Advertisement
personalitycafe.com/intj-for...omen.html
What do you guys think?
There are more great information about intjs located here...
personalitycafe.com/intj-for...ientists/
What do you guys think?
There are more great information about intjs located here...
personalitycafe.com/intj-for...ientists/
Advertisement
Advertisement
-
Re: Rarity of INTJ women
Tue, August 25, 2009 - 10:01 PMINTJ women out there... please post something here. It is said that only 0.8% of women are INTJ - by far the most rare of any among 16 types. -
-
Re: Rarity of INTJ women
Tue, August 25, 2009 - 11:12 PMHmm not sure what to post? This is my first post! yay! :-D -
-
Re: Rarity of INTJ women
Tue, August 25, 2009 - 11:23 PMoh snap, i didn't even see the original post up there... never mind... i'm a noob.
-
-
-
Re: Rarity of INTJ women
Wed, August 26, 2009 - 3:34 PMA lot of INTJ people tend to gather @ INTJForum, and I've not seen a shortage of INTJ women there.
-
Re: Rarity of INTJ women
Sun, September 27, 2009 - 3:33 PM"Post Something" is vague. As such I shall make a random assessment.
Personally, I think there are inherent types and those forged by will in society. I would assume INTJ females are inherently rare in comparison with other types. I think sensory types are least rare simply on the basis of supply and demand within our American society. It takes more action upholders to push the machine and less to create and analyze the system.
It is far easier to test as intuitive than to actually be an intuitive. Until this sort of psychology has merit in scientific fact, the assumed ratio of type and ability to determine another's type is up for grand debate. As it stands only one's self can truly assess their own type and only under a significant understanding of the process.
As our society changes, I could see more women believing they are INTJ, INTP and even INFJ after establishing careers and societal roles stereotyped as befitting these types. It would be more likely to notice ENTJ and ENTP out of the NT groups, however. It's important to remember to compare what you will to do in circumstance separately from who you are
and have been in your life. If you cannot separate this notion then most likely are not an INTJ.
It's far more complicated than some bebo quiz or a search for self on quizzilla some rainy day. Intuitive types are rare despite our social increase consciously seeking knowledge for all above the grind. Female NT may abound as frequently as males, but any true NT woman will attest to the struggle on how this plays out in their social life and pursuits. I've not personally met another NT woman who has not tried to mask some aspect of what comes with a rational personality at some point in their life. This alone throws the ratio for accurate testing into a dubious range.
-
-
Is rationality underrated in women?
Tue, November 3, 2009 - 1:12 AMI have read your post with interest. Why do women try to mask their rational personallity, do you think? Is rationality underrated in women?
Most of the people I know, men and women, are rational people. Thinking, analyzing situations, reacing a conclusion - all come naturally to them. They don't try to mask it or deform it. They like it.
However, most of my friends are finding it difficultto act upon their decisions. It is the translating thoughts into actions" part that get them stuck, and then the rationalizing begin: I can not do it because it goes against my character, I shouldn't do it because nobody else does, I can not do it because it is not the right timing - what ever they can think of. Being rational, they recognize, sometimes, that they are avoiding their decisions because they are afraid, but that does not help to motivate actions...
I wonder if not-rational people have the same problems.
-
-
Re: Rarity of INTJ women
Sun, October 25, 2009 - 2:08 PMI would like too see more research done on the testing and its accuracy. As for the shortage , if there is a shortage is it nurture or is it nature? -
-
Re: Rarity of INTJ women
Sun, October 25, 2009 - 3:11 PMThe official MBTI has been tested repeatedly since its inception in 1942 -- that's almost 70 years of ongoing testing.
More information is available on the publisher's official website at www.cpp.com/Products/mbti/mbti_info.aspx
According to its own user manual, the MBTI (classified as a Level B psychological instrument) is at best 70% accurate. That means there is a strong likelihood one of the four letters received will be wrong.
Since such things are obviously unpredictable, it could mean that all four letters came out right -- OR even that all four letters came out *wrong*. (I've seen it enough times.) To wit, Isabel Briggs-Myers (who created the instrument) said, "No pen-and-paper test can tell you who you are."
The free quizzes and knock-offs widely available on the internet have NO reliability studies -- they are simply an attempt to mimic the gold standard, and the fine print will assure you that they should not be counted on. They typically promote misleading information, such as implying the numerical scores are significant, and claiming they represent "strength" of a process (which is unmeasurable).
Furthermore, any statistics about type in the population are completely hypothetical. The only statistics are based on MBTI results (which are gotten through various questionable means and remain unverified), and then assumed to be accurate for the entire population of the world -- a ludicrous assumption indeed.
When you compound these assumptions with the fact that MBTI results are at best 70% accurate, you have a pretty flimsy proposition all around.
Additional information is available on the website www.INTJ.org
The more important conversation to have is not about nitpicking the assessment and its flaws, but delving into and fully grasping the model of psychological types, upon which the MBTI is based. Isabel Myers wrote, "The purpose of the MBTI is to make the theory of psychological types by C.G. Jung practical and useful."
Jungian Joe Henderson, who studied firsthand with C.G. Jung himself, said, "Like all superior creations of the human mind it [type] is more nearly perfect than its user, yet its only real function lies in its use. Such application requires a conscious awareness which is extremely hard to maintain until through practice it may become in a way habitual.”
