So i found this shit. What ya think??
https://www.objectivepersonality.com/
So i found this shit. What ya think??
https://www.objectivepersonality.com/
Very interesting upon first glance, @idontgiveaf. It deserves a closer look.
Those prices are pretty high. They could be bullshitting. Finding similar people pics online isn't hard. They could just be making random assertions so they can get the one-time buyers in and make some quick cash. Could be a scam.
Problems: "This experiment is also something even "Joe-idiot" could see that the chances of two people in separate rooms randomly guessing the exact same personality types so many times in a row was astronomically low. "
"The more people we objectively type and log in our docs, the more patterns start to emerge."
These people are learning the same system for typing, so it's no wonder that their observations agree.
"In order to insure diligence to the scientific method we require anyone claiming to have consistent objective results in typing personality to pass the OPT with a score of 90/100 or higher. "
Their test is just a test of agreement: you'd make a good typist if your typing agrees with ours.
Implicit assertions:Higher Standard
To become a personality Operator and pass the OPT-100 takes dying to that self-serving, subjective bullshit that is inside all of us. This is 99% of your training and takes 2 years of daily pain to overcome your natural reflexes to jump to biases and projecting, to protect the ego. To be one of the only people in the world to objectively track personality at 90% or higher requires an elite level of work ethic and pain tolerance. The OPT-Tests are our dividing ground between subjective and objective.
1) If you are with us, you are special("elite") and "objective."
2) You're going to work like a dog
3) If your typings don't agree with ours, you're simply selfish and egotistical.
4) Benefiting our cause is the less selfish thing to do, because we say so. You don't want to be "selfish" do you? (Appeals to a sense of altruism people have.)
Cult warning.
Last edited by Aramas; 05-03-2018 at 02:07 PM.
It may be a cult. Lol. I'm not pointing fingers.
I liked it because they seem to have done research which shows a correlation between something (personality types?) and visual appearance. I didn't see anything about interpersonal relationships, but neither MBTI nor Kiersey have a theory for that and they still have some (some) useful information. That potential for useful information why I want to read more about this.
Seem to have is the operative phrase. Like I said, they could have just looked up some people online that looked similar, photoshopped the images into a strip, and pasted them onto the page to make it look as if there'd been some behind-the-scenes work. They could be simply deceiving themselves by learning the same typing methods and then applying them in some kind of shared delusion.
The most interesting fact is that, even though they are only two people, they are charging a crapton more than anyone else in the typology community. Need I note that people are more likely to judge a product as quality just because the pricetag is higher?
Bullshit-O-Meter.jpg
But look at this from the broader perspective: if you were to pay these people $129 or $199, and they handed you a type on a silver platter, you would still not be confident that their typing of you was correct, because you wouldn't understand how typology works well enough to be certain that the typing you were given was correct. Just read the material, talk with others, and learn typology for yourself. All the info is out there for free. You don't need to pay people money to give you what you can find anywhere else without charge.
Last edited by Aramas; 05-03-2018 at 02:11 PM.
another baseless bs with subtypes
Well, it seems like what they're trying to do is a kind of a double-blind test.
It says that they have the 60 minutes interviews of their clients independently and separately analyzed by two third party Operators.
Then they have the results checked by another third party.
And the result seems to be that people of the same types tend to look similar. w0w.
I think what they might be doing is that they're simply outsourcing the work to some Indian operators, and they "type" people based on what they look like.
This is their "result":
Yeah, because we all know that if they all wear glasses, if they all have blonde hair and blue eyes, if they all have a beard, then they all must be similar.
Stupidity at finest. It probably is a scam preying on the gullible who are easily impressed by simple things and simple repeating patterns. Or maybe it's not a scam, and they're completely sincere but not too bright.
Last edited by Singu; 05-03-2018 at 05:46 PM.
This is the dumbest shit I've ever seen.
Well I'm broke anyway so it looks like I won't be getting results from them regardless.
Is this some sort of scam parody by Singu fan?
Anyways, they only take $129. This is relatively cheap compared to Sol's performance price tag the difference here is that money goes to opposite directions and analysis is free. So, you know to whom to turn to.
MOTTO: NEVER TRUST IN REALITY
Winning is for losers
Sincerely yours,
idiosyncratic type
Life is a joke but do you have a life?
Joinif you dare https://matrix.to/#/#The16Types:matrix.org
They don't know what they're talking about. The only way is to learn Socionics and then you can see for yourself that it is objective. You have to do the work yourself, don't trust anyone
The decisive thing is not the reality of the object, but the reality of the subjective factor, i.e. the primordial images, which in their totality represent a psychic mirror-world. It is a mirror, however, with the peculiar capacity of representing the present contents of consciousness not in their known and customary form but in a certain sense sub specie aeternitatis, somewhat as a million-year old consciousness might see them.
(Jung on Si)
MOTTO: NEVER TRUST IN REALITY
Winning is for losers
Sincerely yours,
idiosyncratic type
Life is a joke but do you have a life?
Joinif you dare https://matrix.to/#/#The16Types:matrix.org
The decisive thing is not the reality of the object, but the reality of the subjective factor, i.e. the primordial images, which in their totality represent a psychic mirror-world. It is a mirror, however, with the peculiar capacity of representing the present contents of consciousness not in their known and customary form but in a certain sense sub specie aeternitatis, somewhat as a million-year old consciousness might see them.
