About

I’m a Swedish atheist and anti-woo debater interested in the human brain, especially its dysfunctions. Modern neuroscience can explain why people believe in gods, souls, ghosts, UFOs, telepathy, and the like. In my eyes religion is closely related to believing that paranormal and supernatural entities/experiences/phenomena are real.

So religion and religious belief systems are yet another kind of so-called woo thinking, which is also known as magical thinking, see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magical_thinking . I call this way of processing information IPS #1. (IPS = Information Processing System).

This more “primitive” or, if you dislike that word, less complex and less elaborated thought paradigm equals the child’s emotional, intuitive, associative, preverbal, non-logical (or at least prelogical) one. Therefore such an adult person becomes gullible, credulous and naive since he or she is processing sensory information by, particularly, using the brain’s immature, “childish” cognitive functions and methods.

BTW, you can also follow me on Twitter if you want to. There I call myself BB News, and my hashtag is @bbnewsab.

90 responses to “About

  1. Thanks for your feedback. The blog circle of mine is getting bigger. And yeah, I sincerely noted your objections(to my themes) and I will try to find a better colour. Nice blog of yours by the way.

  2. Dear bbnewsab, I have been trying to reach you. I’m not really Twitter literate. I wanted to thank you for re blogging my posts. Your comments were very generous! Do you have an e-mail address? Mine is charlesclantonrogers@gmail.com. Obviously, we share interest. Send me an e-mail if you are interested in sharing book recommendations, etc. (I visited the University of Uppsala in 1968). Charles Rogers

    • I have both private and more “official” mail addresses. Try this one: bbnews@gmail.com. But when I write this reply, you and I have since long established contact both via mail and now also carrier pigeons.

      But there may be others out there in the darkness who want to send me a mail or two in order to tell me what they think of my sinful way of blogging. Only God knows…

  3. Thanks for the sub. You should know, I’m a little bias towards Scandinavians. That’s were I should have been born. My best friend is from Viborg, Denmark, but that’s not why I’m bias. I just think Scandinavia rocks.

  4. Argh, where is your “follow blog by email” button?

    • @john zande: Oh, sorry for that.

      Actually, I thought God and His angels would guide those who wanted to follow this godless, blasphemous and impious blog.

      But alas!

      Now I notice that one of God’s angels instead must have hidden the Follow button. *isn’t hard to guess why*

      On second thoughts, this is what I should have expected from that sinister and invidious imaginary friend who seemingly prefer sitting on his throne of gold at the Tiananmen Square a.k.a. the Gate of Heavenly Peace.

      I should have known better – cf. what Annie Lennox tells her “followers”/fans in this fabulous Eurythmics video.

      Heavenly music, isn’t it?

      Amen to that.

  5. @john zande: Who said it would be easy to find that button?

    You see, true God believers, not used to logical thinking, are not supposed to find it.

    So now, by finding the button, you’ve proved to me – and also to yourself – you’re a real God disbeliever. A disrespectful blasphemer. By divine right.

    Welcome on board! Hope you’ll enjoy the trip!

    It’s full board and lodging for all my passengers. And best of all: All is free. Exactly as it is in Heaven (at least I’m told so by some priests I’ve met).

    And furthermore: Never any begging for money or asking for tithes to keep the blog ship sailing. It’s an eternal promise.

    So my offer is definitely a much better deal than that one God, His angels and His priests are used to tempt their followers (passengers) with.

  6. Hey there, thanks a million for following my humble blog 🙂

    • The pleasure is on my side, juliawinnacker. I notice you are interested in art, literature and other “beaux arts”. And that you’re an author yourself..

      That sounds terrific. But why do you blog in two languages, German and English? Is is because you love languages (words)? Or is there another reason?

      • Thanks a lot 🙂 It’s also nice to meet you, bbnewsab.
        Of course I love languages 😀 That’s why I write stories in both English and German, but there are also topics about which I can talk freely in one language, but not in the other.
        When I started the German blog, it had been bilingual. Soon I found that translating each post into the language that it wasn’t originally written in became somewhat difficult and sometimes even annoying. That’s why I started the English blog. So you see, there’s no mystery behind it 😉

  7. Just popping in to say hi! Hope your okey!

  8. Me, too. Miss you. Have thought about you often.

  9. Sarah

    Hello. I am curious if you believe that creating alter egos of yourself online, anonymously, is a woo personality trait.

  10. Hello, Kertie!

    Nope, I’d rather say I’m an INTJ:

    INTJs, as introverts, are quiet, reserved, and comfortable being alone. They are usually self-sufficient and would rather work alone than in a group. Socializing drains an introvert’s energy, causing them to need to recharge.

    INTJs are interested in ideas and theories. When observing the world they are always questioning why things happen the way they do. They excel at developing plans and strategies, and don’t like uncertainty..

    BTW, Why should I, according to you, be an ENTP? Maybe you’re a flatterer, Kertie? 🙂

    • Kertie

      If you are an INTJ, why you can’t see that Implicit relations are realized by implicit causal patterns and rather you call it “magical thinking”?

      All Ns are interested in ideas an theories and many of them are always questioning why things happen the way they do.

  11. Kertie

    ENTP are the most introverted extrovert, so easily mistaken by an introverted.
    So why you can easily be ENTP:

    -Very Informal use of language of typical ENTP. No INTJ use language like this.
    -Skilled at seeing logical fallacies.
    -Ideas presented in a very scattered way which indicates quick reasoning. Ne-Ti detected.
    -Fe detected: effusive and personal way of explaining things.
    -Want to understand things in a concrete and logical way.
    -Debating and questioning everything. Strong need to debating.

    INTP would be way more formal and serious -due to analytical thinking Ti first and inferior Fe .

    And what do you mean by “a flatterer”?

  12. Kertie

    I suspect you are the creator of this blog lol

    https://mbtimasters.wordpress.com/2015/01/15/patriarkatets-harskare/

    ENTP, Swedish, same style of writing.

    If you are, it confirms you are ENTP ’cause the blogger has confessed it.
    If you aren’t, it confirms you are ENTP also, because the writing indicates same sort of reasoning.

    Anyway, why on Earth do I have to flatter you? You are a complete stranger. Also I don’t flatter people. Can’t answer me right? LOL

  13. Kertie

    You deleted my other messages. That’s not honest. I want to see if you can reply me. I am a 5w6 thinker-temper and a truth seeker.

    I said you can’t be INTJ because they see implicit patterns too and how events links to another, they are holistic thinkers because of Ni; which you call “magical thinking”.

    Also, you scattered writing indicates quick reasoning, you can see logical fallacies and your way of communicating is very Fe oriented and very informal, typical of ENTP.

    You are ENTP, no doubt. I’ve studying MBTI the last 2 years and I have talent to spot the patterns behaviours/communicating styles in people.
    I am very talented at it.

  14. Hi, Kertie!

    Sorry for my delayed answer.

    Why are you so interested to know if I’m an ENTP or an INTJ or maybe “belong to” some other letter combination taken from the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) system?

    There are numerous comprehensive critiques about that test online. I’d say the most obvious flaw is that the MBTI test seems to rely exclusively on binary choices. Human beings are not either-or. That is, we are NOT either extravert or introvert. We are something between the two available chocies.The validity of the MBTI test is poor. The same goes for the reliability of the MBTI test. .

    Finally, to answer your specific question, Kertie. NO, I’m not the one who created the blog you mention and link to. . .

    • Kertie

      Yes, later I realized you aren’t the creater of that blog. Sorry.

      The tests are inaccurate by far, my sister got ENTJ when she is a obvious INFJ 4w3. Every ENTJ description is accurate for her, she is very bossy and domineering but…

      I am into cognitive functions. I’ve studied cognitive functions everyday 2 years ago. MBTI tests are very vague and flawed.

      Ni-doms are holistic thinkers. I am worried about how holistic medicine is called BS just because most people don’t understand holistic thought. Only 3% of people are Ni-doms. And they are not taken seriously. Except for aux Ni users and maybe tertiary Ni users.
      I am Ni- dom. It is NOT magical thinking and I am in fact very skeptic. I have High reliance on Ti. I am 5w6.
      I’ve experienced it by myself how my ideas on most things never were taken seriously in school and college because I see everything in a holistic way.
      Most people despise holistic thinkers. We just want to help.

      The time when Holistic Science be accepted, would be a great progression in science and technology. It would help humanity.

      The Chinese however have more advanced technology and medicine and guess what? They used to respect the holistic approach.

      So for your question

      “Why are you so interested to know if I’m an ENTP or an INTJ or maybe “belong to” some other letter combination taken from the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) system?”

      Is not about the four letters. Is about the cognitive functions.

      See:

      An ISTJ is usually skeptic of most things. An INTJ perceives the information in a totally different way. And yes, an INTJ is likely to believe in “woo science” as you call.

      Si-doms deals well with rutines. Ni-doms don’t but we can analize the future implications of actions or events.
      Introverted Intuition is NOT magic. Is all probabilistic reasoning. Probabilistic logic.

      I ask because I want to understand your perspective. With a perspective of a skeptikal ENTP I would figure out the perpective of anothers skeptikal ENTPs and why they are too skeptikal using probabilistic reasoning.
      People are very similar and now I know why. 16 combinations of thought patterns…

      I understand your need to question everything.
      I used to do it too. I never trusted my Intuition , killed it with logic and because of that I’ve done a lot of errors in my life.
      If I knew about cognitive functions before, I would be healthy and sucessful now.

      Plus, I was born in a poor country so I know life is not easy at all. I am not a softie not a flatter nothing of it. Those are people who never experienced a harsh life.

      I need to understand. I hope YOU understand my message.

  15. Kertie

    Plus, my grandma is a Si-dom and she always view my Ni as something impossible to be true.
    “I have so much experience”, she said. Her “lot” of experience was only reduced to live in a small rural village. I was 6 years old when I realized a lot of things most adults don’t.

    So, age is a Ad hominem. I need very little experience to learn new things. I am not being arrogant. I am seeking truth.

    I repeat: I ask because I want to understand your perspective. With a perspective of a skeptikal ENTP I would figure out the perpective of anothers skeptikal ENTPs and why they are too skeptikal by using my probabilistic reasoning.

  16. Kertie

    *When I said: “I never trusted my Intuition , killed it with logic and because of that I’ve done a lot of errors in my life.” I mean never trusted my Intuition for prophetic dreams and the evil in people.
    I never trusted my mom’s Intuition neither. Everything had to were logical. I sadi “How do you know that?” and she can’t explain it. So, I was disobedient when I was barely 6 years old.

  17. Kertie

    I hope you read my 3 messages above.

  18. @Kertie: Yes, I just read your new comments. All of them.

    I’d say I’m a skeptic regardless of how you want do define me by using MBTI woo.

    I believe neither in CG Jung’s nor Myers-Briggs’ personality typologies. Both systems are pseudoscientific. They lack evidence based confirmation.

    According to me they remind too much of astrology and horoscopes. So I’m not interested in debating this topic any more.

    • Kertie

      Neuroscientist Dario Nardi used an EEG machine to look at regions of the brains different personality types used.
      Scientists are using new technologies to prove anything you ENTPs say “woo science” are very real. Especially In China and Russia.
      Seems like you are against progress.
      Sorry if you don’t llke that.

  19. Kertie

    “According to me they remind too much of astrology and horoscopes. ”
    False analogy.
    I’m here not to “win” any debate, but to know new perspectives. You can’t provide me yours.

