Myers-Briggs theory: how deep is my understanding?

[Dmitri Lytov]

Many Americans know MBTI and derivatives (Keirsey test etc.) much better than socionics. Even in this forum, where many people believe that "MBTI is crap", we often judge socionics from the standpoint of what we know about the Myers-Briggs theory.

However, what do we really know about the Myers-Briggs theory? There is a lot of popular books that represent only basics, ABC: descriptions of 4 dichotomies, descriptions of types, some case studies and some practical advices. And... that is all. A lot of more complicated things, such as functional models of types, hypotheses of intertype compatibility, empirical researches etc. are not represented in these books, either because they are considered know-hows or because they seem "too complicated" and thus decrease chances for a book to be sold.

My poll is a proposal to forum participants to evaluate how deeply you know the Myers-Briggs type theory and researches relevant to it.

[Dmitri Lytov]

NB: getting a low score in this poll does not mean something bad; it simply mean that you do not need so many details, that you are intetested more in practical aspects of MBTI than in theoretical details.

Here is my own story.
BEGINNER: 1990 - 1995.
LOW: 1995 - 1999.
MEDIUM: 1999 - until recently, when I happened to read old publications from T.Carskadon's Journal of Psychological Type and L.Berens' Bulletin of Psychological Type (for 1990s). It was much more than I could retrieve from books, in fact, some of their achievements left socionics far behind. However, I am not familiar with newer publications.

...and I am glad that I never knew about JPT before, because with my experience of that time I would not understand it all.

[Transigent]

Edited for gayness.

[snegledmaca]

I have not read the books but from the information of the internet I have concluded that MBTT is a behavioral theory. Simply from the fact that people can easily take on types and type assessment is performed on the basis of behavior. A "If I look, act and behave like a duck then I will be, slash, am a duck" attitude. Tests determine preferences derived from behavior and *not* the other way around. Because of that the theory cannot be use to predict intertype relationships because people of same type only *behave* the same while the cause of such behavior is left unexplained despite the claims of otherwise. (This last argument is from personal experience with people of same MBTI types)
I've proposed a theory about this here.

[Olga]

I do not belong to any cathegory of yours. I did not read anything about MBTI and I heard enough nusty things about it so.. I am quite "happy" to study socionics as it does make sense to me and I see the potential of it.
If I would have more time I would start to read Young.
Everybody? knows that I disagree with intertype realtionships as they are defined at the moment and would like to hear more about the differences within the type(s).

[Creepy-]

Well, I haven't read any books about it but I have gone and looked up extra information on the internet, so I guess I'm medium.

I'm not in the "MBTI is crap" party, just in the "I prefer Socionics, myself" party.

[wym123]

Well, I haven't read any books about it but I have gone and looked up extra information on the internet, so I guess I'm medium.

I'm not in the "MBTI is crap" party, just in the "I prefer Socionics, myself" party.

The internet is a poor substitute for books so choosing Medium is somewhat deceptive (I think Medium entails Books and the internet). If you have only used the internet as the primary resource, it might make more sense to choose Beginner or Low.

[Creepy-]

Well, I haven't read any books about it but I have gone and looked up extra information on the internet, so I guess I'm medium.

I'm not in the "MBTI is crap" party, just in the "I prefer Socionics, myself" party.

The internet is a poor substitute for books so choosing Medium is somewhat deceptive. If you have only used the internet as the primary resource, it might make more sense to choose Beginner or Low.

Do you have any books to recommend? I haven't actually found any.

edit: I have read Jung, though, so it's a start.

[wym123]

Well, I haven't read any books about it but I have gone and looked up extra information on the internet, so I guess I'm medium.

I'm not in the "MBTI is crap" party, just in the "I prefer Socionics, myself" party.

The internet is a poor substitute for books so choosing Medium is somewhat deceptive. If you have only used the internet as the primary resource, it might make more sense to choose Beginner or Low.

Do you have any books to recommend? I haven't actually found any.

LOW: I read popular books and articles on this matter (Keirsey, Tiegers, Kroeger-Thuesen etc.)

[Creepy-]

I meant titles. In the absence of books in the various libraries I have access to, I would rather have somewhere specific to start If I'm going to buy them.

[wym123]

I meant titles. In the absence of books in the various libraries I have access to, I would rather have somewhere specific to start If I'm going to buy them.

Keirsey, Tiegers, Kroeger-Thuesen etc.

[Creepy-]

I meant titles. In the absence of books in the various libraries I have access to, I would rather have somewhere specific to start If I'm going to buy them.

Keirsey, Tiegers, Kroeger-Thuesen etc.

Ok, I understand that I should read "Please Understand Me" before reading "Please Understand Me II", but should I read them before or after reading "Portraits of Temperament" or "The Temperament Discovery System"?

Or is it better to start with Tiegers or Kroeger-Thuesen?

I can probably afford only one book (yuck) so...

[Dmitri Lytov]

It is easy to find a lot of descriptions and extra materials in the Internet, maybe even more than in books, but you need to be curious enough to keep searching.
For example, here:
http://typetango.com/
one can find descriptions of the same types from many authors, including even socionic descriptions.

[wym123]

I meant titles. In the absence of books in the various libraries I have access to, I would rather have somewhere specific to start If I'm going to buy them.

Keirsey, Tiegers, Kroeger-Thuesen etc.

Ok, I understand that I should read "Please Understand Me" before reading "Please Understand Me II", but should I read them before or after reading "Portraits of Temperament" or "The Temperament Discovery System"?

Or is it better to start with Tiegers or Kroeger-Thuesen?

I can probably afford only one book (yuck) so...

Go for this: Journal of Psychological Type

I don't know anything very little about MBTI (I have only used the internet) so I voted "Beginner." However, I was checking out this Journal and it looks very good!

[Creepy-]

I meant titles. In the absence of books in the various libraries I have access to, I would rather have somewhere specific to start If I'm going to buy them.

Keirsey, Tiegers, Kroeger-Thuesen etc.

Ok, I understand that I should read "Please Understand Me" before reading "Please Understand Me II", but should I read them before or after reading "Portraits of Temperament" or "The Temperament Discovery System"?

Or is it better to start with Tiegers or Kroeger-Thuesen?

I can probably afford only one book (yuck) so...

Go for this: Journal of Psychological Type

Thanks!