaching to a bunch of capitalists. Ofcourse the capitalists do not want to hear the communist side of the story. But that is where you are wrong, plenty of capitalists are getting fed up with the dogma, and you as master capitalist refuse to see this. You think you speak for the whole mbti community, but you don't.


I am "listening" to you, but 1+1 is not 3, it is 2.

If someone else comes along who knows what they are talking about then their answer will have actual backbone other than fear. They'd show that they understand the system by referring to the people who made the system.

You seem to believe very heavily that you are right, so I will leave you alone and hope that you one day get an enlightened understanding of MBTI.


----------



## Antrist (Jan 26, 2011)

I love reading a thread title and thinking... "I bet an ENTP wrote this", going into the thread and finding that I'm right and highly unsurprised. You sound so much like a friend of mine, it's unbelievable. He's a young and developing ENTP and sometimes get a bit too big for his boots. 

You're going to have to work on your depth of knowledge when it comes to human psychology. A lot of what you've said here is ideas glued together hastily and barely credible as an argument for or against anything. 

The best part for me, I think, is where you say that the persona is a step beyond the ego. What is that all about?

Perhaps it would be best if you looked more closely about how MBTI has been applied to business and relations at work. Quite a few companies (including institutions such as Oxford Aviation) use this system, and similar systems, to discern which candidates will work well together, have good synergy, are good for each others' development, will challenge each other, will look at problems differently etc. after all, the key component to MBTI is cognition.


----------



## Erbse (Oct 15, 2010)

Hm.

Conspiracy theories!

Population control through typology.

Well, if that's everything it takes - well played, Myer-Briggs!


----------



## DoubleMasked (Feb 20, 2013)

I would rather say egoless people are easily controlled. 

Ego controls the defense mechanisms, and self-identity. Which leads to setting personal boundaries.

Ego diminishing is actually a cult brainwash technique. 

What actually happens when you break your ego is that you break your self-identity, and conform to the group that preaches to you. 
You are no longer your memories, likes and dislikes that you've had as an instrinct thing of your personality for as long as you can remember.

You are now Zen/Osho/Ego-death/etc. 

Be you, don't be them.


----------



## Antrist (Jan 26, 2011)

DoubleMasked said:


> I would rather say egoless people are easily controlled.
> 
> Ego controls the defense mechanisms, and self-identity. Which leads to setting personal boundaries.
> 
> ...


Ahh! Communists!


----------



## DoubleMasked (Feb 20, 2013)

Antrist said:


> Ahh! Communists!


Hehe. Don't have a cow man. Have half a cow and i'll take the other half.


----------



## JungyesMBTIno (Jul 22, 2011)

In all honesty, I have to be the bearer of un-PC news, but if one really can't figure out if they defend themselves via introversion or extraversion (or both, but one more positively and one in a more distorted way), I'm convinced Jung wouldn't call you a type. It gets to a point where that much oblivion of it becomes ridiculous, even though I'm sure true introverts have probably gone through life viewing extraverts as inferior and unoriginal (while probably secretly envying their smart-sounding objectivity at times), while true extraverts probably view introverts as a little insecure, not trustworthy (unreliable), and as Jung puts it mighty well, as extraordinary doctrinaires - or as Freud puts it, as self-absorbed ego-maniacs (while probably envying their ability to transgress norms and think for themselves about the darker side of the object in relation to subjective ideals at times). Never fear though, both attiudes can learn to embrace the other direction, but it's often just with a negative bent toward entrusting the inner/outer world with much value or influence in your life. It's not that E/I people can't be good at the other side, but it's just often not on socially satisfying grounds (like introverts might be the kind of people who tend to reveal really negative ideas in the extraverted sphere, while extraverts might be the kind of people who might have overly biased personal opinions that verge on the inappropriate if they aren't careful enough with them).