(Jung on Si)
The website is so illogical and inconsistent that it's hard to believe that they have anything valuable.
I would never believe they would accurately type people to be one of 512 types and that two people can conclude the same in 9 out of 10 people.
By judging quality of website content I can only guess that their system is equally worthless.
These guys are just youtubers trying to monetize on their videos about MBTI.
Last edited by falsehope; 05-15-2018 at 08:43 PM.
Maybe that Dave guy is weird LIE? Not sure. He surely spits out huge amounts of subjective images.
MOTTO: NEVER TRUST IN REALITY
Winning is for losers
Sincerely yours,
idiosyncratic type
Life is a joke but do you have a life?
Joinif you dare https://matrix.to/#/#The16Types:matrix.org
Total BS. Surprisingly I think there’s a fair number of people who believe in it and are paying to learn how to type “objectively” through their classes, who are now regurgitating their nonsense wherever they go, and sounding like crazy people lol. WTF is this stupidity? Animals? Yeah man, I’m a blaster! Sounds so fkng dumb.
Last edited by Blue; 01-14-2019 at 06:25 AM.
Seems like a money-making scheme.
Genuine researchers are usually more interested in sharing their ideas and findings publicly. For example Gulenko is willing to discuss the finer points of his research with whomever, not only those who pay "subscriptions." The same thing is true for researchers in most fields.
I would stay away from these guys or at the very least avoid sending them any money.
Haha I stopped taking it seriously when I found it was based on 512 types. Sure, if you have 512 types you are bound to be right sometimes, a broken clock is right twice a day.
It is like they made a personality system so convoluted and overly complicated, that to critique it would be such an ardous task. How they managed to royally fuck up the 8 Jungian functions with this abomination is mind boggling.
“We cannot change the cards we are dealt, just how we play the hand.” Randy Pausch
Ne-IEE
6w7 sp/sx
6w7-9w1-4w5
oh, I remember his youtube channel, didn't know he had a class
"512 types" may sound intimidating or too much maybe at first glance, but what he is saying is probably not that new necessarily. I saw these similar 'subtypes' under cognitive types as well. So for instance, you could have and ESTJ (mbti) Te and Si strongest or you could also have one with Ne quite strong...etc. That is a very brief gist of what I remember from his channel.
It is like modular enneagram gone wild. Sure you may get the result by adding in components. In the end it fails to tell the underlying stuff. By adding enough components A=B=C....=D.
MOTTO: NEVER TRUST IN REALITY
Winning is for losers
Sincerely yours,
idiosyncratic type
Life is a joke but do you have a life?
Joinif you dare https://matrix.to/#/#The16Types:matrix.org
Hey guys, I decided to make a new typing system. It has a 99.9999999% success rate with over 7 billion types, it's guaranteed not to fail and it's tailor suited to your own personality. PM me for details, I charge $100 for an analysis preview, and $1,000 for a complete report. On top of that, I'll refund you the $100 analysis preview if you purchase for the complete report. Previews and reports are selling out fast so contact me ASAP if you want to reserve one before it's too late!
“We cannot change the cards we are dealt, just how we play the hand.” Randy Pausch
Ne-IEE
6w7 sp/sx
6w7-9w1-4w5
“My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.” —C.G. Jung
If there are systematic regularities then this is not a problem as it would be easy to generate profiles with help of a computer.
Since we are talking about IEE it won't happen.
Sometimes I wonder how easy it would be to automate when many professionals write their reports.
Robots.
MOTTO: NEVER TRUST IN REALITY
Winning is for losers
Sincerely yours,
idiosyncratic type
Life is a joke but do you have a life?
Joinif you dare https://matrix.to/#/#The16Types:matrix.org
The underlying reality is that types(socionics, mbti, enneagram, etc) aren't everything, only part. Between it all are the shades of gray that have little purpose except to demonstrate that we our more random and unpredictable than what can be explained through types. It is a layer of flesk that masks what many would consider the unappealing aspects. There are more than 16 types, but too much more becomes tedious for our minds to comfortably handle. The more numerous just approaches individuality and no longer becomes relevant for discussion.
The difference is Socionics and Enneagram are different typology systems that were created separately and there is a lot of overlap between them. You can also choose to ignore subtype systems from both of them. Like for instance, I ignore sub wings from the Enneagram and I take DCNH from Socionics with a grain of salt.
I get your point that having more types is just breaking down the theory further, but I personally find it redundant past a certain point. This is why I don't take Objective Personality seriously because breaking down Jung's 8 functions into 512 types is redundancy even if there is some validity in it. They are more likely to make an error in several of the types like you mentioned too.
“We cannot change the cards we are dealt, just how we play the hand.” Randy Pausch
Ne-IEE
6w7 sp/sx
6w7-9w1-4w5
"Personality theories" (and therefore, Jungian typology) are about looking at the past observed data of people, and organizing it in a statistical way.
This as a rule can say nothing about what kind of a person the person is going to be in the future, or how the person is going to act in different situations, which is arguably the most important point. In short, it falls short of being able to predict their behavior. I don't necessarily want to say that predicting things is the only point, but at what chances do you have of getting something right, if you can't even predict things? In fact, how do you conduct "experiments" and "tests" without predictions?
It also can't say anything about the person when that person is not being observed, which must include a whole chunk of the total personality in the term of the unobserved and hidden from public view.
For being a "personality theory", it doesn't actually have much ability in able to say a whole lot about the entirety of the person's personality.