tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7185084828405514713.post4442376025912232543..comments2012-10-15T05:13:21.347+03:00Comments on The wet is floor: The Importance of ValidityTommihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10339486280980702262noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7185084828405514713.post-34889309331229137442012-10-15T05:13:21.347+03:002012-10-15T05:13:21.347+03:00Hi Tommi,
Interesting thoughts above. Have you he...Hi Tommi,<br /><br />Interesting thoughts above. Have you heard of Jungian Cognitive Functions? It uses the same MBTI signifiers but I find it much more applicable because it goes further to deconstruct how each cognitive function plays out in "real life". I use "real life" loosely because for me, it's just an understanding into the thought processes of each type. <br /><br />The validity of a theory depends on what practical use it has. If MBTI claims that knowing your personality type can identify the best-suited profession for an individual person, that is a gross generalization and is misleading at worst for someone seeking a career path and basing that on a MBTI test. The issue I have with that is the theory ignores variable such as genetic makeup, personal preferences, goals, values, upbringing, resources etc that are more practical determinators for a career path.<br /><br />Since I'm not an academic, I checked Wiki and it says the theory was invented in 1962 intended to "help women who were entering the industrial workforce for the first time to identify the sort of war-time jobs where they would be "most comfortable and effective". [1] I guess the question becomes, why would we still think it should be applicable in 2012?! <br /><br />I understand your post is not about MBTI and really about the cost vs benefits regarding potentially invalid theories. I hope you don't mind this comment being intrusive.<br /><br />Jacqueline<br /><br />[1]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myers-Briggs_Type_IndicatorJacquelinehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04432983808693175339noreply@blogger.com