----------



## Frostpaw (Mar 1, 2013)

I'm not sure what to think of all this. However, I'm curious of one thing. OP speaks about a clear mind (Or something along those lines), one free from these "ego prisons". What would a mind like that look like? Surely that's a superior state? Otherwise there wouldn't be any need to reach it. Yet I've never met anyone who could be described as having this superior state of mind. If OP has it, then I don't want it. Because from what I've seen, OP is nothing special. I've not seen anything in his arguments that would give him the title of enlightenment or anything else along those lines. It all just sounds like speculations with a firmly attached belief to them..

Besides, if OP hasn't reached this "clear" state, which I'm pretty sure he hasn't, then why should I trust him? I would take the artistic advices of a construction worker with a pinch of salt. Why would this be any different?


----------



## DoubleMasked (Feb 20, 2013)

Frostpaw said:


> I'm not sure what to think of all this. However, I'm curious of one thing. OP speaks about a clear mind (Or something along those lines), one free from these "ego prisons". What would a mind like that look like? Surely that's a superior state? Otherwise there wouldn't be any need to reach it. Yet I've never met anyone who could be described as having this superior state of mind. If OP has it, then I don't want it. Because from what I've seen, OP is nothing special. I've not seen anything in his arguments that would give him the title of enlightenment or anything else along those lines. It all just sounds like speculations with a firmly attached belief to them..
> 
> Besides, if OP hasn't reached this "clear" state, which I'm pretty sure he hasn't, then why should I trust him? I would take the artistic advices of a construction worker with a pinch of salt. Why would this be any different?


It is cult-talk, do not get involved in it.

I have extensive information about it from years of study, and I can tell you straight of the bat: Pure utter bullshit.

If you wipe your mind entirely clear, then who are you?


----------



## phoenixpinion (Dec 27, 2012)

DoubleMasked said:


> I would rather say egoless people are easily controlled.
> 
> Ego controls the defense mechanisms, and self-identity. Which leads to setting personal boundaries.
> 
> ...


I'm aware of that, and thank you for pointing that out. What I'm talking about is moving your ego to the center so that it is no longer at war with the shadow, but at peace. It is then when your heart chakra opens, which is the gateway to the anima (for men), animus (for women), and ultimately your Higher Self (or Self as Jung calls it). There's a huge difference between a balanced ego (the ultimate expression of you) and no ego (no you, hence no expression). No ego is what cult leaders and new age self-appointed gurus advocate so their followers drop their guard and so their energy can be stolen without limits (predators), such people are actually my nemesis.


----------



## phoenixpinion (Dec 27, 2012)

Antrist said:


> I love reading a thread title and thinking... "I bet an ENTP wrote this", going into the thread and finding that I'm right and highly unsurprised. You sound so much like a friend of mine, it's unbelievable. He's a young and developing ENTP and sometimes get a bit too big for his boots.
> 
> You're going to have to work on your depth of knowledge when it comes to human psychology. A lot of what you've said here is ideas glued together hastily and barely credible as an argument for or against anything.
> 
> ...


Yep, I'm an ENTP and I'll always be an ENTP, but that is not my true ME, but only a small part, the personality/ego! That is all I'm saying. And this is the limitations of the MBTI typing system (socionics aswell, which I find even more appalling, since it takes itself even more serious). It is a closed system, one that does not recognize that there are steps beyond it, because it is designed for business relations and career development (as you put so nicely), to which typing is the inevitable outcome. It is basically social understanding for asocial people, highly superficial, hence perfect for business relations, since we all know how superficial the business environment is. Aslong as you identify with your mbti-type you are not an autonomous self-conscious individual, but are operating on a group mind. MBTI has 16 of such group minds. 
The perfect business is one that utilizes each one of those 16 group minds, a complete 16-cog machine, but autonomous people are not sought after by companies, since they have a will of their own, dreams of their own, desires of their own, they are a company on their own, hence have no place as a cog in another company, who's will/dream is as close-minded as profit/influence/power. If I, want to fit in the business world, I need to lower my consciousness back to my mbti-type, the ENTP, which I can offer/sell as a cog to a company. In turn, the company makes sure my cog remains oiled, with a good salary.

