Two things that irritate me about MBTI (which I've just had to do as preliminary for upcoming training):
- False-dichotomy questions like "Do you prefer theories or facts?" NO. They are complementary: theories require facts, theories allow us to discover more facts.
- Being asked the same questions (with very slight variation) over and over again. My inner cynic wonders whether the point here is to make sure the responses are well towards one end or other of the four scales, with very little in between, in order to make it easier to believe that people can be neatly divided up into sixteen basic archetypes.
FWIW, I believe archetypes can be useful tools for thinking - even 'earth, air, fire, water' can help people realise what their options are - but IMHO, classifying people into archetypes often turns into a substitute for actually thinking about issues. "You're a Pisces, so we're made for each other!" and so on. Don't even get me started on 'Mars and Venus'.
Exercise: 20km (? - lost track somewhat over Easter), total 190km/114mi: night 8 from Rivendell.
- False-dichotomy questions like "Do you prefer theories or facts?" NO. They are complementary: theories require facts, theories allow us to discover more facts.
- Being asked the same questions (with very slight variation) over and over again. My inner cynic wonders whether the point here is to make sure the responses are well towards one end or other of the four scales, with very little in between, in order to make it easier to believe that people can be neatly divided up into sixteen basic archetypes.
FWIW, I believe archetypes can be useful tools for thinking - even 'earth, air, fire, water' can help people realise what their options are - but IMHO, classifying people into archetypes often turns into a substitute for actually thinking about issues. "You're a Pisces, so we're made for each other!" and so on. Don't even get me started on 'Mars and Venus'.
Exercise: 20km (? - lost track somewhat over Easter), total 190km/114mi: night 8 from Rivendell.