    This is considered “woo science” in Hispanic countries:
    (Why would music be important at that point?)

    https://bbnewsblog.wordpress.com/2015/12/20/13-reasons-music-education-is-required/

    But for now in Europe this has been proved. It would take no longer to cognitive functions be proven too.

    WHY CANT YOU PROVIDED ME YOUR PERSPECTIVE?

    You are the one who is acting like a having a not evolved child-like brain. I’m proving you. If you can’t answer, it just would prove my point.

  20. Kertie

    If you delete my messages above, it would prove my point of you being the one who’s having a not evolved brain 😀

    • First: I have never deleted any comments so far on this blog..

      Second: I recommend you to read this article: https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/cutting-edge-leadership/201402/the-truth-about-myers-briggs-types .

      Third: Google mbti + pseudoscience and read some of the articles that will then appear.

      Fourth: Concerning Dario Nardi, read for example this thread taken from Reddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/mbti/comments/2geskm/dario_nardi_savior_of_mbti_or_bs/ .

      Here’s a quote from that thread I just linked to:

      Dario Nardi is a former college instructor who’s now touting the “neuroscience” of personality claiming that the cognitive functions are supported by brain science. This has caused a lot of people and organizations to tout him as the savior/innovator of the MBTI – snatching the MBTI from the jaws of new age pseudoscience and restoring its credibility using hard science brainscans.

      I have made this thread for discussing Dario Nardi and his work. Even if you disagree with my findings I think the points I list below are a good place to start.

      After researching Nardi I’m not sure what to think.

      He claims to follow Jung instead of MBTI but I have not seen him demonstrate any in-depth knowledge of Jung. Nor am I sure that his function definitions are correct. They sound highly technical (a bit like Socionics at times) without getting much into the Jung or the functions that I know.

      He has made some brainporn charts showing how some (not even all) of the types supposedly map on to the brain, but none of his data is peer reviewed.

      The controls on his “experiments” are questionable. He taints people by exposing them to type before scanning them. In truth, a lot of social science is junk science like this. But an MBTI does not have the luxury of simply confirming the existing paradigm, so Nardi should tighten up his controls. My point is that you can’t go around being the only researcher who claims something and then have junky data filled with gaps.

      After reading one of his (pretty overpriced) books, I did not see how he could guard against the possibility that his data is really scanning the deep properties of a person’s brain and not just snapshots of a given state. This is doubly troubling because Nardi fails to have proper scientific controls in place.

      He travels the world with his message about correlations between brain scans and type but where is the independent review of his data? It is deeply worrying to me that he has had his basic message in place for years but has not advanced one bit towards getting it accepted as actual science. A real scientist would not travel the world for years with such a half-baked dataset pining for a conclusion that is convenient to him. He would withhold propagating in the way done by Nardi until he had something more solid.

      Lastly, is he even INTJ as he claims? He doesn’t write or speak like an INTJ at all, more like some kind of FP. I am not the first to notice this – many people have said so.

      Basically I am worried. He presents himself as a scientist who has “discovered” a correlation between the brain and MBTI, but I do not see signs of a true scientific attitude or an openness to the possibility that the results could go either way (maybe there is no correlation between MBTI and the brain that is measurable with our current equipment).

      FINALLY; Kertie: Please read the texts I link to. Those texts confirm my point of view and they give you my perspective on this topic (you told me you wanted my perspective).

      To sum up: MBTI is BS. Dario Nardi is BS. Can I be more clear?

      • Kertie

        Ok, I read it all.

        I clearly see your perspective. You are not into cognitive functions. That’s the problem.
        You haven’t understand my message above: “The tests are inaccurate by far, my sister got ENTJ when she is a obvious INFJ 4w3. Every ENTJ description is accurate for her, she is very bossy and domineering but…

        I am into cognitive functions. I’ve studied cognitive functions everyday 2 years ago. MBTI tests are very vague and flawed.”

        I want you to reasoning:

        Now, why do you think holistic thinkers (Ni users) are misunderstand everytime? (except in China maybe). I used to talk poetically everytime.
        How can a 6 years old know more things than many adults?
        I have to tell you Ni-doms are those “mature children”, as contrary as you think “no evolved brain”. How many of them do you know? Can you see how uncommon it is?

        I had PSTD for a while I used to act erratically, but thanks for that, doctors thought I was mentally ill and proceed to scan my brain.
        I am healthy.

        I used to be skeptic of neurodivergence and thought Sensors (most people) were the only normals. Intuitives are seen as “freaks”. People with scientific interests are themselves rare (NTs).

        Artits, poets are rare too (NFs).
        Every NT is a potentially scientist. Every NF is a potentially artist. Those groups of people are NOT materialist and are not well adapted to the rest of the world.

        Can’t you see patterns behaviours in people? Most people maybe see yourself as a freak. Most of them aren’t interested in theories.

        Howewer you are from Sweden and I can’t be very sure since is a developed country. Maybe most swedish talk about science and art everyday.
        The gap between NT,NF is far more prominent in a poor underdeveloped country and make the differences very obvious.

  21. I look at cognition in the following way:

    Cognitive processes are plenty. They include perception, recognition, imagining, feeling, thinking, judging, reasoning, conceptualizing, planning, remembering, and problem solving, – just to name “a few” of all cognitive processes we deal with..

    Some (Maybe many) of these cognitive processes I just mentioned seem to coincide with the MBTI personality typology (or, for that matter, with the 12 signs of Zodiacal constellations).

    Anyway, we prefer to solve problems that emerge in our lives by using some problem solving strategies more often than others.

    That’s why the 16 personality types in the MBTI test (or the horoscopes) often have similarities to how human beings tend to try to solve upcoming problems.

    We learn, from an early age, often by trial and error processes (or by imitating our mum or dad), what problem solving strategies are the best, or most comforting, for us to use when we face a problem.

    Of course these problem solving strategies can be changed over time. The choice we make depends on how well we succeeded in solving the problems we faced earlier.. If we succeeded, then the brain rewards us. If we didn’t succeed, then the brain doesn’r reward us, leading to an urge to change the problem solving strategy in order to see if the new one is better to use the next time we face a new problem we have to (or want to) solve.

    What’s wrong with the MBTI test and Dario Nardi’s research is that they both seem to suppose our brains are genetically coded in a way that makes relearning ( = choosing new problem solving strategies) more or less impossible.

    So – to oversimplify it for pedagogic reasons – if you were born to be an ENTP you can’t become an ISFJ later in life. That is, both MBTI fans and Dario Nardi say that it’s almost all about nature and very little about nurture.

    The truth is that our personality traits change over time. And that is, in turn, a big problem for, not least, religious people who want to believe that they will always be the same and have the same preferences in an eternal Heaven or Paradise. How heavenly is Heaven if one day you start to dislike the people you hung out with during the first 10 billion years or so in Heaven?

    Also remember old sayings like this one: If you are not a liberal at 25, you have no heart, and if you are not a conservative at 35 you have no brain.

    Of course you need not fully agree with that saying, but at the same time it’s not totally wrong either. Our personality isn’t static. It’s dynamic.

    Here you have the explanation to why it’s so common that if you take the MBTI test, say, ten times over the years, the test will probably tell you that you belong to different personality types (out of the 16 available) more than once.

    So both the MBTI test and Dario Nardi’s research (based mainly on EEG measures) are, if not one hundred percent pure BS at least full of highly pseudoscientific BS.

    • Kertie

      “”””What’s wrong with the MBTI test and Dario Nardi’s research is that they both seem to suppose our brains are genetically coded in a way that makes relearning ( = choosing new problem solving strategies) more or less impossible.

      So – to oversimplify it for pedagogic reasons – if you were born to be an ENTP you can’t become an ISFJ later in life. That is, both MBTI fans and Dario Nardi say that it’s almost all about nature and very little about nurture.””””

      However an ISFJ have the same functions in a switched way, meaning he or she could become a very analytical person. In fact one theory says an ISFJ switches into ENTP under stress and viceversa. Which happens to be true according to my observations.

      “””””Of course you need not fully agree with that saying, but at the same time it’s not totally wrong either. Our personality isn’t static. It’s dynamic.””””

      Of course it’s dynamic, Jung himself had notion of that.

      “””Here you have the explanation to why it’s so common that if you take the MBTI test, say, ten times over the years, the test will probably tell you that you belong to different personality types (out of the 16 available) more than once.””””

      Again, under stress cognitive functions switches and in fact everyone have use of the eight functions.

      I see the problem. The tests leads to stereotyping and confussion for most people and they could start to irrationaly believe some are better than others.

      Thank you for provide your perspective.

  22. Kertie

    I just want to ask another question.

    In underdeveloped countries most of people seems to be Sensors with no analytical/abstract thinking at all. Think of African countries.

    My country itself is full of people that rarely use any logic and no abstraction at all. They are kinda like monkeys.

    That’s why I said you the gap between Intuitives and Sensors is far more prominent, which makes the differences obvious. A abstract person with analytical/critical thinking like me, is ULTRA RARE.

    I had many problems in early life because Introverted Intuition is abstract as hell and people struggled too hard to understand what I was saying. I even was abused psychologicaly by peers because of that.

    What could be the reason why in those countries people struggles so hard with abstract/analytical thinking? I don’t think “inferior races” be the answer. Nutrition maybe? Still I have more analytical thinking than people of rich developed countries, which is weird.

  23. @Interesting question you ask, Kertie.

    I suspect that it’s a lot about how you use and train your brain. Both nature and nurture are of importance.

    Again I’ll have to oversimplify the answer in order to make it more understandable and my reasoning easier to follow.

    FIRST: Nutrition, literacy and religion are factors that mean a lot.

    The more religious a country is, the higher is the risk of starvation (poor nutrition).

    The more religious a country is, the higher is the illiteracy level.

    The more religious a country is, the higher is the level of authoritarianism (oppression) in that same country..

    SECOND: The most important risk factor – or the most important common denominator – seems to be authoritarianism. And religion is probably the easiest way to make a country authoritarian.

    The priests tell their congregation members (parishioners) that they must obey and never question what the priests or other exegetes say is the right interpretation of the holy texts.

    The message is, If you question the dogmas, you’ll end up in Hell. So don’t do it, don’t question what the priests tell you is the right thing to do.

    If you are illiterate, then it’s much harder to challenge the priests.

    If you suffer from malnutrition, then you aren’t able to focus on questioning the priests because IF you question them, then the risk of expulsion.is an imminent.danger (and you’ll starve even more).

    THIRD: The brain has got TWO information processing systems (IPSs). Google Daniel Kahneman + two systems.

    Read for example this article: http://upfrontanalytics.com/market-research-system-1-vs-system-2-decision-making/ . It gives you a pretty good overview.

    FOURTH: Religious people and pseudoreligious people (like New Agers). more or less dislike system #2 ( = logical, analytic and questioning [antiauthoritharian] thinking] and they are told by priests and political rulers (or clan leaders) that system #1 is much better to use.

    This system #1 is based on intuition, which paves the ground for magical thinking. (see, for example, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magical_thinking ).

    Intuitive thinking relies on associative and noncausal thinking, i.e. the association of entities is primarily based upon their semblance to one another (cf. homeopathy, based on the doctrine of like cures like or similia similibus curentur).

    Maybe these four explanations can give you at least part of the answer, Kertie,

    • Kertie

      Yes, in fact my country is among the most religious in the world.
      I know that’s one of the major problems there. People don’t question anything.

      “This system #1 is based on intuition, which paves the ground for magical thinking.”