And yeah, the persona being a step beyond the ego, perhaps that was not the best wording. (fuck human language, gimme telepathy already.) It is nothing more than a mask our ego puts on to interact with the world, which we all have. I'm aware of that, but what I actually meant was that the persona of a psychopath must be much more sophisticated and complex than a normal person's, if he wants to pass through society undetected. For example, there are psychopaths who use personas as the divine incarnated. (Imo, the more Godlike the persona, the more likely you are dealing with a psycho.) Who knows, Obama could be one, he seems to like using the persona of savior. However, I can't see a person operating on his True Self (=0=∞=Ego/mbti-type (positive/conscious psyche part/radiation) + Shadow (negative/unconscious psyche part/absorbtion)), using any persona at all.


----------



## phoenixpinion (Dec 27, 2012)

Erbse said:


> Hm.
> 
> Conspiracy theories!
> 
> ...


Haha, you'd be surprised! :tongue:

Facebook seemed harmless aswell. Now what do we have? No longer do they need to spy on us, we do it ourselves!





http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...e-employers-psychologists-say-suspicious.html (Apparantly you could be a psychopath now if you don't own a facebook. Somebody arrest my grandmother! Haha, red flags, control alert!)


----------



## JungyesMBTIno (Jul 22, 2011)

I think MBTI is an illusion itself - not what it actually derived from is though. I, in all honesty, cringe at its abuse of the scientific method, let alone, how it tries to make this stuff into something concrete. I mean, really, if you spend enough time around people, it's easy to get a sense of a person's type if you actually know what to look for (part of the issue is invalid internet representations of types - I mean, I can guarantee that I have mistyped a billion INFPs as like INTJs and ISTJs because of the internet crap about feeling types not showing thinking, even though with Fi, you really probably won't see their feeling anyway, but certainly will see a lot of extraverted thinking, because thinking is highly outward for them). I especially hate how MBTI turns this stuff into "preference" (I mean, if used properly, that's fine, but people make waaay too much out of that - the preference stuff means nothing other than what you can honestly observe within your inner reactions to the function mentalities - it was sort of misinterpreted from Jung's ego syntonic/dystonic references, which can certainly extend well into the realm of mental illness - it's not an egotistical kind of preference you're going to get with most of type, I don't think - it's not like you don't like all of your functions on some level anyway, it's just that with the lower two, you have trouble really "owning them" toward your idea of who you are) - oh fucking please, I'm sure people PREFER to have a shadow (HAH - a shadow, my ass). I mean, from a Jungian standpoint, this stuff might as well be mere adaptation of strengths against the greater unknown - really nothing about "my Ne does this, my Ti does that" - nothing mechanical. The way MBTI dumbs this stuff down is an illusion for sure. Pretty annoying (and honestly, tends to make for really boring discussion of a pseudo-scientific or fairy-tale nature).


----------



## gertrudeslime (Feb 26, 2013)

I've lurked on this website for some years, and I notice a "Hive Mind" that develops among the type-specific boards. A usage of "we" - "we do this, but we don't do that." There seems to be a _decrease_ in individual personality and growth in order to fit the type one believes, and an _increase_​ in the desirability to now live life as true to the label as one can. A more disturbing trend, I see, is diagnosing real world persons as XXXX. Family members, friends, partners. And altering the relationship you have with these people based on your presumed types and how XXXX traditionally, symptomatically reacts to XXXX. Or in fact doubting your own ability to interact with said persons and instead asking for advice based on this person's MBTI score. I find this entire community fascinating, however! And I sense a very deep loneliness in it, a longing to belong.

Some people might find my observations offensive.


