| Hey! My name is Erik and I’m an FF-ENTP-Ne/Ti CPB(S). At least if you trust Objective Personality. Which you really shouldn’t. I have never typed as ENTP and never really related to the ENTP description. So just make up your own mind and see their ideas more as interesting alternative theories or perspectives. In the end, you are the one who needs to be able to explain yourself. Systems and frameworks can help, but you are going to have to do the majority of the work on your own. Sorry. |
| Objective Personality is a relatively new system that claims to be able to “objectively” type you. But they are also saying that they will need years to test and back up their theories. In their own FAQ, they explain that they are still far from being able to claim to have any scientific evidence. So what is the truth here? |
| First of all, I believe Objective Personality (OP) have a honest and real desire to make the study of personality type more scientific, and I know how challenging that is. I also think they are adding some interesting contributions to better understand personality type. That’s why I am doing a video series studying their concepts and adding my own theories and ideas. I believe typology would be better if different systems learned to work together and collaborate. That’s also why I am working on an Objective Personality self-assessment test. I do this to see if it is possible to come up with falsifiable definitions and statements that can be used to predict your personality type, using the central OP concepts. The test is still in beta and some results are not showing correctly, but you can already see how you would fall on the core scales and begin exploring your Objective Personality type. Take the test here In today’s video, I am talking about the Objective Personality four animals and how you can use them to better understand introverts, extroverts, judging and perceiving types. I hope you will enjoy them and my continued exploration of OP! |
| |
| Watch video |
| I hope you will enjoy this series! Best regards, |
| Erik Thor P.S: I do my work completely for free, on my limited spare time. My website is completely ad-free and I provide my content completely free of charge for anyone. If you would like to support me, consider donating. |
Hey everyone, I’m Erik Thor, an expert on using personality psychology for flow and personal development.
Are Objective Personality Really Objective?
Get your own personalized report
Unlock a deeper understanding of yourself with our comprehensive In-Depth Personal Profile. This 30-35 page report offers unique insights into your personality, providing tailored advice for your career, well-being, and personal growth. It’s more than just a report; it’s a journey to self-discovery and personal development.
ok..Hi, after equating fi with emotions, I think the problem is sensor stereotyping, SJs are dumb, esfps are stupid etc. I think the whole ST vs SP vs NT vs whatever thing is overrated. Most people mistyped the SJ letter combo as NP! (happened with many ‘infps’ i know) and it can work like P. most of your np friends are SJs “guardians”???? percieving is basically forgoing the purified traits of dominant function…so, its bypassing accuracy..usually forgo the kind of like conscientious parts to fit for the
experiential parts. psychologically more information heavy but no way less imposing other ps are often more controlling and planniing thanmost sjs, in my experience. everyones an individual acfter all
By the way youre kind, caring, open-minded…you’re Ne-Fe-Ti-Si imo.
Um, it’s saying that the link on ‘Take the test here’ is a security error and expired when I click on that link? There’s also some weird stuff there about needing to send a new test email, not sure what that’s about.
Getting back to topic, Objective Personality seems to have one main thing going for it, which is recognizing that people can develop their functions in a way that does not match the ‘normal’ stack order. Other than that, their system just seems to add more and more layers of complications to explain things, and most of them don’t really seem necessary or good (e.g. the weird sexism of saying that there is ‘masculine’ and ‘feminine’ functions). Also, Objective Personality probably isn’t going to get recognized as being an ‘objective’ personality system anytime soon; the most scientifically validated part of MBTI is the letters, but they spend all their time looking at functions. Until they prove the connection between letters and functions, they’re kind of doomed to failure. On the other hand, I’d honestly argue that the whole ‘Sum Stack’ idea of functions is far closer to being objectively proven, because that idea does at least have some basic statistics that back up how the functions can be correlated to the letters.
Personally, when I think about what a good test would be like, I wonder if it would be possible to have a test that judges how well you match each function as it shows up in each position in the stack? A lot of people I know figured out more of their type by looking for signs of the inferior function than by looking for signs of the dominant (especially for the introverts), so it’s certainly worth thinking about.
ok..Hi, after equating fi with emotions, I think the problem is sensor stereotyping, SJs are dumb, esfps are stupid etc. I think the whole ST vs SP vs NT vs whatever thing is overrated. Most people mistyped the SJ letter combo as NP! (happened with many ‘infps’ i know) and it can work like P. most of your np friends are SJs “guardians”???? percieving is basically forgoing the purified traits of dominant function…so, its bypassing accuracy..usually forgo the kind of like conscientious parts to fit for the
experiential parts. psychologically more information heavy but no way less imposing other ps are often more controlling and planniing thanmost sjs, in my experience. everyones an individual acfter all
By the way youre kind, caring, open-minded…you’re Ne-Fe-Ti-Si imo.
Um, it’s saying that the link on ‘Take the test here’ is a security error and expired when I click on that link? There’s also some weird stuff there about needing to send a new test email, not sure what that’s about.
Getting back to topic, Objective Personality seems to have one main thing going for it, which is recognizing that people can develop their functions in a way that does not match the ‘normal’ stack order. Other than that, their system just seems to add more and more layers of complications to explain things, and most of them don’t really seem necessary or good (e.g. the weird sexism of saying that there is ‘masculine’ and ‘feminine’ functions). Also, Objective Personality probably isn’t going to get recognized as being an ‘objective’ personality system anytime soon; the most scientifically validated part of MBTI is the letters, but they spend all their time looking at functions. Until they prove the connection between letters and functions, they’re kind of doomed to failure. On the other hand, I’d honestly argue that the whole ‘Sum Stack’ idea of functions is far closer to being objectively proven, because that idea does at least have some basic statistics that back up how the functions can be correlated to the letters.
Personally, when I think about what a good test would be like, I wonder if it would be possible to have a test that judges how well you match each function as it shows up in each position in the stack? A lot of people I know figured out more of their type by looking for signs of the inferior function than by looking for signs of the dominant (especially for the introverts), so it’s certainly worth thinking about.