      Wrong. I use the system 2 definitely. Which people call “intuition” is actually pure abstract reasoning . https://www.goodtherapy.org/blog/psychpedia/abstract-thinking

      7 Signs Your Abstract Thinking Is Highly Developed:
      https://www.learning-mind.com/abstract-thinking/
      I have all of the signs in the link.

      https://jennrian.com/2016/06/03/ni-introverted-intuition/
      “”iNtuition detects patterns and trends, and derives possibilities from them. The foundation of both Ne and Ni is possibility.

      iNtuitive functions, both Ne and Ni, are future-focused. They see what could be or what might be rather than what is (or in addition to what is). iNtuition detects patterns and trends, and derives possibilities from them. The foundation of both Ne and Ni is possibility. We can differentiate between extroverted and introverted iNtuition by what it chooses to do with those possibilities. As an extroverted function Ne is objective and seeks to expand possibility. The nature of Ne is improvisation. As an introverted function Ni is subjective and seeks to refine possibility. The nature of Ni is prediction. The cognitive function of iNtuition is often viewed in a mystical light because of its ability to see things and make connections outside of readily available information. Ni, in particular, due to its propensity towards prediction is often associated with psychic ability or a sixth sense. Ni is not supernatural, it’s just difficult to explain.””

      Introverted Intuitive Style = Perspective. Perspectives have the ability to watch their own minds form a pattern. When they hear people talk or do something, their mind will shift into the other person’s perspective and get a sense of what’s going on.

      Introverted intuition is like a memorisation of complex patterns and associations that we make often less consciously, and intuitive judging is like the organisations of these complex patterns into a grand and unified theory or association of associations.

      You are the one who is thinking Intuition is magic lol.
      It is pure complex abstract thinking. An introverted intuitive child is the primary example of a mature child. However if intrapersonal intelligence is not developed, you’d have a very emotionally unstable person who acts forever like a child.

  24. Kertie

    Why did you put “Your comment is awaiting moderation”?

    Are you planning to delete my reply? Be honest.

  25. Kertie

    I will see if you don’t make public my reply to your last message above.

  26. If you – or anyone, no matter who – in a comment involve more than TWO links, WordPress suspects that it might be spam.

    WordPress then sends a mail to the owner of the blog and asks him to check the comment. He can then approve of the comment “manually”.

    So after my approval, your comment now is visible.

    It’s not about censorship, Kertie.

    I repeat for the third time, I have never deleted any comment on my blog so far. I’m not that kind of person.

    Now a question to you: If you believe the MBTI typology is so fantastic, why can’t you “see” that in your MBTI analysis of me that I’m not the kind of person who refuses to publish your comments and/or instead chooses to delete them? Do you think I’m a liar, denying my urge to delete some of your comments now and then?

    Finally some words about abstract thinking. System #1 (IPS-1) is mostly a nonverbal information processing system. You think in pictures/images. That’s not called abstract thinking. In fact it’s rather the opposite of abstract thinking.

    Verbal thinking, on the other hand, is equivalent of abstract thinking.

    But if you want to call thinking in pictures abstract thinking, well, Kertie, I won’t prohibit you from doing so.

    BTW, have you seen this fascinating list of intuitive (“magical”) dreams: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_dreams ?

    That list shows that the best scientists normally use both IPS-1 and IPS-2.

    IPS-1 is the child’s way of thinking. We all start our lives by using nonverbal IPS-1 thinking.

    When we grow up, we acquire the ability ro read and write. Then we open up for the IPS-2 thinking system.

    But some of us have great difficulties being good readers and/or writers. Those people struggle with the letters all life long.

    Maybe you have noticed that many woo believers can’t master the language. They misspell words, misunderstand them, can’t construct understandable and/or logical sentences, create neologism and so on.

    They are dyslexics and often also suffer from dyscalculia. (IMPORTANT: I don’t say that all dyslexics are woo believers, obviously there are different forms of dyslexia.)

    If you don’t master your language, there’s a big risk you’ll have to continue thinking in pictures/images also as a grown-up adult. That is, you cling to your brain’s IPS-1 information processing system instead of developing your IPS-2 thinking system.

    The brain’s IPS-1 system is kind of magical, because it lacks the capacity to question things (use critical analysis) based on logic. Please have another look at my link to Wikipedia’s list of dreams. Talented scientists know how to use both systems (both IPS-1 and IPS-2). Woo people prefer using only the IPS-1 thinking system.

    I think you, Kertie, are capable of using both the IPS-1 and IPS-2 systems available in your brain. But at the same time you seem to believe in the MBTI personality type system too much. Why is it so important to trust the MBTI system? Sometimes in your comments you seem to agree that the MBTI typology is kind of BS. And still you find it so fantastic. How come?

  27. I found some comments needed to be approved by me before they are going public. Now I have approved of them. Hopefully all of them.

    Those comments are from the beginning of May. Perhaps that’s why you thought I use to delete some comments?

    You see, I get almost 400 e-mails a day to my GMail. And I have been away from home (on vacation) a couple of weeks, so probably I missed those WordPress e-mails in the beginning of May asking me for an approval.

    In one of these comments you ask why I wonder if you’re a flatterer. Can’t you see that I use an emoji ( this one: 🙂 ) after the word “flatterer”? In other words a joke, sort of. And to be honest, your MBTI typology of me IS kind of flattering. I’d be proud if you’re right in your typology selection chosen for me.

    • Kertie

      My responses to your wrong points:

      “””If you believe the MBTI typology is so fantastic, why can’t you “see” that in your MBTI analysis of me that I’m not the kind of person who refuses to publish your comments and/or instead chooses to delete them? Do you think I’m a liar, denying my urge to delete some of your comments now and then?”””

      I’m not into MBTI, for the last time. I’m into cognitive functions. However it is true that people use 4 of them most of the time.

      The order of your functions won’t tell if a person is honest or a liar. That’s nonsense.

      “””Finally some words about abstract thinking. System #1 (IPS-1) is mostly a nonverbal information processing system. You think in pictures/images. That’s not called abstract thinking. In fact it’s rather the opposite of abstract thinking.”””

      Wrong. I will tell you an example to you to understand: there is a Japanese series from 1998 that predicted VERY accurately how technology would be in 2008. The creators predicted the future. This series contains a lot of symbols and images that most people struggle to understand it’s meaning. It is not a struggle for me because I have a very abstract reasoning. It is implied that the creators have Intuition, which is nothing but a precise reasoning of logical probabilities that can predict the future.

      “””Maybe you have noticed that many woo believers can’t master the language. They misspell words, misunderstand them, can’t construct understandable and/or logical sentences, create neologism and so on.

      They are dyslexics and often also suffer from dyscalculia. (IMPORTANT: I don’t say that all dyslexics are woo believers, obviously there are different forms of dyslexia.)

      If you don’t master your language, there’s a big risk you’ll have to continue thinking in pictures/images also as a grown-up adult. That is, you cling to your brain’s IPS-1 information processing system instead of developing your IPS-2 thinking system.”””

      I am very good at use of my language. In fact I always was the best in Spanish Literature classes. Both understanding and improvising. Nothing dyslexic.

      You missed the fact I am Hispanic and ENGLISH IS NOT MY LANGUAGE, I JUST STUDIED IT ABOUT 2 YEARS.

      THAT IS WHY I HAVE ERRORS.

      “””Those comments are from the beginning of May. Perhaps that’s why you thought I use to delete some comments?”””

      I am not naive and most people would do something like that. I just suspect it, I did not asume it.

      “””In one of these comments you ask why I wonder if you’re a flatterer. Can’t you see that I use an emoji ( this one: 🙂 ) after the word “flatterer”? In other words a joke, sort of. And to be honest, your MBTI typology of me IS kind of flattering. I’d be proud if you’re right in your typology selection chosen for me.”””

      Could be a joke, could be not. People have different types of humour.
      You need to develop self-knowledge to convince you what cognitive functions do you use.

  28. @Kertie: Believe or not, but the fact is I got an email in my mail box yesterday about the validity and reliability of the MBTI personality test..

    Here you can read the article:

    How Accurate Is the Myers-Briggs Personality Test?

    By Bahar Gholipour, Live Science Contributor | May 19, 2019 08:46am ET

    Link: https://www.livescience.com/65513-does-myers-briggs-personality-test-work.html

    Hare are some excerpts from that interesting article/analysis:

    There are two types of people in the world: those who believe in the Myers-Briggs personality test and those who don’t.

    Except that’s not true. Grouping people into two, three or 16 categories, which is the aim of a lot of personality tests, has never quite worked. And even in the case of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI), which is simultaneously the most popular personality test in the world and the most frequently debunked, non-experts and psychologists alike take varying positions about the value of the tool.

    About 1.5 million people take the test online each year, and more than 88% of Fortune 500 companies, as well as hundreds of universities, use it in hiring and training, according to The Myers Briggs Company, a California-based firm that administers the MBTI.

    Despite the popularity of the test, many psychologists criticize it — hardly a few months go by without a harsh take-down of the MBTI in the media, where a psychologist will say that the Myers-Brigg is unscientific, meaningless or bogus. But there are others who take a milder view of the test. “Many personality psychologists consider the MBTI to be a somewhat valid measure of some important personality characteristics but one that has some important limitations,” said Michael Ashton, professor of psychology at Brock University in Ontario.

    The test uses 93 questions to assess the following traits:

    Introvert (I) versus Extrovert (E)
    Intuitive (N) versus Sensory (S)
    Thinking (T) versus Feeling (F)
    Judging (J) versus Perceiving (P)

    Based on the combination of traits people fall into, the test ultimately assigns them one of the 16 labels, such as INTJ, ENFP, and so on.

    Why do psychologists doubt it?

    Psychologists’ main problem with the MBTI is the science behind it, or lack thereof. In 1991, a National Academy of Sciences committee reviewed data from MBTI research and noted “the troublesome discrepancy between research results (a lack of proven worth) and popularity.”

    The MBTI was born of ideas proposed before psychology was an empirical science; those ideas were not tested before the tool became a commercial product. But modern psychologists demand that a personality test pass certain criteria to be trusted. “In social science, we use four standards: Are the categories reliable, valid, independent and comprehensive?” Adam Grant, University of Pennsylvania professor of psychology, wrote on LinkedIn. “For the MBTI, the evidence says not very, no, no, and not really.”

    Some research suggests the MBTI is unreliable because the same person can get different results when retaking the test. Other studies have questioned the validity of the MBTI, which is the ability of the test to accurately link the “types” to outcomes in the real world — for example, how well people classified as a certain type will perform in a given job.

    The Myers-Briggs Company says the studies discrediting the MBTI are old, but their results are still being perpetuated in the media. Since those early criticisms, the company says it has done its own research to refine the test and assess its validity. “When you look at validity of the instrument [the MTBI], it is just as valid as any other personality assessment,” Suresh Balasubramanian, the company’s general manager, told USA Today.

    Some of the test’s limitations, however, are inherent in its conceptual design. One limitation is the MBTI’s black-and-white categories: You are either an extrovert or introvert, a judger or a feeler. “This is a shortcoming, because people don’t fall neatly into two categories on any personality dimension; instead, people have many different degrees of the dimension,” Ashton told Live Science. And, in fact, most people are close to the average, and relatively few people are at either extreme. By placing people into tidy boxes, we are separating people who are in reality more similar to each other than they are different.

    The MBTI may be missing even more nuances by assessing only four aspects of personality differences. “Several decades ago, personality researchers had determined that there were at least five major personality dimensions, and more recent evidence has shown that there are six,” Ashton said. “One of those dimensions involves how honest and humble versus deceitful and conceited someone is, and the other dimension involves how patient and agreeable versus quick-tempered and argumentative someone is.”

