99%er arrested for trying to close their account at Citibank!

Hmmm so you direct comments at one person when they are intended for another. Thatt might help me unravel some of the things you post. Do you have other such distinctive posting techniques we should be aware of ?

I'm not understanding what you're saying.

The "old grouch" comment was in answer to a post by Dr. WHO, not your post.


And, obviously the question about the MBTI was also directed to Dr. Who, not you.

Does that clarify anything for you?

Or maybe I can put you back on "ignore," that would certainly resolve your confusion issues.
 
Werbung:
You sound like a terrible old grouch for such a young man!

There are legitimate times for various emotions. Anger is inappropriate expressed at a brother who has done nothing wrong but apporpriate expressed at the pedophile who rapes a kid in the neighborhood.

Grouchy? If that is the way you see me perhaps it is because you are sympahtetic to communism and you propose things that are being done to hurt this country and are unconstitutional. I never once remember seeing you address the concern about them being unconstitutional. Either you just don't care or your fingers are in your ears. Grouchyness is the least severe appropriate emotion when faced with that. Rage would be better.

People have the right to protest. . .and the support for those protesters is MUCH higher than it ever was for the tea party!
Of course they do. Did I ever say they don't? I just am saying they need to follow the law while they protest. Do you think they should follow the law?

Do I care if support is higher for a group of people who are misguided than for a group of people who want a return to constitutional principles? Do I agree that you are right, excepting for the influence of the media and skewed meanignless polls in Time? No, in fact I literally laughed out loud. But if you want to think that it can only be beneficial come next election.

So. . .get used to it! ;):)

Time (not Time) will tell.


By the way. . .Are you an ISTJ? That's where I would assume you would fit, based both on your ideologies, your choice of words, and your dogmatic style of writing.

What do you think?


I don't think it is relevant in the slightest. The only question you need to ask yourself is if you can learn something from me.

Can you guess what I am?

I don't care. (I mean that in the friendliest of ways) I listen to what you say and ask if it is right each time you say something. Whether you were wrong before or whether you say it for whatever reason does not matter to me.

Personally I find inventories like that to be circular. Why would I care about a test that claims behavior could be predicted based on traits that are themselves inferred from behavior? That is basically a self-report? And yet fails to have strong validity? When you ask a pig if he would prefer to wallow in mud or dust and he tells you "mud", then label him an MW (mud-wallower), have you really learned anything more than what they pig could have just told you. The results would only be as good as the insight of the pig.

But you could do an internet search to discover that the test lacks validity and is circular so don't just trust me.
 
There are legitimate times for various emotions. Anger is inappropriate expressed at a brother who has done nothing wrong but apporpriate expressed at the pedophile who rapes a kid in the neighborhood.

Grouchy? If that is the way you see me perhaps it is because you are sympahtetic to communism and you propose things that are being done to hurt this country and are unconstitutional. I never once remember seeing you address the concern about them being unconstitutional. Either you just don't care or your fingers are in your ears. Grouchyness is the least severe appropriate emotion when faced with that. Rage would be better.


Of course they do. Did I ever say they don't? I just am saying they need to follow the law while they protest. Do you think they should follow the law?

Do I care if support is higher for a group of people who are misguided than for a group of people who want a return to constitutional principles? Do I agree that you are right, excepting for the influence of the media and skewed meanignless polls in Time? No, in fact I literally laughed out loud. But if you want to think that it can only be beneficial come next election.



Time (not Time) will tell.





I don't think it is relevant in the slightest. The only question you need to ask yourself is if you can learn something from me.



I don't care. (I mean that in the friendliest of ways) I listen to what you say and ask if it is right each time you say something. Whether you were wrong before or whether you say it for whatever reason does not matter to me.

Personally I find inventories like that to be circular. Why would I care about a test that claims behavior could be predicted based on traits that are themselves inferred from behavior? That is basically a self-report? And yet fails to have strong validity? When you ask a pig if he would prefer to wallow in mud or dust and he tells you "mud", then label him an MW (mud-wallower), have you really learned anything more than what they pig could have just told you. The results would only be as good as the insight of the pig.

But you could do an internet search to discover that the test lacks validity and is circular so don't just trust me.

As a "shrink," you should know that the MBTI does have very good validity. Do you also have that much contempt for Carl Jung? As an advocate of "individualism," why would you feel that others' report would have more validity than self-report?

Have you ever worked with the MBTI? I know only worked with it, I worked for the company who publishes it. . . not in the "developping" process, but as a simple HR person. . .interesting though!

Have you asked yourself if you can learn anything from ME?
For exemple. . .have you ever wonder about another, kinder, friendlier type of Capitalism?

Have you looked at "Consciencious Capitalism?" There may be an area where we could agree on something. . .but obviously, you would have to be open to "learn something from me," which you seem to be too confident in your own knowledge to do!

