AdamF

I own and run http://www.myersbriggstypeindicator.co.uk I noticed that the image for the 4 dichotomies has been pasted on this website. Google now links to this site for my image. I would be grateful if one of two things would happen. Either the image to be removed, or for it to be credited to the website with a hyper link http://www.myersbriggstypeindicator.co.uk

Many thanks,

Dan

Someone above posited that the church felt ENFJ to them, which is the classic “HR Manager” type. I’m not sure the church is ESTJ, but it’s easy to perceive it that way because: 1) ESTJs like to take charge and are outspoken, 2) ESTJs are the “preservers of tradition”, 3) SJs (all 4 SJ types) comprise 40-45% of the population and are the cultural bias in the US, and 4) ESTJs are organization-oriented (they like hierarchy and formalizing structure). The other types usually allow them to do this because they aren’t that interested in those activities. INFPs (if that is Jesus’ type) are not generally creators of organizations. They would inspire people around them to do things. I suspect most churches would characterize themselves as ESTJ with the exceptions of those that have very distinct non-mainstream dogmas (e.g. Scientology, Hare Krishna, etc.). I’ll have to keep an eye open this conference weekend to see what organizational MBTI indicators I catch.

The other difficulty is that local wards probably differ greatly in terms of organizational type. So even if the twelve have a type bias (I think I see a few different types in there), that may play out differently in our local wards. I would probably peg Monson as an ESFJ. Uchdorff, hmmm, maybe an ENTJ. Eyring–INTJ (I think, a researcher type). Packer seems classic ESTJ. And I doubt Peter, James and John were INFPs (because INFPs aren’t as common as other types), although there is little information to go on.

There is Jesus the Man, and there is Jesus the mission (the Savior of mankind). I don’t think knowing one is automatically knowing the other. We can know him both as a person/friend and as our Savior. Knowing Him as our Savior always ends up being about us, though.

Even if the Savior is INFP, we should not try to become INFPs. I personally disagree with the notion of type development (that eventually we will all be all types, therefore perfect). Adaption to other “types” doesn’t mean we become that type–we just have a high degree of self-awareness and social skill (emotional intelligence, not MBTI). A Savior of any other type would still love us and redeem us.

I suspect Christ finds this humorous…trying to define him in our terms. He’s probably wondering, when will we ever grow up.

One of the strengths of the MBTI when it is used correctly is it’s description of the interplay of one’s different personality preferences and it’s avoidance of norm-setting. It seems like the metric you are using has definite norms of psychological health and adaptation to society. For instance, Extroversion and Openness to Experience are “good” things, am I right? The MBTI is only designed to be used with relatively healthy individuals, mentally speaking. Neuroticism isn’t measured by anything on the indicator. Neuroticism could be classified by type theory as perhaps “life not supporting you in your innate preferences”. That said, how can we classify Jesus, as God, as anything less than perfect on all of these metrics you list?

How about we speculate about a psychometrically valid personality inventory that generates useful (eg, predictive) results, such as the NEO-PI-R? Or any other Big Five inventory? Let me just say, for the record, that I do think the MBTI has its uses in certain settings, but any idiot using it as part of a selection battery deserves to have a lawsuit the size of China handed to them. It simply isn’t a predictive measure designed for looking at job performance. However there are personality measures that are, and there are personality measures, such as various iterations/adaptations of the NEO, that are equally useful for the things that the MBTI are used for.

As a trained Industrial/Organizational Psychologist (that is, I don’t just use these tests, I develop them). My current job is developing noncognitive measures (such as personality inventories), so I’m pretty close to this sort of thing. Trust me when I say that the MBTI is not well respected among psychometricians for very valid reasons. It is used in business settings primarily because it is easy to use, understand and compare. One thing that some psychometricians are bad at is developing tests that are both psychometrically valid and easy to use and understand. That is a challenge that is supremely difficult.

Now, as for Jesus personality type on the Big Five? There are five factors–Openness to Experience, Concientiousness, Extroversion, Agreeableness and Neuroticism (or Emotional Stability, depending on how you think about it). For the sake of simplicity, we will say that these are scored from 1 to 5. Christ showed a willingness to venture outside the normal mores of his society, which is a mark of Openness to Experience. In fact most of his ministry involved breaking the centuries of prohibitions built by the Jewish traditions. So I give him a 5 on this. Christ was supremely conscientious. He never failed in his duties, was always true to his loyalties, so I give him a 5 on this. Extroversion is, as hawkgrrl noted, a bit trickier, and for similar reasons to hers, I am going to give him a more neutral score (and this is one of the reasons that the Big Five continuous scores are more psychometrically valid than the MBTI) of 3. Agreeableness is an area where I think that we can easily say that Christ was very agreeable–although there were times when his reasons and ideas were inscrutable, and his occasional righteous anger and aloofness mar this a bit. I still give him a 5. Finally, Neuroticism. We will think of this as Emotional Stability and give him a 5–he was very stable and did not have any noted or notable mood swings or difficulty controlling his emotions, even when under extreme stress.