    Not entirely useless

    Some of the shortcomings of the MBTI stem from the complex, messy nature of human personality. Neat categories of MBTI make personality look clearer and more stable than it really is, according to David Pincus, a professor of psychology at Chapman University in California. Psychologists prefer other tools, namely the Big Five, which assesses personality based on where an individual lies on the spectrums of five traits: agreeableness; conscientiousness; extraversion; openness to experience; and neuroticism. The Big Five model has a better record of scientific validation than the MBTI, experts say.

    Still, the MBTI is not entirely useless.

    People are drawn to tests like MBTI out of a desire to understand themselves and others. “The four dimensions from which the MBTI types are derived are all useful ones for describing people’s personalities,” Ashton said.

    And even when the MBTI’s results don’t quite match your intuition about yourself or are just wrong, they can still provide insight. Many people who’ve taken the MBTI have noticed this effect. As a former employee at Bridgewater Associates (a hedge fund almost as famous for having employees take personality tests as it is for its $120 billion in assets) wrote in Quartz, the MBTI labels never seemed to fully describe a person. Instead, the real value of the test seemed to be in the push “to reconcile the gaps between what the test results tell us, and what we know to be true about ourselves.”

    In this sense, the MBTI can serve as a starting point for self-exploration by giving people a tool and a language to reflect on themselves and others. The test is “a portal to an elaborate practice of talking and thinking about who you are,” Merve Emre, an associate professor of English at Oxford University in the United Kingdom, wrote in “The Personality Brokers,” a review of the MBTI’s history.

    Ultimately, it’s not the MBTI label, but the power of introspection that drives the insights and sometimes fuels the motivation to take steps to change one’s condition.

    • Kertie

      Again, I don’t believe in the MBTI system, it’s VERY flawed.
      I recognize the cognitive functions instead in myself and other people. Cognitive functions are the way you mostly use your brain.

      You missed completely one of my messages that have the key to know these functions are real:

      “In underdeveloped countries most of people seems to be Sensors.

      That’s why I said you the gap between Intuitives and Sensors is far more prominent, which makes the differences obvious. A abstract person with analytical/critical thinking like me, is ULTRA RARE.

      I had many problems in early life because Introverted Intuition is abstract as hell and people struggled too hard to understand what I was saying.”

      Did you missed again? try to identify the key:

      “A abstract person with analytical/critical thinking like me, is ULTRA RARE.
      I had many problems in early life because Introverted Intuition is abstract as hell and people struggled too hard to understand what I was saying”

      Did you see?

  29. @Kertie: So then you maybe agree with me at last that the MBTI test is BS and Dario Nardi’s research is BS as well?

    On May 14, at 5:42 am, you wrote in a comment: “You deleted my other messages. That’s not honest.”

    Don’t you see those two sentences are denigrating me? You accuse me of being a moron who can’t stand critique and instead chooses to delete comments he dislikes.

    You could instead have written: “I can’t see my just submitted comment in the comment field. Did you delete it? If that’s the case, I think you are a dishonest person.

    Even if English isn’t your native tongue, Kertie, I think you should understand that what you wrote in your comment is nothing but an unfair accusation of me. If you are not absolutely sure, please let your allegation instead be a question and finish your sentence with a question mark.

    You see, woo believers very often accuse skeptics of being dishonest and always wishing to delete comments and so on. And they also believe all atheists lack morals because they are not afraid of any god(s).

    Finally, when I wrote about dyslexics in an earlier comment I wasn’t thinking of you. Not at all.

    I just wanted to inform you that some people – especially woo believers – have big difficulties using their native language in a good way. And I hoped you should see what I myself can see, namely, How on earth can that “personality trait” (of being a miserable “word processor”) be incorporated into the MBTI typology system?

    Just FYI, Kertie, my English is flawed, too. Swedish is my native tongue.

    I can assure you that I wouldn’t dream of insulting you when it’s so obvious English isn’t your native language.

    But you seem to believe that I am a person who enjoys insulting you for not mastering the English language.

    I don’t want to insult you at all. In fact I enjoyed our debate, but now I think it’s time to stop debating with you.

    All the best for you, Kertie. I really mean it.

  30. Kertie

    “”””On May 14, at 5:42 am, you wrote in a comment: “You deleted my other messages. That’s not honest.”

    Don’t you see those two sentences are denigrating me? You accuse me of being a moron who can’t stand critique and instead chooses to delete comments he dislikes.

    You could instead have written: “I can’t see my just submitted comment in the comment field. Did you delete it? If that’s the case, I think you are a dishonest person.”””””

    I know, I just was proving your reaction to my “That’s not honest” sentence. I truly considered the posibility of that not being actually the case, because you are the kind of person who likes debate and question everything you see. And prove if the other people can provide arguments to support their theories.

    I am not a “woo believer” (I am not assuming you accused me to be one, though you think cognitive functions theory is “woo theory”, but I’m not religious at all, as I said).

    “”” And I hoped you should see what I myself can see, namely, How on earth can that “personality trait” (of being a miserable “word processor”) be incorporated into the MBTI typology system?

    Just FYI, Kertie, my English is flawed, too. Swedish is my native tongue.

    I can assure you that I wouldn’t dream of insulting you when it’s so obvious English isn’t your native language.

    But you seem to believe that I am a person who enjoys insulting you for not mastering the English language.”””””

    Is not a “personality trait”, but the fact certain cognitive functions makes people speak in methaphorical way which is considered WEIRD for others.
    And is the fact if a person is not very focused-minded, is likely to have errors interpreting texts in Lierature for example.

    I’ve noticed that your English is not perfect but it is NOT AS FLAWED AS MINE.

    AND BY THE WAY YOU ARE FROM A RICH COUNTRY, YOU GOT THE CHANCES TO LEARN BETTER.
    I’M FROM A SHITHOLE AND I’M BARELY AN AUTODIDACT WHO STUDIED ENGLISH (WITH BAD TEACHERS) 2 YEARS.

    I put it on capital letters to remark my point.

  31. Kertie

    Now I’m embarrased by the fact the most common things in a shithole country like mine is corruption, lies, theft, those kind of things.

    https://www.businessinsider.com/most-corrupt-countries-in-the-world-world-economic-forum-2018-10#t29-iran-30-2

    Mine is #29 (Paraguay). Makes Chile and Brazil look like rich developed countries.

    https://warisboring.com/guess-which-country-is-among-the-worlds-most-corrupt/

    I missed completely the fact you are Swedish!! (facepalm) How fool of me.

    So, don’t take it personally, I will take into account for not cometing the same mistake in the future.

  32. Kertie

    Wait… missing details… missing CONCRETE DETAILS! I completely missed the fact you are from European Nordic culture! CONCRETE DATA.

    Introverted Sensation (Si) is the function of concrete data. That is the weakest point of an introverted intuitive!

    I miss concrete details ALL TIME and because of that I hurt people! But in the place I live people don’t say when they are offended, they simply hate the person and spread rumours about her/him! But you told me I offended you!

    See? The use of Cognitive functions in a certain order is real!

    Ni+Fe+Ti+Se cognitive functions stack
    Ne+Fi+Te+Si shadow functions

    Si= concrete data/detalis, I miss it everytime!
    Sorry.

  33. Kertie

    Is not Introverted Sensation, but Introverted Sensing, I made a mistake 😦

  34. @Kertie: I’m not angry with you. Not at all.

    According to me, MBTI typology is a belief paradigm. It’s not based on evidence. So MBTI typologists remind me of religious people by ignoring that their “dogmas” lack evidence.

    Just FYI, I’m used to being offended all the time because I’m an atheist and skeptic.

    You see, Kertie, religious people – at least if they belong to one of the three abrahamic religions – “know” (i.e. are being taught/brainwashed) that atheists always lack morals and therefore will one day end up in Hell together with persons like Adolf Hitler and Joseph Stalin. 🙂

    Completely OT, but after reading your new comments I wonder, are you, by any chance, living in or near Asunción in Paraguay?

    I wonder because rumor has it that capital is a real shithole. And you just wrote you’re from a shithole.

    Or perhaps you mean that all Paraguay is a shithole?

    Anyhow, Kertie, I think you’d like to live in Sweden, Haven’t you considered to move to my country? I assure you that Sweden is an unusually beautiful and rich and generous secular country. But, alas, you’ll find corruption in Sweden, too. But hopefully to a lesser extent than you’re accustomed to where you live at the moment.

    • Kertie

      I had the need to apologize because of politeness factor. And the fact I treated a person from a decent country with decent culture like if were from a culture like Paraguay’s made me ashamed.

      I know you are not the kind of person who is easily offended.

      As for your question, the entire country of Paraguay is a shithole. The capital too. Is insufferable to live here (I live in one of the most important cities, Encarnación city, on the border with Posadas, Argentina not in the capital).

      See, corruption is all over the world, but just like ambiental contamination, in some places is worst.

      All foreigns have the notion that Paraguay is a miserable country. Only Paraguayans don’t notice or don’t want to notice that.

      A PERSON WITH CRITICAL THINKING AND BIG AWARENESS OF THE BIG PICTURE IS DEMONIZED…

      ENTP people, INTJ, INFJ… that’s why I said the differences are too prominent and obvious. Phenomena is real.

      I’m considering moving to a better place. I even considered the possibility to sell a organ but I’m aware of the dangers and only could be worst I’ve could be cheated.

  35. Kertie

    And for the cognitive functions theory… I ACTUALLY WISHED WAS NOT REAL…

    That’s almost like accepting my father could never operate with logic!
    He is an ESFJ- Fe,Si,Ne,Ti . The most common in women, that’s explain the stereotype “women aren’t logical at all”. And my father RARELY uses any logic.
    An ESFJ is also the dumbest. Sometimes I think my father is retarded, honestly.

    How can you denying the fact there are men without logic and logical women, defying the stereotypes genre? My INFJ mother and me are way more analytical and good with numbers. I can spot fallacies too.

    Neurodiversity is real.

  36. Kertie

    https://hbr.org/2017/05/neurodiversity-as-a-competitive-advantage

    ” Many people with these disorders have higher-than-average abilities; research shows that some conditions, including autism and dyslexia, can bestow special skills in pattern recognition, memory, or mathematics. Yet those affected often struggle to fit the profiles sought by prospective employers.”

    They say certain kind of people are autistic when actually they only have different view of the world. Many “Aspergers” are actually over-diagnosed Abstract Introverteds. See again:

    “research shows that some conditions, including autism and dyslexia, can bestow special skills in pattern recognition, memory, or mathematics.”

    Pattern recognition. Special skills. They are just different people.
    A true autistic can’t read between the lines nor had any social skill, even high funcional ones. I’ve seen INTJ and INTP who are definitely NOT autistic but are overdiagnosed.
    INTJ excels at pattern recognition in science and technology.

    https://www.sbs.com.au/news/feature/different-way-thinking

    “A casual primary school grounds-keeper, Langdon has trouble hearing words in the presence of low-frequency noise and struggles with some goal-oriented tasks. But he can be rational in a crisis, which must help in his role as a volunteer fire-fighter. He can ‘hyper focus’ and sees patterns which give him an unusual window on the world.”

  37. Yes, Kertie, neurodiversity is real. But the MBTI typology isn’t the best way or method to discriminate between existing neurodiversities.

    No, Kertie, never ever consider selling one of your kidneys (or other body organs) to get money and a better life.

    Just a question to you: I know that Swedish girls (young women) temporarily move to another country – like Great Britain, Australia or Spain (often in order to learn English or Spanish) – to work there as an au pair. For more information, click on this link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Au_pair .

