Intoscience

I don't know, and maybe I will never find out during my own experience. I would hope that it doesn't play a significant role in the hiring process, mainly because I agree that the tests don't necessarily represent a person's true capability or potential. So why are they used at all? The company whose job I have applied for considers itself to be a modern, diverse and inclusive business, committed to people, the environment and sustainability. A sales pitch I know, so why are they using a personality test as part of the employment selection process? I assume that they may attribute certain personality categories to be beneficial for certain job roles. I can't fathom for what other reason they may want to do these tests other than they may also consider certain personality types to fit better with the company's ethos and culture? I also assume that they place some faith in the results of the test, else why conduct them, other than to tick boxes? By the way, I have progressed to the last stage in the interview process, which is encouraging.

I'm just saying that if I believed god was real then I couldn't imagine what god was or looked like. So yeah, to fill the gaps I may consider god as a reflection of human self image. But then I can't imagine how such a "being" could be god. In a sense its a bit like trying to imagine what was before the big bang, what is at the edge of the universe what exists beyond space & time... Asking such questions may in themselves be nonsensical but they also might be quite valid. So I imagine god to be the same - beyond our imagination but not beyond existence (in some form). If you think about such things more closely you begin to realise that even our language may lack the ability to describe these things. If so then how can one begin to for an image? Our imagination is limited really to our experiences, our sensory inputs. I image god to be outside of this.

Well yeah that's sort of the point, isn't it? (my bold) Maybe it could be interpreted this way but that was not my initial intent, no, well sort of to a degree I guess. I imagine that if I believed in god then to me god would be unimaginable in my mind. Since god in this sense is all powerful and encompassing then god sits outside (if that even means anything) all that we can ever imagine. Making it impossible to imagine god and the "realm" god resides, (again if that evens means anything). So my statement was to summarise and embrace this notion.

I try to apply logic where I can and try when possible to avoid contradictions. Though, being human, with complex emotions, ideologies and all the other distractions, I fail miserably at times.

+1 I'm getting confused on what we are trying to establish? I consider myself an atheist = I don't believe in any god/s deity, divinity... If I believed in any or even just one of the said then I would consider myself a theist, but would then go on to define what it is I believe in.

So this is the only way I can comprehend something that cannot be imagined in any physical or metaphysical sense or experience we may have or ever encounter/ed.

What do you find interesting, I'm intrigued. Is it because my statement is paradoxical?

Atheist - someone who does not believe in any god or gods, or who believes that no god or gods exist: I'm not sure how I would interpret this, does it mean that to be an atheist you have to not believe in "any" god? Or would it be applicable to those that believe in only one god - theist to one, atheist to all others? Sorry but I'm edging towards Dis n Dat on this point.

I'm quit surprised by this. Though I can understand that if a god is presented as a person then the person imagining that god may well indeed imagine a person from their ethnicity. The classical Christian western image of god being an old man with a long white beard sitting on a large throne in heaven for example, not dissimilar to that of the Greek god Zeus. When god is described as a person, then I guess its difficult to image a metaphysical being other than that in the shape of a human being. If god is described alternatively as a force that surrounds and occupies everything then this makes it easier to discard an image of a person. Similar to George Lucas's "force" in the Starwars trilogies. In my mind "if" I believed in god then I would imagine something that cannot be imagined at all.

Yes, so maybe (objectively speaking) the tests do exactly what they are designed to do - categorise people by personality? This was my point, I expected the ambiguity to yield differing results, turns out all the results were the same. In my feeble mind is this then not objective enough? Would a person asking the same questions not form an opinion based on their own emotional bias, be that intentional or non intentional? They are surely bound to use themselves as comparison to make a judgement. A test doesn't care, it's just a computer program that uses a set of universal algorithms to yield a non emotionally biased result.

The OP is not likely to reply based on posting history - 4 new topics all on the same day, no response to any as yet. So while we are waiting maybe you would like to give us your thoughts on the subject?

No doubt that we all share traits that fit into each category. As i said before there is bound to be overlap and likely that each of us would qualify as more than one type certainly as we progress through life and our attitudes and experiences change. My point was that, I took the test/s with little to no knowledge of them, no experience and definitely no other agenda but to "tick boxes". What surprised me was that over a selection of independent tests (I repeat myself once again) I received the same result. I would have expected (suspected) that since the tests are rather ambiguous then the tests would yield differing results, placing me in similar but different categories. this was not the case in my own experience. Maybe being an ant has its advantages, aliens... well we may see one day.

