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
In general people don’t like being generalized lol. Any sort of a system for splitting people into categories is going to see push back sooner or later but the most valid criticism of MBTI is that it’s just a set of self-reported characteristics. Once you’ve taken an evaluation if you didn’t like the way it categorized you and you’re smart it’s pretty trivial to respond certain ways to get other categorization the next time you take it. Its been around long enough now and become well enough known that people will presume other people have manipulated their own results and invariably sooner or later it ceases to be scientific at all. Of course, this rationale applies to nearly the entire realm of psychology if you aim it broadly enough.
Latest Answers