    Some of these young Swedish women I know moved abroad found a suitable boyfriend in the new country och even got married there.

    Have you ever considered moving to Spain and work there as an au pair? You seem to be too clever to continue living in your present shithole country, Kertie. You deserve something better. Much better. I think you’d be better off in a more secular country where analytical thinking is more appreciated than in Paraguay.

    But whatever you do, Kertie, never move to a Muslim country to work as an au pair. In Muslim countries women sometimes are treated worse than animals.

    • Kertie

      I don’t see how *cognitive functions theory* (not MBTI) , isn’t a good way (which could be a best way?) to discriminate people’s different brain functionality.
      As I tell you, my father posses no logic and the ESFJ (Fe Si Ne Ti) is in fact the dumbest. A man is supossely to be logical according to genre stereotypes but my mother and me are females and way more rational than him.

      How can you explain the fact than some women are more rational than some men, defying the stereotypes? Anyway…

      You seem a nice person who really think is in the correct way.

      I’m informed about those rich Muslim countries, an Arab man once told to emigrate to United Arab Emirates but I cautiosly told him “no”. I did not tell why not, of course.
      Their religion is one of the most violents. Many Africans are Muslims, they follow nonsense horrid traditions.

      As For your question, “Have you ever considered moving to Spain and work there as an au pair?”, YES of course I did.
      But even to moving is way more difficult what it seems like.
      And many latina women are cheated with a good salary with an OK job like that (au pair), and then they are victims of White-Slave Traffic.
      As you see, I considerer all possibilities and I inform myself. I’m very informed and cautious (not child-naive at all as you said Empaths are).

      I’m currently sick (not a mortal disease at least) and there are not good doctors here. The only thing I can think of to heal myself is intermitent fasting (yes, weird medicine but I have no chance) and when I heal, I’ve move to a better place.

  38. @Kertie: Sorry to hear you’re not feeling well. Being poor AND being sick – that’s no good combination.

    Anyway, I have a suggestion for you. Have a look at what’s hiding behind this link: https://www.gooverseas.com/blog/cost-volunteer-israel .

    So, what about volunteering on an Israeli kibbutz, Kertie?

    Working on a kibbutz in Israel is safe. No risk of being raped. It means free accomodation, usually in a shared dorm. Some volunteering programs on a kibbutz also include breakfast and lunch (choose such a kibbutz, Kertie). Be prepared to have to work six days a week. But still no slavery.

    All people I know of having been on a kibbutz in Israel say it’s a wonderful time being there. Sometimes you’ll make friends for life. Some even meet a person to marry! Many Christians work on the kibbutzes. You don’t need to convert to Judaism.

    After being there for, say, a year, you’ll understand you are pretty near Western and South Europe. That continent is more suitable for you (and your brain) than Paraguay.

    Maybe you after finishing your work on an Israeli kibbutz can move on from Israel to an au pair job in, say, Spain or Great Britain?

    On the kibbutz you’ll meet many volunteers who come from different European countries. Maybe they can help you and give you some advice what to do next and where to move next.

    Here you can read more about volunteering on a kibbutz: http://www.ivolunteer.org.il/Eng/Index.asp?ArticleID=339&CategoryID=131 .

    Jobs include: dishwasher, fields, gardening, cowsheds, chickens, factory, picking dates and bananas, dining room, garage, supplying the nurseries with supplies, laundry, looking after children and a lot of other general duties. There are many similarities with an au pair job. But much more diversified. And, important, much safer.

    Think about it, Kertie.

    • Kertie

      Thanks for all these information, I’ll consider it. However still need money to go there :/

      Anyway I’ll see the possibilities to choose the best option.

      People told me that Israel is a OK place.

  39. Kertie

    Hi. Again. Try to read without skipping any word, please.

    ” Modern neuroscience can explain why people believe in gods, souls, ghosts, UFOs, telepathy, and the like. In my eyes religion is closely related to believing that paranormal and supernatural entities/experiences/phenomena are real.”

    I’ve read years ago that “More Than Half of This Country Believes in Elves” refering to Iceland.
    Iceland. A developed country.
    Not a shithole. Still people there believe in mythology. Which AMAZES me.

    In shitholes and most ignorant countries it’s actually pretty common because of lack of alphabetization, so you could argue ignorance is the root of those beliefs. I thought it too. Until a read about Icelandic. A rich country.

    But according to YOUR perspective, apparentely ALL of those people are nothing but mentally ill. Instead of they simply have more creativity due to their thought process. So, it’s actually normal. They’re likely to be INFP, ENFP.

    And to people like me (INFJ), we aren’t mentally ill.
    We have better observation skills that see things that escape the perception of others.

    INTJ may believe in UFOs (they don’t have much empathy to notice that UFOs are nothing but the same tought process that create unicorns).
    An INTJ however perceives very similar things to us INFJ.

    As 5 years old, I’ve have a more accute perceptive mind than the average 25 years old women. I had already notions that are taboo to most children (death, disease, sex, and things about human nature. Can you think of a 5 years old thinking about it?

    Do you really think a person like me is simply mentally ill?

    I’m skeptikal of religion and UFOs but I can’t deny the patterns I’ve seen in people’s though process due to my acute mind.

    Big 5 is just about traits. Jung theory is about information gathering of the brain.
    Having the information gathering of the 1% make logically leads to think we are simply crazy people.

  40. Kertie

    And I miss concrete details all the time because that is my weakest function.

    Thay’s why I’ve forget you are Swedish (concrete detail) and nothing alike an ultra corrupted shit-minded South American in a message above (from May 30, 2019 at 10:49 pm).

    As for a person like me, I’m not easily corrupted because my brain operates in a way that makes me stubborn about morality (Ni+Fe)

    People like me are the evidence of the MBTI. Read my message above. Carefully. Trying to focus.

  41. @Kertie:

    I want you to know that I consider you to be an intelligent young woman.

    But even intelligent and well educated individuals – both men and women – sometimes tend to believe in pseudoscientific bullshit.

    The psychology behind the MBTI test IS – and has always been – based on pseudoscience. You’ll understand my point of view, Kertie, if you read this article, http://mentalfloss.com/article/573003/myers-briggs-type-indicator-facts .

    My blog is called Mass delusions a.k.a. Magical & Religious Woo-Bullshit Thinking. The MBTI stuff is pseudoscientific woo thinking.

    But if you want to (continue to) believe in that outdated typology system, Kertie, I won’t forbid you to do so.

    Now some words about Iceland:

    Still today in many countries a more or less clear majority seem to accept visions and the appearance of ghosts as real events. The Icelanders are mostly well educated, but they live in a cultural context where beliefs in elves and other supernatural beings that live in nature are common and fully accepted, even by governmental authorities.

    Have you already read this article about Icelanders and their belief in invisible hidden beings (a.k.a. huldufólk): https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2013/10/why-so-many-icelanders-still-believe-in-invisible-elves/280783/ ? Or else, please, read it now, Kertie.

    Many people all over the world – but mostly in religious (which often means poor) countries – live in the expectation of omens, prophetic dreams, and other close encounters of the supernatural kind.

    They are primed for self-delusion, expecting the inexplicable, accepting the uncanny. Their cognitive laziness (try to google what cognitive laziness stands for) makes them believers in magic and supernatural beings. Their critical and logical thinking has been suspended. They think like children tend to do ( = cling to the cognitive default mode thinking system called Information Processing System #1 or IPS-1, which is based on emotions and magic and often also called nonverbal intuitive thinking).

    Science, on the other hand, needs a nonemotional and nonmagical way of thinking/reasoning, often called logical IPS-2 thinking.

    You can read more about these two information processing systems in our brains if you google Daniel Kahneman + thinking fast and slow.

    BTW, I’ve saved a comment that explains my idea pretty well. The commenter wrote:

    “Growing up I was indoctrinated into religious fundamentalism. Everything I read in the Bible was wondrous, loving and True™.

    Since escaping [from religion], when I read it again [i. e. when I read the same texts now afterwards] I’m amazed at how ridiculous it is. I can’t believe I ever thought it was a miraculous work. Now when I read it the myths, fairytales, folklore and manufactured history are plain to see.”

    • Kertie

      From the article about Icelanders, here is the key:

      “A farm hand who disobeyed his great-grandfather’s orders was allegedly struck with tuberculosis. And while he outright claims he doesn’t believe, he hedges a bit. “I do not dare to maintain that usual human sense organs are perfect,” he wrote, “so there might be a possibility that something exists which normal people cannot perceive.”

      See? The fifth senses organs may not be perfect.

      The entire article of why Icelanders believes in those things can explain why people in my poor country believes in similar things too!
      So, is the same thought process.
      Is an international phenomena, no matter how rich or poor a country is.

      As I said, the INFP and ENFP are the ones who believes in surreal things.
      They perceive things and try to explain them in a concrete way.

      Fairy tales born this way.

      Now, again, read without skipping a word, carefully:

      But me (INFJ), my thought process definitively differs from the normal. Which NOT mean I am crazy.
      Here is my thought process explained. Try to read it concentrating:

      https://www.typeinmind.com/nife

      It is a VERY complex thought process. A lot of analogies are used to explain the impresionist paradoxical nature of Intuition.
      Is not “emotion”. The “Feeling” in my decisions is about others, not about me.
      Read the link above. Carefully.
      It basicaly explain my entire life troubles, as well my very high capacities. I look way smarter than I am (my IQ is about only 120).

      For me is very hard to be like this (INFJ) because I am poor and I have to be the most concrete as possible.
      Being INFJ is hard itself, and is worst when I have to be practical and concrete, focused in a rutine. I actually wish I wans’t like this. Makes me very uncomformist.

      And I wished my father was logical, a man is supossed to be logical but he looks like the stereoype of a woman, because he is ESFJ (the most common in women).
      Jungian fucntions are NOT wishful-woo thinking, because I didn’t wish nor choose to be this way. I wish a was a stereotypical naive woman. I wish my father could be logical. This actually dissapoints me.

      Another thing, I know people with higher IQ than mine’s but everyone thinks I am the smartest one due to this sharp insightful mind.

      And a curiosity, for me is kinda easy to understand complex things like Quantum Physics concepts, when smarter people than meare confused,
      I see nothing but clarity due to my capacity to understand paradoxes because of Ni.

  42. Kertie

    I did a rationality test:

    https://programs.clearerthinking.org/how_rational_are_you_really_take_the_test.html#.XReAzFJKiUk

    My result was “skeptic”. Which I actually am. But I can’t be skeptic to things that are obvious to me.
    My perception abilities are very acute due to my though process:

    https://www.typeinmind.com/nife

  43. @Kertie:If you try to think scientifically – and I want you to do just that – then you immediately should understand and realize that temporal connection doesn’t mean that the connection is causal. And if two things are similar, it doesn’t mean they both have the same origin and/or have a causal connection. And if you take the same test, say, ten times, then you should get the same result at least eight out of these ten times.

    If you’re interested in understanding your own personality (traits) and why you act or react the way you do – and who isn’t? – then you need some kind of explanative (theoretical) model that can explain your behavior (and others) to you. The MBTI is such a model. The MBTI is like a map that makes it easier for you to find your way through the “jungle”.

    It doesn’t mean that the MBTI model is the only “map” worth considering and/or following. Neither does it mean that the MBTI model is the absolutely best “map” to use to find out who you are..

    It’s always you, yourself, Kertie, who choose if you want to believe in the predictability, reliability and/or validity of the MBTI test. But remember, what is the best “map” according to you is perhaps one of the worst in other persons’ eyes.