And, I think I said that before, but I a do not believe in the "literal word of the Bible," nor do I believe in the "literal word of the Constitution." For me, both of those are a GUIDELINE (useful, as long as they are kept alive by allowing reason and changes of circumstances to adjust the LITERAL part of it!)

I know you disagree with this, and I don't really care. As one exemple, I believe that we have done just as much "interpretation" of the constitution by looking at "the right to bear arms" as an unlimited right, no matter how the technology, and conditions in this world evolve, than if we would if we put some rational limits to it (i.e., I do not believe that our right to bear arms was ever intended to give us the right to bear AK 47 or grenades, or . . .eventually an atomic bomb or chemical weapon, but the fundamentalists will insist that it means just about ANY arms!. . . sorry, I think that is just about as dumb a concept as that example you were trying to use with the pig wallowing in mud or dust!).

And I am no more "sympathetic" to Communism as you are to Socialism. . .which I am sympathetic to! But you knew that all along, didn't you. I guess you have been called "a grouch" before, because it sure hit a nerve! And yet, I was ONLY referring to that ONE post where you sounded like you were in a bad mood. . .

Oh well. . .enjoy your day. .and "smile," your kids will be better off for it!
 
As a "shrink," you should know that the MBTI does have very good validity.

"Validity of MBTI
The validity of a test estimates how well the test measures what it purports to measure. There are two types of validity that should be considered:

1.

Construct validity - does the MBTI relate to other scales measuring similar concepts?
2.

Criterion-related validity - does the MBTI predict specific outcomes related to interpersonal relations or job performance?

The National Academy of Sciences committee reviewed data from over 20 MBTI research studies and concluded that only the Intraversion-Extroversion scale has adequate construct validity. That is high correlations with comparable scales of other tests and low correlations with tests designed to assess different concepts. In contrast, the S-N and T-F scales show relatively weak validity. No mention was made in this review about the J-P scale.

Overall, the review committee concluded that the MBTI has not demonstrated adequate validity although its popularity and use has been steadily increasing. The National Academy of Sciences review committee concluded that: ‘at this time, there is not sufficient, well-designed research to justify the use of the MBTI in career counseling programs’, the very thing that it is most often used for."

Do you also have that much contempt for Carl Jung? As an advocate of "individualism," why would you feel that others' report would have more validity than self-report?

I like Carl Young just fine. I recognize that self-report measures have their place but also have problems.
Have you ever worked with the MBTI? I know only worked with it, I worked for the company who publishes it. . . not in the "developping" process, but as a simple HR person. . .interesting though!

Only in grad school.
Have you asked yourself if you can learn anything from ME?
For exemple. . .have you ever wonder about another, kinder, friendlier type of Capitalism?

Sounds like an EXCELLENT idea for a thread.
Have you looked at "Consciencious Capitalism?" There may be an area where we could agree on something. . .but obviously, you would have to be open to "learn something from me," which you seem to be too confident in your own knowledge to do!

Again that sound interesting. No, I have not heard of that before. I am open to hearing about it.
And, I think I said that before, but I a do not believe in the "literal word of the Bible," nor do I believe in the "literal word of the Constitution." For me, both of those are a GUIDELINE (useful, as long as they are kept alive by allowing reason and changes of circumstances to adjust the LITERAL part of it!)

You may think the const is a guideline but you would be wrong. Sometimes the wrongness of your position is so blatantly true that I do not need to be dogmatic to assert it.
I know you disagree with this, and I don't really care. As one exemple, I believe that we have done just as much "interpretation" of the constitution by looking at "the right to bear arms" as an unlimited right, no matter how the technology, and conditions in this world evolve, than if we would if we put some rational limits to it (i.e., I do not believe that our right to bear arms was ever intended to give us the right to bear AK 47 or grenades, or . . .eventually an atomic bomb or chemical weapon, but the fundamentalists will insist that it means just about ANY arms!. . . sorry, I think that is just about as dumb a concept as that example you were trying to use with the pig wallowing in mud or dust!).

It is presently unlimited except where other const articles apply, and it needs to be amended. That is plain and simply true.
And I am no more "sympathetic" to Communism as you are to Socialism. . .which I am sympathetic to! But you knew that all along, didn't you.
I seem to remember you waxing eloquent if slightly on marx.

I guess you have been called "a grouch" before, because it sure hit a nerve! And yet, I was ONLY referring to that ONE post where you sounded like you were in a bad mood. . .

actually you are the very first person to have called me that particular word.

I think the word you are searching for when talking about me is "smug". That I have been called before and I recognize some truth in that and that is is a flaw of mine.

" Smug -1.
contentedly confident of one's ability, superiority, or correctness; complacent."

I AM confident in my correctness, well, mostly when I am correct, I also freely admit when I am wrong.
 
"Validity of MBTI
The validity of a test estimates how well the test measures what it purports to measure. There are two types of validity that should be considered:

1.

Construct validity - does the MBTI relate to other scales measuring similar concepts?
2.

