|
|
|
|
|
|
by enkid
2076 days ago
|
|
|
First, their interpretation of I/E is not the same that the Big5 label it. The Big 5 also don't look at it as binary. I'm also not sure how to interpret your System 1 vs System 2 comment, as thats also not binary. Everyone uses both. Is it supposed to be a preference? Do you have a link describing that? It doesn't make sense to the way the two are described to me either. |
|
|
The MBTI also doesn't look at thing like E and I as binary when it comes to the "type of a person". A single preference is binary under the MBTI, but everyone has multiple preferences. For example, if someone's primary function is "Extroverted Thinking" then their secondary function may be "Introverted Intuition". As the relative strength (degree of preference) may vary continuously, that leads to a continuous grading of "extraversion" when describing a person
As far as I can see, the Big 5 doesn't even attempt to explain what's going on at a sub-person level, which probably does mean that there is little evidence for those parts of the MBTI theory, but it also means there is little evidence against it. In any case, I've seen a lot of people arguing that the MBTI is rubbish because there are degrees of extraversion (and other described properties) in people, and that's a poor reason to dismiss the theory because it predicts exactly that.
> I'm also not sure how to interpret your System 1 vs System 2 comment, as thats also not binary
I suspect there are differences of opinion over this within the academic community, but IIRC https://www.jstor.org/stable/3132137 describes the response to "Wason Selection Tasks" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wason_selection_task) as being remarkably strongly bimodal indicating binary preferences.