    If you want to evaluate the scientific value of your “map”, then the parameters at stake need to be tested not only once but many times. In science the result must (in principle) be the same every time the same test design is being used. You can’t rely on a test result – i.e. a “map” – that changes from time to time and is reliable on day 1 but unreliable if you use the same “map” a month later.

    The so-called neuroscientist Dario Nardi,, mentioned in the article you linked to, Kertie, uses EEG-waves in order to corroborate the conclusions drawn by MBTI proponents. Measuring EEG-waves is an outdated (albeit cheap) procedure to use nowadays to measure brain activity. As a matter of fact real neuroscientists today use/prefer methods that measure blood flow in different parts of the brain instead of measuring electrical signals registered from electrodes attached not inside the brain tissue but on the scalp.

    Here’s an article I want you to read: http://mentalfloss.com/article/513934/4-suspect-historical-theories-predicting-criminality . Can’t you see the similarities between Dario Nardi (and his believers) and personality trait researchers like Franz Josef Gall, Cesare Lombroso and William Sheldon (all three are mentioned in that article)?

    If you can’t see the similarities I so easiily can see, Kertie, then I suspect you’ve got a problem to understand the difference between pseudoscience and science.

    That said, I want to add that if you really are interested in personality traits on a general and/or an individual basis, of course you can use the explanative powers of the MBTI model. But please don’t call that model scientific. The MBTI model doesn’t meet the standards of what is real science. Real scientists always aim for their studies’ findings to be replicable. Remember that most people who take the MBTI test don’t get the same result from time to time.That means the test in question doesn’t meet the scientific replicability standards. Which is the same as saying the MBTI test is unscientific/pseudoscientific. And I prefer to call it woo bullshit.

    • Kertie

      Holy damn! I’ve repeated many times that I’m not into the MBTI test.
      Me and my mother score INTJ and my sister ENTJ. When actually we’re INFJ. The test isn’t reliable at all.

      Woo is about beliefs. You call beliefs “wishful thinking”.

      I’ve said I wish J-U-N-G-I-A-N T-H-E-O-R-Y wasn’t real. I don’t like to be an idealistic uncomformist person, neither my mother.
      And is worst being poor and being like this. We can´t stand practical, daily routines very well. It’s overwhelmed.
      We like theories and smart things.

      And I wished my father could be a logical person, but logic is his weakest point, he looks like a stereotypical naive woman.
      According to theory, my father will always be dumb and naive. He can’t figure out ANYTHING. And is very gullible.
      Homer Simpson is smarter than him, I’m not kidding.

      Did you read the article I’ve posted? This:

      https://www.typeinmind.com/nife

      Read it carefully. This explain my thought process in detail.
      I use this tought process in 99% of situacions. It’s VERY complex. Read it please.

      Jungian theory is about how do we use our brain in most cases. The link above explain mine’s.

      There is not equivalence between the predicting criminality article and the 16 combinations of though process.

      The ectomorph-endomorph-mesomorph theory, tough, could be explained by the hormones and metabolism of the different bodies.
      An ectomorph is skinny because is more anxious. Then burns out more fat. And so on.
      But this theory doesn’t mean a muscular type (mesomorph) will be agressive, it just about tendencies. May have more testosterone, which make they more agressive. But is just tendencies.

      It is the fact that the Jungian theory lead to stereotypes the thing that bothers you?

      Stereotypes are unfounded. That is not the base of the theory. The base of the theory is how you brain operates most of the time.

      Read it carefully:

      https://www.typeinmind.com/nife

      This is how a brain of a person like me operates. It’s VERY complex.

  44. Kertie

    “If you can’t see the similarities I so easiily can see, Kertie, then I suspect you’ve got a problem to understand the difference between pseudoscience and science.”

    My result on the rationality test I’ve posted was “skeptic”.
    But I can’t be skeptic to things that are obvious to me.
    Introverted Intuition: a very sharp acute mind.

    When others see confussion, I see pure clarity. Because of that many people thing I’m sort of a genius. When my IQ is only 120.
    I see clarity in many Quantum Physics theory, because I understand paradoxes very well. Due to Ni.

    As a 4-5 years old, I was more perceptive and critical than most adults. Due to Ni-Fe-Ti-Se. I thinked a lot about death, sex, diseaase, drugs, etc. As a 5 years old! Can you imagine how uncommon it is? Well, is about the 1% of population.

    Being like this cause in many cases the impression of a mature child with bigger awareness of things than even adults actually posses.

  45. Kertie

    In other words, Jungian cognitive theory is even more reliable than any IQ test.

    I look smarter than I am. Due to my big awareness of things. People think I’m a sort of genius.

    But I recognize the importance of logical consistences. Thing is, my percepcion of things are deeper than logic.
    I value the scientific method.

    Again, is it the fact that people are prone to categorize things/being
    prejudiced against others, what makes you want to deny Jungian Theory?

  46. Kertie

    The main point in the article is not Dario Nardi’s method used to meassure brain activity.

    Is about the brain’s information gathering.
    Mine’s (principal point which makes me very perceptive):

    “Ni is the way that an NiFe perceives their inner world, it dictates the way they store information and how they perceive that information. It also heavily dictates the path that their train of thought will take. Ni tends to store information in a spread out way with all the pieces of data having connections of various strengths to multiple additional pieces of data. This creates a dense web-like mass of information that is too large to be viewed in detail as a whole, but can be zoomed in on to show intricate clusters and threads of thoughts. This network of data rests slightly outside of the conscious mind, giving Ni a dreamlike quality that is equally likely to be experienced in images and impressions as it is to produce concrete facts. Because the focus of the Ni perception is constantly scanning the whole but also frequently zooming in on various thoughts and feelings and changing angles on a subject, Ni dominant people tend to experience their inner world as constantly fluctuating.”

    In other words, Ni (Introverted Intuition is very alike to the collection of data scattered in the world wide web AKA net).

    VERY complex and VERY difficult to put it in words when it comes to communication with others.

    • @Kertie: Let me put it this way:

      The Jungian personality theories are NOT based on scientific evidence. What CG Jung did was – like Sigmund Freud did – to try to explain special personality types. Then Jungian and Freudian followers/supporters/”disciples” still today try to corroborate Jung’s and Freud’s ideas by using scientifically accepted test methods. And we can all see that their “disciples” fail. Their efforts to corroborate their “Master’s” ideas are in vain. All the time.

      One such person (believer) who has tried to corroborate both Jung and the MBTI test is Dario Nardi, He’s using EEG (which is a scientific method to use) to show that the 16 personality types in the MBTI have their special electrical activation patterns in the brain. But using EEG to evaluate and corroborate personality traits is like using a sandglass to record how fast Usain Bolt can run 100 meters. Using EEG is a very inexact method to measure personality traits.

      So Jungian (or Freudian) ideas of what personality traits are and how they energe and form are still just ideas. That is, they are not based on science but on speculation. And speculations need to be corroborated by scientific experiments. Otherwise the speculations are not trustworthy.

      That’s why I mentioned earlier personality trait researchers like Franz Josef Gall, Cesare Lombroso and William Sheldon. Vestigia terrent (literally meaning “The footprints frighten (me)”, i.e. IF you base your ideas on solely speculations, the odds are very low that it’s all about woo bullshit), Kertie!

      Of course some ideas (based on only speculations) MAY be correct. But then again it’s up to you to prove that they are right by using scientific test metods to corroborate them. That’s why Dario Nardi and his EEG comparisons are so appreciated by Jungian (and MBTI) personality trait believers. But as i just mentioned, Nardi’s method to corroborate those (Jungian) ideas is blunt and pointless – or with a metaphor: if I choose to draw a circle on a painting nobody can argue that my drawn circle must mean that I thought of a wedding ring. Also remember the Freudian saying that sometimes a cigar in a dream means just a cigar and nothing else.

      Today’s neuroscience provide us with much better explanations than Freud and Jung ever did about what our personality traits are and how they emerge and form. I’m not saying that Freud and Jung were totally wrong. But today we’ve got better – and more scientific – explanations than the ones offered by Freud and Jung. .

      BTW, Kertie, I hope you know that CG Jung believed in UFOs. If you are a genuine skeptic you should be able to admit that If he was wrong in that aspect (about aliens), how then can you be so absolutely sure he wasn’t wrong about human personalities as well? A skeptic accepting Jung’s belief in UFOs and aliens without hesitation is in my eyes a kind of oxymoron.

      • Kertie

        Please tell me another theories better than Jung’s about how brains work after reading this. Please.
        Pay attention. You said you are interested on human brain, right? Me too.
        Ok, let’s go:

        “So Jungian (or Freudian) ideas of what personality traits are and how they energe and form are still just ideas. That is, they are not based on science but on speculation. And speculations need to be corroborated by scientific experiments. Otherwise the speculations are not trustworthy.

        That’s why I mentioned earlier personality trait researchers like Franz Josef Gall, Cesare Lombroso and William Sheldon. Vestigia terrent (literally meaning “The footprints frighten (me)”, i.e. IF you base your ideas on solely speculations, the odds are very low that it’s all about woo bullshit), Kertie!”

        Something “smells” bad here. I (speculate) corrupt people might be hiding this on purpose. Intuitives working together could destroy all the actual system of war and poverty. Anyway.
        Ok, I accept the fact that Dario Nardi used a rudimentary method to measure brain activity.
        I’m not a Freud “follower”, he just evaluated everything according to HIS point of view. He had obsession with sex. That’s all.

        However Jung reminds me of Galileo Galilei. In his time, his ideas were called “bullshit” too and ridiculized. But he was right.

        You just accepted that there are special types of persons. Jung was my type. So, I can perceive easily very similar things that him. People’s patterns behaviors.

        Those special types of persons are not “crazy”, just posses a different brain.

        “If you are a genuine skeptic you should be able to admit that If he was wrong in that aspect (about aliens), how then can you be so absolutely sure he wasn’t wrong about human personalities as well? A skeptic accepting Jung’s belief in UFOs and aliens without hesitation is in my eyes a kind of oxymoron.”

        See, people like me (Ni-Fe users) try to understand every point of view from every possible angle and even if we disagree with some ideas of certain person, we’ll take the ideas we agree with.
        Ni doesn’t take in account paradoxes, oxymorons, vague impressions; in fact I talk in paradoxes and oxymorons even don’t realizing. Some people used to think I am crazy.
        That is due to my perceiving function. I’m comfortable with those things, as they come naturally to me. Its part of how my brain function.

        Introverted Intuition Explained/Signs of Introverted Intuition:
        (I don’t like the expression “gut feeling” ’cause is not about feeling but strong impressions that are fairly accurate)

        https://liveboldandbloom.com/11/personality-types/introverted-intuition

        Introverted Intuition Explained

        Introverted intuition, also referred to as Ni, is a perceiving function that is typically associated with the ability to recognize how one event leads to another.

        The Ni function allows people to sort through conscious and unconscious information, giving the user a vision or mental imagery of the past and future that both hold meaning.

        This small population can pick up on intangible clues to see how processes or objects relate to each other.

        Now, this is not some sort of magical ability, but rather it’s an ability to put a lot of puzzle pieces together correctly without even realizing that you are doing it.

        Ni involves an ability to shift one’s perspective and see things in many different ways to find an underlying meaning.

