Writer's Block: Taking It Personally

[rocknload]

[Error: unknown template qotd]

Short answer: I think those tests are bullshit, and me saying hey, I'm an ENTP! is about as useful as saying hey, I'm a Leo/Virgo cusp! In fact, in my case the astrological sign is closer to describing my personality, but it's not like it's saying a lot anyway. The profiles are always filled with phrases like: "They tend to have a perverse sense of humor as well, and enjoy playing devil's advocate." Or: "Sometimes they exaggerate problems and overreact to stumbling blocks, but generally they are positive and their natural pride and stubborn streak keeps them from giving up." Those sound awfully specific, don't they? But honestly, how many people wouldn't identify with those statements?

Pop psychology usually pisses me off, though.

Comments

[ex-monarchy375.livejournal.com]

LMAO ALL OF THAT STUFF IS WORDED SO CAREFULLY. I really think that if you look hard enough, you can find something in anything that you can relate to yourself.

[rocknload.livejournal.com]

That's the idea, I'm pretty sure!

And they're never negative, either. I mean, what about the people I've met who are the black holes on the galaxy of personalities, sucking in all that is good from everything in sight and warping space and time so that everything revolves around them? That's definitely a personality type, but where does it that fall on the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator?

[pretzelcoatl.livejournal.com]

Actually, they can be pretty negative. :P

Not that I'm LEAPING TO THE DEFENSE of personality typing, of course. God I hate defending pop psychology.

[rocknload.livejournal.com]

Are they? I don't think I've ever seen one that didn't seem to me to be spinning even glaring flaws into something positive, quirky, and unique. Like the whole word is populated with Mary Sues or something, I don't know.

[pretzelcoatl.livejournal.com]

This page does: http://www.personalitypage.com/relationships.html

But you're kind of right about some descriptions, and how most people tend to treat the concept of typing. There are so many people bragging that their type is "the most rare." GAH. Both sides of "I'm a special snowflake!" really really bug me. >:[

[sunsetsred.livejournal.com]

See, the reason I think it's completely different from astrology is that it's not going "LOL YOU'RE THIS RANDOMLY" and overly vague and generic. It's like saying you're left-brained or right-brained, it's an actual "Okay, are you an introvert or extrovert?"

Now, any description that is supposed to define a million people who just happen to share 4 characteristics is going to be a generalization, but it's not that much of a stretch to go "extroverts are more outgoing than introverts".

[rocknload.livejournal.com]

People being left-brained or right-brained is actually totally made up psuedo-scientific bullshit popularized by the media, though! That in particular drives me nuts, in fact, probably because it freaking ignores the fact that people are not logical or creative—they traits are not polar opposites, they actually coincide more often than not, and drawing weird lines like that makes no sense.

[immelmanturn.livejournal.com]

I roll with astrology only because I like being a centaur.

[rocknload.livejournal.com]

Dude, I want to be a goddamn centaur. I am nothing cool.

[immelmanturn.livejournal.com]

What are you?

[rocknload.livejournal.com]

A lion in Western astrology, a freaking ox in the Chinese one.

[immelmanturn.livejournal.com]

Dude, lions are awesome! And ox are cool, at least you're not a rabbit or something.

I'm a dragon

[unicorn]

I LOVE BEING A CENTAUR.

We are the cool things.

I am also a snake.

[immelmanturn.livejournal.com]

DUDE WE ARE SERIOUSLY TOTALLY AWESOME.

I mean, other people are virgins or water bearers or fish and stuff. Fuck that.

[rocknload.livejournal.com]

Just because you two lucked out on the RANDOM ANIMAL ASSIGNMENTS doesn't make these things more valid. ACTUALLY IT MAKES THEM MORE TERRIBLE IN MY EYES.

[maxiboom.livejournal.com]

Whatever! Nondescript pots of water forever!

[idgiebay]

Hear hear. *toast*

[rocknload.livejournal.com]

The tests can be fun! Sort of like those Which Character From Firefly Are You tests.

[idgiebay]

Yes, they can be! I enjoy taking them myself, but I harbor no beliefs that they're accurate representations of who I am. XD

[immelmanturn.livejournal.com]

Your icon reminds me of Mt. Rushmore.

[rocknload.livejournal.com]

I think answering the act of answer the questions might be valuable in and of itself, because it does make you sort of think about the kind of person you are and stuff. But the actual results? Fun, but eh. Unless they're telling me that I'm MY FAVORITE CHARACTER or that I'm going to grow up to be an evil genius or something, the wordy explanations are irrelevant.

[unicorn]

I tend to take it a little more seriously (though only on my own behalf) mostly because ONE of them fits me perfectly while the rest sound nothing like me and I get it on every single variant of the stupid test that exists. But I am kind of unusual like that, my mom tried to tell me she was four different ones.

Edit: Looking back over it, I think I only tend to trust it because it identifies flaws I've already noticed myself. Heh.

[rocknload.livejournal.com]

You strike me as a person who's unusually self-aware to the point where an online test on the Internet is probably going to have no affect on your perception of your personality whatsoever. This might affect why you routinely get the same results no matter how the writer is slanting the test and stuff!

Since I can never decide if I'm an introvert or an extrovert or a rational logical person or an impulsive intuitive one—probably because I am none of these things—the test just fails for me. My results depend on how the author is defining those words and even then I'm like, barely over whatever line they've drawn, which makes me doubt the effectiveness of the whole exercise.

[unicorn]

I think you're an ixtroverted rational intuitive. And it occurs to me that most clear-cut categories like that only really work if it IS, in fact, clear-cut! People aren't in general.

[rocknload.livejournal.com]

They aren't! I mean, you can approximate, but if you're doing that enough then it's sort of like what's the point? Plus, the Myers-Briggs in particular sets things as opposites of each other, and we kind of accept that this makes sense but if you think about it, deciding that say FEELING and THINKING are mutually exclusive polarities is sort of arbitrary.