What's your personality type? (MBTI / Enneagram)

I did the MBTI a few times over the last decade to actually test a theory. My results were different 10 years apart, the maker claims your personality types don't really change from your first result, but that's bull plop because that would mean my default personality is someone experiencing domestic abuse. So frankly I find MBTI/horoscopes/houses/bloodtypes/etc offensive.
I'll never share my "star sign" or anything else like that, I'm not gonna do work to give a short hand to people too lazy to get to know me as an individual and think I can be summarised in any way.
It's just another means of creating arbitrary discrimination anyone who says stuff like "oh no, _____ is a libra/capricorn/scorpio/etc we wouldn't get along!" is a horrible person.

Couldn't the same be said for ASD/ADHD/other neurodivergent labels? I know many people for whom MBTI has been beneficial; IMHO, as with all labels/categorisation, we have to be careful how we use them, but they can be helpful and empowering when used in the right way. Of course, we're all too complicated to be completely defined by any sort of label/diagnosis.

They don't follow the same standards (scientific or otherwise) so you can't compare either singularly or as a whole practice, a "personality type" to neurotype.
If other people find junk science useful then good for them, but it won't change the fact that it is used discriminatorily and that I find it offensive.


That sounds oddly aggressive when I read it back (and I have no idea why since I don't have any strong emotion towards you behind the computer screen lol, woops, sorry) so I don't want there to be any misunderstanding: I am just saying there is a reason we get diagnosed with ADHD/ASD?etc and not as an MBTI by the psychiatrists. (Pathologising and ableism issues aside, the physchiatry field is at least held to better scrutiny.) 

abg said:

Of course, we're all too complicated to be completely defined by any sort of label/diagnosis.

I think you just summed it up best with that.

Thank you

No worries. To each their own. We can't all be the same. Oh pls ignore the typos btw I always end up with loads of them and I can't go back and edit my replies to fix all of them too much or else the spam filter -a bizarelly set up beast of the forum- will eat it.
I just notice you are a relatively new member btw, so a belated welcome to the forum too if I've not said it already. 

Fair enough. I think where we differ is that, though I understand the importance of science (and studied Psychology to Masters level), I don't think we should discount anything that's non-scientific; in other words, the absence of science doesn't equally mean a tool/experience is invalid. Science will never be able to explain my faith, or how I feel in green space, or by the water, or when I listen to music (even if "research" shows all of those things are good for us). Anyhow, I digress... Re: your point on discrimination, again the same could be said for neurodivergent labels. Happy to healthily disagree, though, and appreciate your views  

(Btw, I appreciate your follow-up and honesty, haha, I didn't want to come across as a know-it-all, either... I definitely don't! And agreed that science & the scrutiny that come with are really important; despite having found benefit from MBTI personally, and meeting others who have, I do appreciate that scientific backing for is lacking/sketchy, even though it was derived from Carl Jung's work)

Fair enough. I think where we differ is that, though I understand the importance of science (and studied Psychology to Masters level), I don't think we should discount anything that's non-scientific; in other words, the absence of science doesn't equally mean a tool/experience is invalid. Science will never be able to explain my faith, or how I feel in green space, or by the water, or when I listen to music (even if "research" shows all of those things are good for us). Anyhow, I digress... Re: your point on discrimination, again the same could be said for neurodivergent labels. Happy to healthily disagree, though, and appreciate your views  

(Btw, I appreciate your follow-up and honesty, haha, I didn't want to come across as a know-it-all, either... I definitely don't! And agreed that science & the scrutiny that come with are really important; despite having found benefit from MBTI personally, and meeting others who have, I do appreciate that scientific backing for is lacking/sketchy, even though it was derived from Carl Jung's work)

Thank you

No worries. To each their own. We can't all be the same. Oh pls ignore the typos btw I always end up with loads of them and I can't go back and edit my replies to fix all of them too much or else the spam filter -a bizarelly set up beast of the forum- will eat it.
I just notice you are a relatively new member btw, so a belated welcome to the forum too if I've not said it already.