        Signs of Introverted Intuition

        Here are some of the signs you might recognize if you are an introverted intuitive:

        People with Ni function often have gut feelings that are extremely accurate.
        They notice trends to form a prediction of what could be and are often able to envision the future. They may not know how they came up with their predictions or why.
        They synthesize and sort sensory information to get a vision of either what will happen or to figure out something’s underlying meaning.
        They can look at the big picture and put together a plan or idea that is made up of all the bits of sensory information that they take in.
        They’re able to see past what is right in front of them and discover what else is there that is not on the surface.
        They thrive on understanding complex problems and processes.
        They view unconscious images and symbols as relevant as tangible images and data.

        “Introverted intuitives are willing to listen to other people’s perspectives. They are then able to recognize how various points of view can be bridged by common ideals.

        This helps them relate to other people, even if they have opposing opinions about something. This acceptance of other people helps serve the world because it spreads a basic level of respect and kindness around that the world desperately needs.

        The introverted intuitive personality traits are also effective tools when dealing with contradictory evidence. To others, two contradictory claims are not able to simultaneously coexist. One of them must be declared false.

        However, introverted intuitives are able to use their innate creativity to reconcile opposites and transcending mysteries.”

        That is WHY I can be a skeptic about UFOs and other things (I take the rationality test) but I’m able to recognize when he was right.

        In fact I recognized many of those personalities even before knowing about Jung.

        The Jungian theory was just the concrete information that I needed to corrobore my own insights.

        Actually many of modern so-called “pseudoscience/woo science” are actually concrete information still not 100% proven/not enough evidence about things I thought about many years ago. Like in 2003 when I was 10 years old.

        That’s why poeple think I’m a sort of genius. That’s why Jung’s theory has even more validity than any IQ test. (I didn’t say IQ tests has no validity, just LESS validity).

  47. First of all, Kertie: Science never proves anything. Science just verifies or falsifies hypotheses. Nor does pseudoscience prove anything. But there is a great difference between science and pseudoscience. If you try to explain something by using pseudoscientific theories/hypotheses – like the MBTI personality traits theory or Jungian ideas of archetypes – you face the big problem of trying to confirm/verify or falsify such hypoteses/theories. And that is not an easy task to do.

    So in a way it’s praiseworthy that Dario Nardi tried to verify the MBTI personality traits “bullshit” theory by using an EEG device. He actually tried to use a recognized neuroscientific method – measuring brain waves with the help of an EEG device – but the method chosen by him is a very blunt and obtuse one. And therefore rather pointless to use. Especially when there are much better methods available.

    BTW, the same can be said about how NDE believers ( = persons who believe NDEs are evidence of a soul leaving the body) act and reason. They, too, refer to EEG waves (or rather the lack of such waves a.k.a. a flat EEG) and claim that a flat EEG must mean that the brain in question is clinically dead and from that assumption draw the conclusion that, therefore, NDE-like experiences have to be a nonlocal consciousness phenomenon. What I mean by that is that the NDE believers probably start with a false (or at least unevidenced) premise, i.e. neurons in the brain may, as a matter of fact, be still alive although the EEG lines are totally flat. I hope you know of the experiment described in this neuroscientific news article from earlier this year, Kertie: https://www.bbc.com/news/health-47960874 . The headline goes, “Pig brains partially revived four hours after death”. Or else, please read about this experiment now and you’ll better understand what I mean.

    Concerning the Jungian archetypes, read this text: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jungian_archetypes#Criticism .

    You ask me for better methods to map and explain personality traits. Well, let’s return to the neuroscientific research field once more. I’m sure you’ve heard of the concept of neural networks, Kertie. Or else, read for instance this article: https://digest.bps.org.uk/2018/12/06/researchers-say-theyve-identified-two-brain-networks-one-responsible-for-volition-the-other-for-agency-that-together-underlie-our-sense-of-free-will/ . It’s about the brain’s volition and agency networks (which, in turn, and by the way, are related to the concept of free will).

    And here’s yet another article about neural networks, this time about an impulsive behavior network found in the human brain: https://neurosciencenews.com/impulse-behavior-neural-network-10632/ .

    My own “favorite” among neural networks is, at least at the moment, the salience network. You can read about it here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salience_network .

    A quote from that Wikipedia article:

    Pathophysiology

    Dysfunction in the salience network have been observed in various psychiatric disorders, including anxiety disorders, post-traumatic stress disorder, schizophrenia, frontotemporal dementia, and Alzheimer’s disease. The AI node of the salience network has been observed to be hyperactive in anxiety disorders, which is thought to reflect predictions of aversive bodily states leading to worrisome thoughts and anxious behaviors. In schizophrenia, both structural and functional abnormalities have been observed, thought to reflect excessive salience being ascribed to internally generated stimuli.[8] In individuals with autism, the relative salience of social stimuli, such as face, eyes, and gaze, may be diminished, leading to poor social skills.[5]

    Do you need more examples, Kertie?

    I hope you’re able to see how these brain networks can influence most – if not all – of the personality categories listed by the MBTI theory or listed by the Jungian archetype theory.

    And maybe best of all, we are able to verify or falsify the neural networks theory. You can increase or decrease the activity (seen as more blood flow or less blood flow) in a special network (in a special part of the brain) and then you are able to study what impacts these changes/alterations have on the subject’s personality (traits). Or you can study patients before and after a cerebral insult/damage (like a stroke), or why not mention the odd case of Phineas Gage here and now – https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2017/05/21/528966102/why-brain-scientists-are-still-obsessed-with-the-curious-case-of-phineas-gage?t=1562493815168 – and study the differences before and after the brain injury.

    Of course you could argue that such personality changes caused by experimental tampering with the brain’s function are irrelevant to the personality traits presented in the MBTI theory or in the Jungian archetype theory. But then I urge you to show me in what way the theory of neural networks as an important influencer on human personality is full of bullshit. It’s your obligation to do that, Kertie, not mine, because our debate is about whether the MBTI and/or Jungian archetype theories are so much better than all other competing theories/hypotheses and explanations in order to explain/understand our personality traits.

    Nota bene, Kertie, I just used the word EXPLAIN in the previous sentence, not the word DESCRIBE. I don’t deny that the MBTI and Jungian theories have some describing powers, but I’m more interested in explaining powers when we are going to try to understand our personalities (and what impacts our personalities). To explain a phenomenon is usually more valuable than describing that same phenomenon (and the phenomenon in this case is why we have the personalities we’ve got; actually I think it’s a combination of nature and nurture).

    I hope you won’t argue like many NDE believers do, Kertie. Whenever a new scientific paper is published showing that – let’s say – there is a strong correlation between REM dream intrusion and NDE experiences, the paper in question is dismissed by the NDE believers as being totally irrelevant because, the argument goes, a dead brain can’t dream and the brain IS dead since the EEG lines are flat (a premise that of course needs to be verified, but the NDE believers use that premise as an axiom, i.e. as a statement/proposition that is regarded as being established, accepted, or self-evidently true). Or in short, an NDE believer devotes himself (or herself) to a kind of solipsistic reasoning.

    According to Wikipedia, solipsism is the (philosophical) idea that only one’s mind is sure to exist. As an epistemological position, solipsism holds that knowledge of anything outside one’s own mind is unsure; the external world and other minds cannot be known and might not exist outside the mind. (And that, in turn, leads to a confusion of subjective and objective truths. Which is typical for woo bullshit thinking.)

    Frankly speaking, Kertie, you deserve something much better than being called a woo bullshit thinker. So please use your intelligent mind to something better, i.e. learn more about real neuroscience, and hopefully you’ll agree with me that the concept of neural networks has a much better explanation power (concerning our personality traits) than the Jungian unevidenced theories you adhere to today have.

    Finally a metaphor: Every evening we all know it sooner or later becomes dark and every morning we can see the sun rises again and dispels the darkness. Believing in Jungian theories is like believing the sun sets in the sea in order to disappear under the surface of the water. That is NOT the best/right way to describe what actually happens. I think it’s much better to use the scientific explanation that is known today. And likeways I assert that the idea of using the concept of neural networks in the brain has much more explanation power than the ideas of Myers & Briggs, and Jung, have. So instead of taking the MBTI test, try to study and to understand (and learn) how you can influence the neural networks in your brain.

    All the best for you, Kertie!

    • Kertie

      This will be a bit long, please have patience to read it all and try to understand. Anyway, you are interest in human mind as well as I am:

      “Science never proves anything. Science just verifies or falsifies hypotheses. Nor does pseudoscience prove anything.”

      -I misused the words because my language is Spanish, I only studied English for 2 years!
      What I meant was not “prove”, but “verify”.
      In Spanish “to prove” is “probar” and “verify” is “comprobar”. Pretty similar words.

      “So in a way it’s praiseworthy that Dario Nardi tried to verify the MBTI personality traits “bullshit” theory by using an EEG device. He actually tried to use a recognized neuroscientific method – measuring brain waves with the help of an EEG device – but the method chosen by him is a very blunt and obtuse one.”

      -I’ve admited the EEG method was rudimentary in my message above.

      “BTW, the same can be said about how NDE believers ( = persons who believe NDEs are evidence of a soul leaving the body) act and reason. They, too, refer to EEG waves (or rather the lack of such waves a.k.a. a flat EEG) and claim that a flat EEG must mean that the brain in question is clinically dead and from that assumption draw the conclusion that, therefore, NDE-like experiences have to be a nonlocal consciousness phenomenon. What I mean by that is that the NDE believers probably start with a false (or at least unevidenced) premise, i.e. neurons in the brain may, as a matter of fact, be still alive although the EEG lines are totally flat.”

      -I was in a Christian group for a while to receive human support because I needed it; but I was never convinced by the NDE testimonies, I have always sought explanations of why and how these things happen. I actually thought in a very similar explanation to that experiment with brain’s pigs.
      I don’t trust most believers, they usually are the first ones who lack morality. They actually don’t care for others, just for themselves.
      My morality is based on logic and reason, their is based on fear to go to hell.
      That is not honest and it doens’t make sense.

      -About Jung critics:

      “Jung’s staunchest critics have accused him of either mystical or metaphysical essentialism. Since archetypes are defined so vaguely and since archetypal images have been observed by many Jungians in a wide and essentially infinite variety of everyday phenomena, they are neither generalizable nor specific in a way that may be researched or demarcated with any kind of rigor. Hence they elude systematic study. Jung and his supporters defended the impossibility of providing rigorous operationalised definitions as a problem peculiar not only to archetypal psychology alone, but also other domains of knowledge that seek to understand complex systems in an integrated manner.

      Feminist critiques have focused on aspects of archetypal theory that are seen as being reductionistic and providing a stereotyped view of femininity and masculinity.

      Another criticism of archetypes is that seeing myths as universals tends to abstract them from the history of their actual creation, and their cultural context. Some modern critics state that archetypes reduce cultural expressions to generic decontextualized concepts, stripped bare of their unique cultural context, reducing a complex reality into something “simple and easy to grasp”. Other critics respond that archetypes do nothing more than to solidify the cultural prejudices of the myths interpreter – namely modern Westerners. Modern scholarship with its emphasis on power and politics have seen archetypes as a colonial device to level the specifics of individual cultures and their stories in the service of grand abstraction.

      Others have accused him of a romanticised and prejudicial promotion of ‘primitivism’ through the medium of archetypal theory. Archetypal theory has been posited as being scientifically unfalsifiable and even questioned as to being a suitable domain of psychological and scientific inquiry. Jung mentions the demarcation between experimental and descriptive psychological study, seeing archetypal psychology as rooted by necessity in the latter camp, grounded as it was (to a degree) in clinical case-work.

