Big 5 + MBTI

Hey hey

I checked the yourmoral link and its quite OK, and the usual issue when highend stuff like this is for free. There is a cut down in sophisticatednesd of the test.

Which is great to craft curiosity for people to go to find deeper tests with the full questionnaire.

Yea, in this context, they give you the full study because its taken directly from the scientific paper tools themselves - rather than randomly placing it on the internet. I'd imagine Heterodox Academy asked for to list the questionnaires free for people in the raw. I'm glad you liked them - good luck.

The Schwartz one is fascinating too. Me of course, very high in self direction and hedonism and such... total deviant who just does whatever they want, lmao. was not surprised at all.

😜😁😁😜

I do care, but maybe only cause I think the big 5 are relevant as the understanding of such will help to get out of the who is right (e. G. Liberal vs conservative) and to learn and understand that having an opposite isn't bad, but needed to craft balance and equality (not equidity).

I agree with the liberal vs conservative argument as well. After realising all of it - led me to knowing I was a libertarian. I never knew the word existed, and that I had been too heavily listening to the liberal side (as is common in youth) and I am meant to be less caring about either of it. I care more about over compensation of government influence. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tT89wp56h8A great video on it. In this video I laughed hard when the girl on stage laughed hard too - spontaneously. Really defining "feeling accepted" moment for me, lol. Sent it to my mum I think to make her see "hey look I have people" lmao.

Looking into authoritarian politics based on the big 5 and MBTI would be interesting too - as is the opposite dimension of libertarianism.

I would imagine a lot of ENTPs are actually libertarians. But the political philosophy is more common in some countries over others. An ENTP going down this road suddenly realises that if we did have all the power - and we ran the world as an ENTP world, it would be too hard for the average person because in the opposite, some people crave to be told what to do and be restricted. I have learnt to appreciate rules - when talking to young people similar to me I ask, "what would you do without roads or public transport running on time, or having time exist at all, etc". These are conservative values, and are important. Rules are important, I think for the libertarian/ENTP growing up, its learning what rules are meant to be respected (as low in politeness means you don't follow societal standards - we invent things outside of the norm, meaning we have to be outside of the norm) - but we cant take people "too far". I always though as a kid that everyone could lead themselves - i could teach every follower I met to be a leader of themselves. As I've gotten older, met many many more people, learnt more, I've realised some people need to follow because it draws "too much power" from their internal ecosystem lead themselves. They can lead sometimes, but for me to lead it takes 0 energy, I naturally do it. To push someone to do something opposite to them, it takes fuel, and if you drain people of their energy - you make them more prone to disease, to neuroticism tendencies, etc. It is unwise. I didn't know that when younger. It was an interesting understanding.

Balance is necessary for all things to function yes.

Nobody in this context, refers to the collective. I agree that its important, but arguably Big 5 is "more" important than MBTI even though they are somewhat identical. As MBTI is using Jung's theories, which have likely influenced, but been crafted into the more well developed Big 5 over time slotting in with other famous psychologists views. Looking through the history of the big 5 there is lots of influence and still discussion today as to whether the fact that they "run together" means that there is only 2 rather than 5. I just did a bunch of research on the Dark Triad and they were discussing it there. http://scottbarrykaufman.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/jonason-et-al-2013.pdf

So as an example, T types are more likely to score higher on the Dark Triad, due to low agreeableness - which is what makes them T types. Which is why T types, according to Myers Briggs corp, that T types tend to be more dominant in Men, and F in women, because it is testing agreeableness - it has a similar percentage base for the gender dispersion in Agreeableness in the Big 5.