----------



## LiquidLight (Oct 14, 2011)

Haarg said:


> I've lurked on this website for some years, and I notice a "Hive Mind" that develops among the type-specific boards. A usage of "we" - "we do this, but we don't do that." There seems to be a _decrease_ in individual personality and growth in order to fit the type one believes, and an _increase_​ in the desirability to now live life as true to the label as one can. A more disturbing trend, I see, is diagnosing real world persons as XXXX. Family members, friends, partners. And altering the relationship you have with these people based on your presumed types and how XXXX traditionally, symptomatically reacts to XXXX. Or in fact doubting your own ability to interact with said persons and instead asking for advice based on this person's MBTI score. I find this entire community fascinating, however! And I sense a very deep loneliness in it, a longing to belong.
> 
> Some people might find my observations offensive.


A lot of those people are mistyped too. Or just going along with a description they identify with.


----------



## Acerbusvenator (Apr 12, 2011)

Haarg said:


> I've lurked on this website for some years, and I notice a "Hive Mind" that develops among the type-specific boards. A usage of "we" - "we do this, but we don't do that." There seems to be a _decrease_ in individual personality and growth in order to fit the type one believes, and an _increase_​ in the desirability to now live life as true to the label as one can. A more disturbing trend, I see, is diagnosing real world persons as XXXX. Family members, friends, partners. And altering the relationship you have with these people based on your presumed types and how XXXX traditionally, symptomatically reacts to XXXX. Or in fact doubting your own ability to interact with said persons and instead asking for advice based on this person's MBTI score. I find this entire community fascinating, however! And I sense a very deep loneliness in it, a longing to belong.
> 
> Some people might find my observations offensive.


Meh, it's only as strong as you make it.

Think patriotism/nationalism, just because you feel that you belong in a country doesn't make you a patriot or a nationalist. Yet you identify as being part of that country.
Think gender, just because I am a guy doesn't mean that I follow a strict rule of how guys are supposed to be, yet I am one.

Just like that then belonging to an MBTI type can define you (like a nationalist is defined by their country) or it can simply be a part of you, but nothing that completely defines you.

I find MBTI to be a great tool because I don't let it define me, yet it helps me being aware of some of my weaknesses and strengths.

Like @LiquidLight said as well, many of the people who make the weird threads are mistyped. I'd say most people make stereotypes around themselves so they can make themselves feel more comfortable with their own lies. "Believing their own lies" in a way since if many people agree with what they say then they can't be mistyped (which is something they fear and subconsciously believe might be true).


----------



## gertrudeslime (Feb 26, 2013)

Acerbusvenator said:


> Meh, it's only as strong as you make it.
> 
> Think patriotism/nationalism, just because you feel that you belong in a country doesn't make you a patriot or a nationalist. Yet you identify as being part of that country.
> Think gender, just because I am a guy doesn't mean that I follow a strict rule of how guys are supposed to be, yet I am one.
> ...


Oh, yeah, I agree with both you and LiquidLight. I did not mean to speak for the entire board. In fact, I believe the 'mis-typed' people are the ones who make a reference to their types in nearly every post they make, who quote anyone who they identify with and say "THAT IS ME! That is exactly me." The stickied threads encourage this, though. "What do XXXX do most often? Post how you know you're XXXX" and other games. I guess it is a way of self-identification, comforting. Perhaps this is something a person begins to grow out of, because I notice the most curious and idiosyncratic posters are those with high post counts.

I am a person interested in the behavior of others, something I enjoy observing on and offline. So I lurk much and watch people interacting. I don't think I will ever 'type' myself, and if I did I would try and understand this complex system first.


----------



## JungyesMBTIno (Jul 22, 2011)

Yea, the whole "What does so-and-so type like" stuff makes me want to commit violence on my computer screen - ugghh - that's NOT type until the functions become the conceptual backdrop for the likes/dislikes in question (I know that sounds mystical, but it's really what Jung had in mind about identifying functions accurately). I know some people of my type who might as well BE my shadow, that's how much I don't identify with them - then I know others who might as well be my friend as if we've always been friends - there is no need to dissect type into personal trends like this, because "you'll never know..." (as that song lyric goes that I just got stuck in my head).


----------

