It’s been described as “basically a horoscope,” and I can see how the types are general and lean into confirmation bias, but why is it considered pseudoscientific specifically? Doesn’t it just describe personality traits people have? I’ve been seeing it as a shorthand way of describing general personality/worldview but I’m guessing that’s not the issue people have with it.
In: Other
Myers-Briggs has never been scientific. It was created by two people with no background in psychology or psychiatry who were big Carl Jung fans and it is based on the Jungian archetypes.
It’s full of Barnum statements that anyone can see themselves in, has poor reproducibility and doesn’t actually have much to say about what happens after the test. You might be an ENTF, so what? What should you do with that in mind?
It’s management consultancy nonsense for people that dropped science at secondary school.
Latest Answers