Ni in my opinion is correlated to high consciousness + high openness to experience = someone who constricts their openness. Which is why people with high Ni are more rare in the population, because these are traits that usually run opposite somewhat to each other. As orderliness (in the big 10, one of the two branches of consciousness) restricts creativity (openness to experience) - so most people's brains either become creative OR orderly, its hard to manage both. So something like INFJ/INTJ etc, their brains are a much more complex place because from what I can make out - their grinding against themselves. Whereas say ENTP/ENFP, has less orderliness by default, so its just wild creativity - but can be "too" creative, and get them into trouble because there is no restriction and they have to learn it over time (inferior Si - to develop that sense of low order) - but Ni vs Ne, means the restriction is build in - other types have to "learn" to develop the traits they were not as developed with at birth. The big 5 doesnt "change" though. Your personality is inbuilt at birth generally - from all the studies ive read - it implies its unchangeable in a general sense. Similar to IQ, you can argue you can get 1 or 2 points by doing a very small group of things, ie, having enough food when growing up so your brain properly develops, etc. But in general, these things are all inbuilt from birth as is genetic.

Well put, both Comments. I am one of those strange brain constitutions where creativity meets orderliness and industriousness. It's a tough battle inside of me on many situation.

The advantage is to be able to understand the meaningful conservative as much as the meaningful liberal.
Meaningful in this context is to discern the hardline/radicalisms from those two aspects to th place there they actually play well with each other and balance = add to the whole in a functional and progressive way.

And I agree with you, It is inbuilt by genetics and part of life is to figure out what that inbuilt part is, or to say to respond to the big question: who am I? And what is my purpose and finding that peace inside of your self as you discover and ad similate (embrace) those aspects fully and be them.
And... It is possible as well to train those other aspects of the of the big 5 which are not as strong, I couldn't say absent as those parts are in us as well just not as prominent as those who are 'defining' us. We never will be as strong in those trained aspects as those who are genetically predispositioned with it, but again it helps to play and live a more vibrant life when are able to play all 5 traits according to the need of any giving situation. Well aware if a 'pro in one of those 5' is present to give the stage to that one and be a useful bystander to that person.

That's where individualism starts to pay out for the whole and integrates well into societies ans starts to craft more solutions than problems.

(thank you Sireah, for this inviting and interesting sharing of thoughts)

Correct yea. I agree. As someone who grew up saying she was a "tomboy", its fascinating for me after doing the big 5 to be able to explain exactly "why" I am a tomboy. Because my neuroticism levels (high volatility), my brain is very male, to the point where my brain is more male than most men.

Which I always knew growing up instinctively. Doesn't mean I am "male", it means I have a masculine brain. I can act feminine, but I think like a man does, more than how a traditional woman does. Which all ENTP (and i believe also INTJ/ENTJ/INTP,etc) women would agree with - as we all score low or very low in agreeableness (i think ENTJ is low to mid, but you get me). Disagreeableness being a more male trait. Also all the extroverted females in MBTI, as you are more assertive (masculine) than receptive (feminine).

I believe MBTI tests correlate more heavily to orderliness (than industriousness) in consciousness, and assertiveness (rather than enthusiasm) in extroversion, I am unsure whether politeness or compassion in agreeableness (as I am average in compassion and low in politeness - so its hard for me to distinguish internally between the two mentally as I am not highly ranked in either). I believe this is because these are easier to test for than their latter examples. Imagine asking "how hard do you work" vs "do you like things ordered", obviously the latter is easier for a tester to ask a range of questions about.

I say this partly because of the test results I've seen from multiple people. Correlating a test result with someone with low assertiveness, and high enthusiasm - results in an MBTI rest giving them an introverted overall type - whereas say for me, I am low in enthusiasm but high in assertiveness (extremely high 99th percentile) and it gives me an extroverted overall type. I think this is because MBTI doesnt care as much about how "happy" you feel, that likely doesn't correlate to anything in Jung's types properly I don't believe, but the test care more about how much you assert onto the world - but both are the two wings of extroversion. An introvert correlates to someone who has less positive emotions, and asserts themselves less on the world. Which most introverts would likely agree with, but not all, the latter moreso than the former in terms of MBTI I think. But I have no sourcing for this, it is my opinion and just speculation. But I have some basis for the founding, but some of that is gut feeling. So take it with a grain of salt.

Interesting, as I am more on the feminine side while being a straight man. But I do care about more about people than things, as well in my professions, As I do People work.