      Because Jung’s viewpoint was essentially subjectivist, he displayed a somewhat Neo-Kantian perspective of a skepticism for knowing things in themselves and a preference of inner experience over empirical data. This skepticism opened Jung up to the charge of countering materialism with another kind of reductionism, one that reduces everything to subjective psychological explanation and woolly quasi-mystical assertions.”

      -Next thing I will say will be hard to believe. Is a part of my story that should make you understand my point and why I think the way I do (this could easily serve as reference as why other people like me are “disciples” of Jung as you think, because we are pretty similar between us INFJ):

      As I tell you, in June 29, 2019 at 7:43 pm;

      “As 5 years old, I’ve have a more accute perceptive mind than the average 25 years old woman. I had already notions that are taboo to most children (death, disease, sex, and things about human nature). Can you think of a 5 years old thinking about it?”

      Well, I already had those notions as a 5 years old.
      When I was about 9 years old, I can’t helped but see AMAZING similarities between my peers on school. And even among adults.
      I observed carefully their behaviour and many of them (not related persons) looked like they were the SAME person in a different body.
      No matter if one was a girl and the another was a boy, I’ve seen they like if they were the same person. Poetically speaking, like they were the same soul but in different bodies.

      I always wondered why people were so fucking similar. I’ve counted about 15 types of people. Just observing WHAT kind of things they take on consideration.

      As a 15 years old, I asked a lot in Spanish websites why people were fucking the same and why seemed to be just about 15 types of peoples in the world. (I miss my own type LOL)
      (I didn’t knew about Jung, I listened he was pseudoscientific and I care a LOT about science. I didn’t trust my own perception on that).

      TRY TO GUESS THE ANSWERS I’VE GET.

      Well, I’ll make it easy for you:

      People told me my ideas was mystical and/or methaphysical, vague, reduccionist, they told my I had an archetypical view on people and cultures, that this could lead to reduce cultural expressions to generic decontextualized concepts, stripped bare of their unique cultural context, reducing a complex reality into something “simple and easy to grasp”.

      My ideas was judged exactly the same as Jung’s ideas!
      EXACTLY.

      And I even didn’t read ANYTHING about Jung o.O

      Fact is, I perceive people in a VERY similar he did. And why? Because I have the same perceiving function than him. Ni+Fe.

      Metaphorically speaking, is like Jung and me have the same soul. With little differences and nuances that really doens’t matter. But we are the same in essence.
      But is more rational to think people have very similar minds that make them think and behave certain ways, that to think there are such things like “the same soul in different bodies”.

      You asked me why I approve Jung cognitive theory and why not his aliens beliefs.
      It’s simple, is because I don’t see evidence to make sure the existence of aliens. I never saw one. I’m skeptic of things I can’t see and often about my own insights.
      But I see and observe people since I was in kindergarten. So, here is the evidence. An acute sharp mind with very high abilities that can perceive things that others miss.

  48. Kertie

    Quoting you (again):

    “You ask me for better methods to map and explain personality traits. Well, let’s return to the neuroscientific research field once more. I’m sure you’ve heard of the concept of neural networks, Kertie. Or else, read for instance this article: https://digest.bps.org.uk/2018/12/06/researchers-say-theyve-identified-two-brain-networks-one-responsible-for-volition-the-other-for-agency-that-together-underlie-our-sense-of-free-will/ . It’s about the brain’s volition and agency networks (which, in turn, and by the way, are related to the concept of free will).

    And here’s yet another article about neural networks, this time about an impulsive behavior network found in the human brain: https://neurosciencenews.com/impulse-behavior-neural-network-10632/ .

    My own “favorite” among neural networks is, at least at the moment, the salience network. You can read about it here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salience_network .”

    That are instresting theories. I try to understand all perpectives, it is my nature.
    I’ve read a lot about neuroscience, I know the brain is all about neurochemicals, electric signals, the differents part of this organ, etc.

    IMPORTANT : ***About the Impulsive Behaviour article, this one is the thing that directly affects you, right? It is because you have a tendence to be impulsive and lack attention?
    There is actually a link between creativity and a scattered mind.

    https://blogs.psychcentral.com/creative-mind/2010/11/addadhd-and-creativity/

    https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/here-there-and-everywhere/201106/is-the-adhd-brain-more-creative

    There is a *conspiracy* theory that states ADHD actually is a fictional disease. You can research that.
    But I’ll summarize the main point:

    “ADHD is a prime example of a fictitious disease.”

    These were the words of Leon Eisenberg, the “scientific father of ADHD (Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder),” in his last interview before his death.

    I’ve read a lot about ADHD and I’ve found strangely coincidences between that and the ENTP personality. The traits are pretty similar. Amazingly similar.
    If the conspiracy theory happens to be true, then people with ADHD are not ill, just have a brain that operates in a different way. But it is not easy being that way, which leads to think it as an illness.

    ———————

    I already knew about the differences between a injured brain and a healthy one.

    ——————-
    Quote: “Do you need more examples, Kertie?

    I hope you’re able to see how these brain networks can influence most – if not all – of the personality categories listed by the MBTI theory or listed by the Jungian archetype theory.”

    *This is funny because it is actually supports the Jungian achetype theory 😀

    But “evidence” instead take certain personality traits like mental illnesses.

  49. @Kertie: Thank you very much for sharing your interesting thoughts and experiences. Unfortunately I’m on vacation at the moment, but nevertheless I’d like to give you some feedback to your clever comments.

    First my own personality type.As a matter o fact I’m a bit of a lone wolf. When I read about different psychiatric diagnoses none of them is a perfect match, but I think I have some autistic traits (maybe you know that autists very often are atheists as well?). Anyway, I’m definitely more introvert than extrovert. But I can play – pretend to be an – extrovert if I want to. But i can’t say I like it. That’s not my cup of tea.

    Now over to something more interesting (I hope).

    Of course Freud and Jung were not stupid. They did like you do, Kertie. They, too, observed different types of behavior. And then they tried to describe what they noticed. And since they were highly educated people they also tried to explain all the behaviors they found

    They knew that science is not about describing in the first place, but (more) about explaining.

    What I mean is that a person might be pretty good at describing what he/she sees in his/her environment. But at the same time that same person can be a very bad explainer because he/she doesn’t know the real causes behind the behaviors noticed/studied.

    Today most scientists agree that neither Freud’ nor Jung’s explanations can be the right ones. Freud and Jung had probably never heard of neural networks in the brain. Neither had Katharine Cook Briggs and her daughter Isabel Briggs Myers when they constructed the MBTI test after having studied Jung’s theory of psychological types.

    So all of them – Freud, Jung, Briggs and Myers – could not base their ideas on controlled scientific studies of how neural pathways in the brain change when their biochemical and electrical environment shanges. Instead they all had to rely on clinical observations of people and how they behaved. And they analyzed their own behaviors by a method called introspection. And they collected anecdotal evidence.

    These three methods are today regarded as inconclusive and unscientific and therefore mostly dismissed in the modern field of (scientific) psychological research. Of course those methods can contain some grains of truth. But they are at the same time subjective, i.e. not based on objective findings and therefore considered unscientific.

    Jung’s typology theory postulates a sequence of four cognitive functions (thinking, feeling, sensation, and intuition). Each of them has one of two polar orientations (extroversion vs. introversion), thereby giving us a total of eight dominant functions. Also the MBTI test is based on these same eight hypothetical functions (with two opposite functions).

    You should ask yourself, Kertie, if it’s a given fact that there are – must be – 16 different personality types, no more, no less? That is, how can you be so sure there are just 16 different types. Why is it totally wrong to say there are, let’s say, just five, eight, fifteen or twentyfour (choose any number you like)?

    Have you heard of YSWYBIT effect, Kertie? The leters atand for: You see what you believe is true.

    If you expect there are five or eight or fifteen or twentyfour different personality types in the world the odds are very low that you’d see exactly the number of personality types you think and are taught should exist. Remember, Kertie, that for approximately thirty years all cytologists all over the world saw, in their microscopes, that a human cell contains 48 chromosomes, no more, no less. But in 1955, Joe Hin Tjio, chose to use a more advanced technique, and he could just see 46 chromosomes in human somatic cells. Which is the right number. When he published his results and measurements (in 1956), almost all the researchers who had earlier seen 48 chromosomes started to see just 46, like Joe Hin Tjio. How come?

    Have you heard of a Danish writer called Hans Christian Andersen? He once wrote a short tale called “The Emperor’s New Clothes”. You can read the plot of that short tale here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Emperor%27s_New_Clothes#Plot .

    So even if you say that you yourself found out there are just 16 personality types, no more, no less, the most probable explanation to that is that you expected to find 16 personality types, no more, no less.

    When i debate religion with Swedish God believers i sometimes ask them: Suppose you were born in Arabia and your parents were Muslims. Is it not probable, then, that you, too, would have been a Muslim today. Most ot them deny that would be the case, they argue they would have converted to Christianity sooner or later. But we all (?) know the odds are extremely high that they are right. It’s much more likely they would have been Muslims today although they deny it. It’s extremely rare people leave one religion for another (even though it of course happens now and then).

    So we humans are very good at self-deception and wishful thinking. We ALL are. You are, Kertie, and I am, too. That’s why I don’t trust data coming from observations or introspection or so-called anecdotal evidence.

    If the concept of neural pathways in the brain has the best explanation power with respect to different personality types, then it’s a stupid idea to conclude that there can – and must – be only a fixed number of personality types. Let’s assume there are ten neural pathways in the brain that are of great importance for formimg our personalities. Then it goes without saying that you should not confine the number of possible personality types to a fixed number.

    Of course you can simplify your own personality hypothesis and map a special number of personality types. But that’s not science. Then you have, instead, becime a snake oli salesman/saleswoman.

    It’s very probable – and even logical – that you can split up humans and their personality types in how many, or how few, categories/types you want there to be.

    Have you heard of the relationship counselor John Gray who in 1992 became famous by writing a book, in which he concluded that men and women seem to come from different planets and that’s why they have such difficulties understanding each other? With his book “Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus” he became famous all over the world and very rich.

    If you read books about to better understand your marital partner or your friends or your workmates, you’ll soon find out that every writer/adviser uses his own preferred number of personality types to promote his own snake oil sales.

    A relevant question to ask is, Are they all wrong? Or are they all right? I think the best answer is that it depends on whom you ask and what the purpose of the analysis is.

    Another good thing with the neural pathway theory is that it has no focus on a special number of personality types. It doesn’t matter if there are tvo five, eight, sixteen or so.

    And maybe best of all, the neural pathway theory admits that you can change personality type over time. Or with another metaphor: One week maybe you prefer bananas, apples and cherries if you are asked to name three favorite fruits or berries. Next week it’s not impossible that you instead prefer plums, pears and figs. And so on. We know our preferences change over time and that they also depend on what we have done, eaten (and so on) before we are asked the question. (BTW, what you eat can have a greater impact than you normally think on how you feel and on your mental health, see for instance: https://www.the-scientist.com/news-opinion/gut-microbes-may-play-a-role-in-mental-health-disorders-66039 .)

    So, Kertie, it all boils down to that it’s probably a much better theory to see your personality type as a function of how the neural pathways in your brain cooperate with each other rather than assuming that there are just 16 personality types in the world to consider and you – and every one of us – must belong to one of those 16 personality types from birth to death.

    The belief that our personalities are static and never (at least seldom) change is a religious one, which usually means it’s full of woo bullshit. 🙂 . If you are supposed to live in Heaven for an eternity, then there might/will be big problems ahead if all inhabitants in Heaven are not the same day after day.

    Finally, Kertie, a bit off topic: Do you believe in a soul that is nonphysical and maybe eternal and maybe created by a supernatural entity?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s