/atheism/ - Atheism

Agnostic ENTP mater race.

ENFP, weak atheism.

I've noticed that extraverted feelers are pretty rare on the chans.

intp, practically a strong atheist

I fucking hate these classifications, you literally cannot group people together under a few names like that just like you can't do it with horoscopes. There are billions of people, and I am sure that the millions of people even with the same stupid classification as in OP, are still very different from each other.

I'm a random dude.

>>10095

Haha, yeah mine was just the closest of the possible options. A person's classification can probably also change over time.

>>10095

>with horoscopes

Oh boy here we go.

>There are billions of people

With shared traits that can be grouped with respect to those traits. Notice how we can group these people into the human species separate from other species. Now that is a much more discrete grouping than MBTI but that doesn't make non-discrete groupings useless and uninsightful.

Your problem is that you seem to think this test assumes when someone is defined by a certain category that's all they are, this is your mistake. No one claims that. People who consistently score a certain type vary between like individuals however they have their similarities and that's what this is trying to highlight.

>>10091

>agnostic

>master race

Step up, mah ENTP nigga.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignosticism

>>10091

>Agnostic

So an atheist.

>>10099

Even so, when people stop treating it as a rough model or force employees to take the test so they can caterogize/label them, it can be harmful. I would game the test for the position I wanted too.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/toddessig/2014/09/29/the-mysterious-popularity-of-the-meaningless-myers-briggs-mbti/

ISTP atheist since birth

>>10106

Agreed with what you wrote there 100%, though that article.

>The MBTI is pretty much nonsense, sciencey snake oil. As is well-established by research, it has no more reliability and validity than a good Tarot card reading.

This is why I never take journos seriously, they don't know what they're writing about ever.

http://people.wku.edu/richard.miller/MBTI%20reliability%20validity.pdf

>In general, the MBTI and its scales yielded scores with strong internal consistency and test-retest reliability estimates, although variation was observed.

This is a very early framework and probably is missing many details and has things about it that are flat out wrong to be entirely robust, still to call it like Tarot reading is very disingenuous. But journalism is about clickbait more than anything.

>>10106

>when people stop treating it as a rough model or force employees to take the test so they can caterogize/label them, it can be harmful

Yeah, I hate this bullshit. Personality tests are alright for a laugh but taking them seriously as some kind of aptitude test is fucking stupid.

INTP-T

>>10143

hello brother