So that’s my take on it. Feel free to disagree. I’m not going to classify him on the MBTI as I consider it false doctrine.

I am an ISTJ and am about as far as you can get from Bruce McConkie’s positions on most doctrinal issues you can name. Maybe that’s why I can relate to people like him.

Doc - Being an INFP doesn’t give you a God complex, but maybe being a doctor does!

One tenet of MBTI is that there is no type that is better than others, and you can work well with all types if you are aware and open-minded enough. The Kiersey sorter (a derivative of MBTI) tells more about the types by identifying patterns of behavior across types: SJs tend to be preservers of traditions & laws (SPs hate that), SPs like to be daring and adventurous and break the rules that they don’t like (SJs hate that), NFs tend to be idealists with causes and may be viewed as unrealistic by other types, NTs are great strategic thinkers but can also be seen as know-it-alls who make you feel seen through. I have to think McConkie was an ISTJ. I would peg Talmage as INTP.

I also figured they’d deserve whoever they hired. *grin*

I always test almost dead-center, balanced, middle of the road on these tests. It baffles the testers - simply because of the original bias mentioned at the beginning of this post. (”the premise that people tend to prefer one of each pair more than the other.”) I really love to be with others (in person or on-line), but I also love to sit all by myself and read. I am the life of the party for half the party and sitting quietly talking with a friend or my wife the other half. I love History and English, but I am a natural mathematician and musician. I analyze everything, but often act based on my feelings and impressions. I have no problem “wasting time”, but I am doing something all the time. yada, yada, yada . . .

I also hate these tests because of the practical application for which they often are used. Different versions (including this one) have been used on two separate occasions to deny me a job for which I was applying. Seriously, I was told that I was the leading candidate twice, but after the test results were analyzed I was told that the companies were looking for the “right personality type” - which I wasn’t. This was despite the fact that I had been extraordinarily successful in the exact arena for which they were hiring. I had proven my ability, but that ability was discounted in favor of personality type.

Those experiences have colored the way I look at these tests and the way they are interpreted. There almost always is a conscious or unconscious bias involved whenever conclusions are reached about the practical meaning of the results. (I’m sure you recognize that, hawkgrrrl, given how you phrased your post, but I just felt it needed to be said.)

I look at the scriptures, and I see a story in which I simply can’t classify His personality. I see someone who weighed each situation and acted accordingly - who doesn’t appear to have had a set paradigm within which He always operated. I see a real balance. Furthermore, we have such an incredibly sketchy picture of His life even during His ministry that it’s hard to have any confidence that we are getting an accurate view of His personality.

I look at the Sermon on the Mount, and I see a blueprint for perfection (whole, finished,fully developed character) that transcends personality types. I read of His life, and I see examples of each characteristic listed there - but I also see instances where He acted outside those characteristics. Therefore, if I had to pick a personality type from this measurement, I would agree with JfQ: the whole, finished, fully developed EISNTFJP.

So, I’m going to think that, even in his humanness, Jesus was perfectly and comfortably capable in all vectors. I love how you argued from the scriptures for INFP, since I’m an INTP. But I think it reads that way because the writers of scripture tend to be those #$% ESTJ, who would be most shocked and impressed with how Christ made the opposite modes work.

Great post Hawgrrrl….really makes one think doesnt it. I have my own ideas of what Jesus is like and I enjoy the anarchist, peacemaker, and personable interpretation of Christ’s personality.

I’ve been classified as both INTP (The Thinker) and ENTP (The Visionary) in separate professionally proctored tests. Either way, if that doesn’t explain my answer on this question, maybe so for those who know me from other threads…

It’s tricky to identify other’s types for them, as the strength of the MBTI is self-verification. Also, while I can accept that Jesus’s human side had conceivably an MBTI type, does his divine nature have one as well? Wouldn’t God transcend the MBTI? I guess if He has a certain hair color, He could have a certain personality…

I know a lot of INFPs who are turned off by LDS Church culture. That’s an interesting observation if you connect it with Jesus and Joseph…

I would also say the current Church culture favors extraverted intuitive feeling judgers, but that’s my weird perspective.