In other words, it is misguided to question the validity of the MBTI instrument, and infinitely more satisfying to master the theory of psychological types.
Naturally, that's a much harder subject to master -- AND that's what makes it so satisfying.
I hope this helps.
-Vicky Jo :-) -
-
Re: Rarity of INTJ women
Fri, November 6, 2009 - 1:02 PMHello Vicky, please do not think I am antagonizing but I must ask
What would be the purpose of mastering the theory of psychological types if that which we use to measure is inaccurate, how would we find a way to make the typing practical and useful if it can barely be measured accurately? or are you saying when we understand the typing better, better measuring devices or test will be made, that will make it more accurate and applicable?
-
-
Re: Rarity of INTJ women
Mon, November 9, 2009 - 12:30 PMLilly,
I am chuckling at what I consider to be INTJ "idealism." :-)
A little anecdote: when my INTJ husband was in grade school, the teacher gave the students a math exercise: to approximate the volume of the classroom. So my husband eyeballed the length of the room, did some calculations, and eventually gave his "approximation" figure to the precision of three decimal figures. The teacher laughed himself silly, which upset and offended my husband. Finally the teacher explained what "approximate" meant -- you can't start with a "guess" number and then trust it to the level of three decimal places. It's a flawed premise to begin with! My husband never forgot the humiliation of that experience, AND he learned the lesson. "Approximate" is not "precision."
And when it comes to "measuring" anyone's psychology, it simply cannot be done.
For instance, you have a preference for Thinking and I have a preference for Feeling. How could we ever *measure* how logical each of us is? Are you 87.4% logical on some kind of imaginary scale, whereas I am only 49.7% logical? After all, how does one define "logical" anyway? (My extraverted Feeling is *quite* logical, by the way. :-D)
When Jung was told of Isabel Briggs-Myers' assessment, he declined to complete it, but encouraged her, saying it would probably contribute a lot to the field of Psychological Types. Sadly, I have a hunch that he would not be so inclined to think so now were he to see the disastrous applications and interpretations of the MBTI that have occurred.
The MBTI does not "measure" -- it SORTS. Big difference. It sorts people into "buckets." Those "buckets" are the eight cognitive processes, which are 8 forms of consciousness we ENGAGE IN.
Like my husband's boyhood experience with approximations, the MBTI does a similar thing: based on a series of questions, it *approximates* what someone's psychological type may be.
Yet, the formula it works with is about as flawed as the thumbnail guess my husband came up with for the length of the room. It may get very close, or it may be waaaay off. Either way, I wouldn't trust it enough to hire a carpenter to build something to those measurement specifications!
The area of psychology is one of constantly shifting sands. I believe (and I am confident that Jung would agree with me) that it is an inappropriate field for which one should attempt to apply "measurement." As that old saying goes, "there is no there there." How can we possibly "measure" consciousness?
Event writing that, I KNOW perfectly well that such a notion flies in the face of INTJ idealism. EVERYTHING should be measurable -- if it can't be measured, it's only because someone hasn't yet figured out a way to do it yet! :-)
I hope this satisfies your question, Lilly. Please let me know how it lands. -
-
Re: Rarity of INTJ women
Mon, November 9, 2009 - 12:31 PMApologies for how rough my message is -- I'm flying through, probably too quickly today. :-(
-Vicky Jo :-) -
-
Re: Rarity of INTJ women
Tue, November 10, 2009 - 7:41 PMNo problem. I enjoy your illustrations.
-
-
Re: Rarity of INTJ women
Tue, November 10, 2009 - 7:40 PMI think I get the gist of what you are saying.
Not used to measure but to sort
criterion used is abstract
May or may not be accurate
am I close? -
-
Re: Rarity of INTJ women
Tue, November 10, 2009 - 11:03 PMGreat, Lilly -- sounds like you've got it. There's no way to measure psychology.
(Be very wary of anything that indicates it can!)
-Vicky Jo :-)
-
-
-
-
-
-
Re: Rarity of INTJ women
Thu, November 5, 2009 - 3:11 PMa friend had a book and i took the test, resulted as INTJ or 'mastermind'. i won't argue that.
my husband resulted ENFP or 'champion'. the two are supposed to be a perfect match, i would agree we work very well together. i am very quiet, he is loud. i prefer to be alone, he is constantly making plans with friends and encouraging me from my shell.
when we hear about a new plan or idea, i like to know everything about it before i say yes. i have always happened to notice when something will go wrong, and then been too shy to prevent it. i am trying to overcome my hesitation to speak up more, since most of the time people take me seriously. even my worst plans end up a hit.
i'm not 100% sure that i am an INTJ, since i have trouble with timing and responsibility. i like and need schedules, but don't implement them. i love making lists. at work i cannot multitask, i'll just end up running in circles. if i can focus on one thing, i can do it very well. i have lost a few jobs for being too detailed (slow) and not doing more than i was asked to (answering phones and talking to customers when all i want to do is focus on production).
i am unemployed in a small town. my natural inclinations work against me. i do not want to be a receptionist or a nurse or housekeeper. i don't want to work with the public. my dream job is to make jewellery or upcycled clothing and accessories, but i am better at reproducing than originating designs, and don't know where to start.
i am trying to find a job without lying about my abilities or compromising my integrity.
