I thought there just weren't enough of them. Most such questionnaires depend a lot on conflicting answers to eliminate the gratuitous and delusional and get closer to what we are rather than what we think we are or what we'd like to be or be thought of. FWIW I was most impressed with the Strengths and Weaknesses section of the results. It seems a good way to determin just how accurate the generalized results were.

ISTP-A

I read that basically as "virtuoso's usually have some level of autism".

Architect
INTJ-T

it is funny that i have made in the past first-person shooter maps with unreal editor, and i enjoyed it alot, actually my favorite job would be map making for fps games :P

I had to take this in college, then at a course for work and I've been an ISTJ every time

Instead of lazily and glibly dropping a Google link in, why don't you explain, from your own understanding of what you have read, why the test is inaccurate, citing relevant sources?

Of course, I am absolutely of the understanding that such tests to an extent rely on luck, cold reading and creative error margins, but I also would hold that there is at least some accuracy to a test which asks 100 questions on a sliding scale and filters the results down into specific categories. I have done the test twice [once flippantly, once carefully] and I got the same result each time.

It's pretty obvious that the point is that the Meyers-Briggs test has been permanently debunked a long time ago. You can either find and accept the easy and obvious truth, or you can pretend it doesn't exist, and defend and try to fight over the lie.

The Meyer-Briggs test has been debunked but not as a lie, but merely incomplete information. Even within the link provided it mentions that it doesn't mean the test or it's results are useless, it just means it is a very coarse assessment of an extremely complicated system, our personalities. It's like summing up Hamlet as the story of an introspective somewhat troubled prince and the familial and political intrigue of royalty in a fictional Denmark. It isn't a lie but it surely is nowhere near the same as the depth of the entire story and all it's components. It's not the same as reading the whole work and it most certainly isn't the same as actually living as someone like Hamlet. It still works within the limitations of the overview.

Hmm, now the question is, based on the above statement which personality is that?
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/b...ant-narcissist

But hey who are we to judge right?

Just because it doesn't mean anything doesn't make it so that it's not fun to read what it says....

That "judgement" thing is a two-way street.

http://scholarship.law.berkeley.edu/...ornialawreview

I think it has considerable more value than mere fun, though that is also a valid way to view the results. Consider that some people place great value in the absolutely ridiculous assessment of Astrology that asks zero questions beyond what part of the year was your birth. Humans routinely make deep judgments of other humans based on far less than 100 tailored questions such as what we wear or our gender or shade of our skin. This questionnaire has far more validity than those superficial conclusions.

Adventurer
ISFP-T

But only about 60% accurate

Relevance?