Still I am very fond of technic of many different kind and I like to use and understand things, but more as a hobby as a premier passion and a purpose building aspect of my life.

So is as well caretaking for my son, 50 %alternate care the way for me to go, and only be the 50% provider for my family.

And I was quite a way to integrate that in the world we are currently living where is a lot of superficial and confusion on how gender roles work and can be used for the best of the individual first and from there, as a healthy individual for the whole.

I agree that gender roles should be normative, and not individualistic. Ie, if you deny men have higher testosterone than women and should be doing something at school like boxing in a safe environment to get out the added aggression during peak testosterone years to help balance their mentality - then you are going to have a problem.

But i also do not think all men should be "forced" into boxing just because of the flatline average. As testosterone is different in each individual.

But neither do I think that men should not be given the option because, its equaled out for both genders and because 50% of people (women) don't arguably need boxing. Then nobody is offered boxing as a semi-requirement.

It is complicated. As to what the normative roles should be for. The idea that men do not "need" to be masculinised, is causing women to be partnerless because biologically they are pushed towards men like this, especially when menstrating. As women are more sexually selective then men. It is horrible to raise men throughout their childhood saying, "be yourself", to then get to adulthood and realise that women don't want men to be themselves, they want men to be default masculine. Lots of MBTI memes about it, literally read one just before, https://www.reddit.com/r/INFJmemes/comments/102fmp8/what_every_infj_male_discovers_in_their_20s/ I stalk the INFJ memes page sometimes... same with INTJ... both post quite frequently and are cute.

Also I have this which is a channel for all the MBTI meme community posts https://www.reddit.com/user/sirenexpat/m/woof/ ... anyway.

The reason I care about this is also because I am a masculine female and being told that me feminising myself isn't important directly goes against the fact that I like seducing men. I need to know how to be myself, and also to heavily feminise myself to obtain what I want. You need to know the normative, and the individualisation - to adapt to other individuals, but also to know the starting point (the normal for society - to be able to meet the normative requirements). Society is fascinating.

I am going to fail at least 65% more if I don't know the normative model. If I don't know men are attractive to the waist-to-hip ratio, if I don't know men don't like being talked down to, if I don't know what makes them feel masculine affects how feminine I look to them - and how strong a man feels, correlates to how attractive I may be to them, because it makes them feel more protective over me... etc.

Yes, in learning about conservative values as you discuss too, looking at both sides, I realised the value of gender roles. I dont fit them, but for the 80% of people it does fit pretty well - it would be absolutely horrible for me to try and remove the guidelines for what most people need. When I realised this, I felt like a hitler. Like I didn't realise how horrible I had been for literally trying to "skin society alive" of its values just so "i could fit" when all I want to do is sit outside the box anyway. Gave me such a severe mental thump about narcissism, and it frightens me now when I see it in people. I'd imagine it just comes with age a bit too. You realise where you do fit, and appreciate that there is places for everyone.

Yea I'd imagine you score higher on Empathising than Systemising. Do you know of yourmorals.org? Jonathan Haidt's site? Has some great scholarly studies on there you can do yourself for free - they collect the results for their studies sometimes (but thats kinda cool to think of being included in - that taking the test is scientifically useful to the community) - but the tests are quite enjoyable. Like I learnt the differences between proportionality and equality. I score much higher on proportionality, because they are similar but go about it in different ways on how to "give people what they deserve". Proportionality = if you work hard, you get rewarded in equal to the effort you put in. Equality = giving people support to get up to the same level, even if they sit on the couch. I think its fascinating. I didn't know there was another word for another form of compassion. I respect people that word hard, and feel weird getting more than I think I deserve.

https://yourmorals.org/ after you sign up and do the first test - it provides you with about 40 other tests you can do for free. It's fascinating. If you do - tell me what you get for systemising and empathising in the later tests (you will know it in the list when you see it) - to see whether you have higher empathising than systemising. Ie, more feminine. The big 5 as well and MBTI would be what your quoting from yea. But I am curious :).

Thanks for the nice chat mate :).