Criterion-related validity - does the MBTI predict specific outcomes related to interpersonal relations or job performance?

The National Academy of Sciences committee reviewed data from over 20 MBTI research studies and concluded that only the Intraversion-Extroversion scale has adequate construct validity. That is high correlations with comparable scales of other tests and low correlations with tests designed to assess different concepts. In contrast, the S-N and T-F scales show relatively weak validity. No mention was made in this review about the J-P scale.

Overall, the review committee concluded that the MBTI has not demonstrated adequate validity although its popularity and use has been steadily increasing. The National Academy of Sciences review committee concluded that: ‘at this time, there is not sufficient, well-designed research to justify the use of the MBTI in career counseling programs’, the very thing that it is most often used for."



I like Carl Young just fine. I recognize that self-report measures have their place but also have problems.


Only in grad school.


Sounds like an EXCELLENT idea for a thread.


Again that sound interesting. No, I have not heard of that before. I am open to hearing about it.


You may think the const is a guideline but you would be wrong. Sometimes the wrongness of your position is so blatantly true that I do not need to be dogmatic to assert it.


It is presently unlimited except where other const articles apply, and it needs to be amended. That is plain and simply true.
I seem to remember you waxing eloquent if slightly on marx.



actually you are the very first person to have called me that particular word.

I think the word you are searching for when talking about me is "smug". That I have been called before and I recognize some truth in that and that is is a flaw of mine.

" Smug -1.
contentedly confident of one's ability, superiority, or correctness; complacent."

I AM confident in my correctness, well, mostly when I am correct, I also freely admit when I am wrong.


Smug is a good word. . .and I do agree that you are open to reconsidering your statements, alghough rarely open to revising your statements.

This is why I respect you, and also the reason why you may be one of the few people in this forum from whom I would be willing to learn from. . .if you give me the same courtesy!. . . You see, I am also "confident in my ability," and some may se me as "complacent."

Now, re: MBTI. while it does not meet the "academic criteria" of highest validity or reliability (except, as you noted, for the I / E axis, it is extremely useful in many areas, many more areas than it USED to be limited to.

I wonder if you would take the time to look at the NEW MBTI, with its expended axis (i.e., instead of just offering the dichotomy of I/E on the first axis, it looks at it on a continuum, and further offers 4 more continuums under that one axis, that "fine tunes" the results of the test. For example, although I usually test as far to the Introvert side on the continuum, one measure under that axis brings me back toward the center of the continuum, because I test very high on "communication". . .basically, although I am a strong introvert, I have a HIGH need to communicate. . .which seems contradictory, until you realize that people may avoid "large groups" or full exposure, but truly enjoy and get energy from one on one or smaller group communication.) All axis now offer that "fine tuning" of the continuum.

The Constitution will always be what people make of it. For some, it will be an usefull guideline, a respected document that they want to keep ACTIVE and ALIVE in a changing world, for other, it will be a document elevated to a "cult" state, dogmatic and unmovable, frozen in time and . . .losing its real significance if it doesn't evolve to meet today's technological, global, and political evolution.

I have too much respect for the Constitution to see it as a "dead" document, with no active life left in it.
 
Werbung:
Smug is a good word. . .and I do agree that you are open to reconsidering your statements, alghough rarely open to revising your statements.
I am always open to revision though usually don't expect to because before I post I often do an internet search to confirm what I am saying first. Now if my source is wrong...

This is why I respect you, and also the reason why you may be one of the few people in this forum from whom I would be willing to learn from. . .if you give me the same courtesy!. . . You see, I am also "confident in my ability," and some may se me as "complacent."

I already have and will learn from you again no doubt. But I do not think that respect is a prerequisite for learning. Even despicable people say things that are valuable at times. Always consider the message and not the messenger.

I wonder if you would take the time to look at the NEW MBTI, with its expended axis

I did not even know there was a new Briggs. Sure give me a link - I suppose the education forum is the best place for it.

The Constitution will always be what people make of it. For some, it will be an usefull guideline, a respected document that they want to keep ACTIVE and ALIVE in a changing world, for other, it will be a document elevated to a "cult" state, dogmatic and unmovable, frozen in time and . . .losing its real significance if it doesn't evolve to meet today's technological, global, and political evolution.

IMO it should be neither alive and subject to changing meanings nor should it be elevated to cult status - what it is is a legal document, the highest in the land. Like all legal docs it is subject to interpretation but meant to convey only one particular message. The degree to which those interpretations are consistent with the original message is the degree to which those interpretations are accurate. If one wants it to mean something different for different times then there was a process provided to do that. No other process is legitimate. Saying that it is a living document and that the meanings change is wrong. But so far I know of no part of it that is obsolete as written. Even the section on slavery were intended to be changed not merely adapted with no amendments.


I have too much respect for the Constitution to see it as a "dead" document, with no active life left in it.


What would a dead doc look like?
 
Back
Top