They guy took some time to put together what is actually a somewhat thoughtful thesis that is, like it or not, supported by some facts and evidence spread over 8 general data points to arrive at a probable as opposed to categorical conclusion.
And I've read through all the responses thus far, yours included, and not a single one of them even attempted to refute it with a true counter argument of their own. All we got was the usual ad hominems and what Socrates called the tool of the loser when the debate is lost, slander. You, after laughing out load rather than thinking first, chose to dismiss his entire argument by attacking the legitimacy of Myers Briggs rather than provide any actual counter evidence that the personality type he's talking about isn't a useful indicator in his probability model.
There is a psychological term for this kind of hyper-defensiveness, but you can figure that much out on your own I hope.
His theory may have some holes in it, but one thing is certain: Nobody has offered a response that properly disputes it. On the other hand, we have learned some valuable things in the responses, like the size of the army boots his mother wears and that a mother and daughter who weren't licensed psychologists created the Myers Briggs personality indicator. Wonderful!
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/18/2016 05:16PM by 9er8er.