I'm in a fortunate position and count myself very lucky that the job role is a promotion. If I don't get the position no harm no foul I will remain doing the role I am currently. If i do then it is the last step in furthering my career (I guess). It is definitely you, in what way whatso ever is it religious, sounds religious, derides religion...? I was being honest, should I lie? Yes, I am human, or at least I believe I am, you never know (I have often being accused of being an alien).

I often find myself watching clips of people doing some amazing feats, the diversity of talent and skill is astounding! From drawing/painting images, making music, to death defying stunts... humans are so talented. This then got me wondering about life in general, especially animated life and how special it really is. That a bunch of basic atoms arranged in certain ways, can form massively complex mechanisms that can perform such a diverse and unimaginable number of feats is quite remarkable. I was watching a young lady perform on a violin on the streets just the other day, she was no older than 13 and produced a sound from the instrument that just activated every sensory nerve in my body. She is extremely talented and a joy to listen to. There are so many people out there that can do so many amazing things, the universe should be proud of its achievements!

Yeah, I can see how one might want to influence a test in order to gain what they may perceive as an advantage. Honestly, it never crossed my mind during my test. My mind set being that if I remain honest and end up successful in getting the job then I can be confident that I can just be my true self during my employment. This in my mind takes some of the stress out of the job role. The job I've applied for is quite a challenging role and ultimately responsible for nearly 500 staff, so the last thing I want is to try and be someone I'm not. I think most employers (I've been one myself in the past) just want people who are productive and not disruptive. Basically people who are easy to manage, don't complain much and just get on with their task at hand. Not all people function well as a team, but they can still add value to a system independently. My personality is such that though I'm ok with social environments, and can work as part of a team, I generally prefer my own space to work on problems independently.

No, not at all. (my bold) i did learn something about myself which is why I found it interesting. So in this respect, the experience was useful. +1 for the post by the way Not sure, INFJ's are said to be unsure how people perceive them so I guess so. I wouldn't know how to. I answered with honesty and sincerity to the best of my knowledge, as I mentioned some of the questions left me wondering "well it depends" which I then proceeded to tick either a neutral or very slight lean towards. I don't know how the tests results are formulated and what type a test may produce. I might be able to have a good go and guess which obviously would change the result. But whether the result would be of benefit for employment, I'm not sure what type they are looking for, if any in particular. We are all aware that the tests are ambiguous and open to interpretation. What did surprise me during my own experience, and what raised my interest, was the fact that such ambiguous tests resulted in the same outcome on 4 independent occasions. My point being from the start that, what I thought was a total waste of time turned out to be an interesting and thought provoking experience, which I thought I share on here. Some people are engaging in the discussion on the subject, others seem to be playing games. For what ever reason I'm not sure about other than either ridicule or some other agenda I can't ascertain. If I was posting here advocating or promoting these tests then I'd get it, I'm just sharing my own experience... gees guys. I guess if I was to use these tests to ascertain a person's likely personality and how this would fit into the system I intend to engage in with them, then all I could do is to assume the very basics traits to see if there was any in particular that I thought would be of benefit or not. But in reality a person should be given a chance to prove their worth and not necessarily limited to what the test results indicate. What will be interesting is to see if, whether I get the job or not, the personality test played any key part in the decision making. Maybe this is a form of discrimination? positive or negative.

Not sure the tests are or meant to be so direct or accurate that they can predict if someone is going to rape. I just took them to be a generalisation, after all there are around 8 billion unique people that the tests are trying to fit into what... 16 or so categories. Would you like it to know that you are likely to commit a serious crime? I have never once stated that I like or dislike the result -personality type I have been categorised in. I just said that I was surprised by the results and their consistency and that the "group" I'm in are said to show certain traits that I definitely do. I'm sure I also display traits from other personality types, there is bound to be an overlap, else there'd be 8 billion categories. I thought whole point of the tests is to answer honestly, whether you like it or not. Point being you may have to face a difficult realisation about yourself that you don't particularly like. My point being I would hope, rather than the test being a waste of time, perhaps I could use some of the information and learn from it to help me accept, manage or exploit my traits. Gees.. I took the test because I felt obligated to do so as part of a job interview request. From this it sparked an interest!! I'm not advocating anything, I'm sharing my experience, one which surprised me. I didn't know anything about these tests until after I had completed one. I didn't even know how many categories there are or what any of it was supposed to mean until recently. I just, as I always do with similar "questionnaires" is assume that the results will be just ambiguous. But my interest was sparked once I completed more tests with the same results which then prompted me to delve into the traits of my type... As you said I could have just ticked of from a list, I'm not a phycologist so I have no idea or expertise on these matters. I just found the results surprising and interesting and felt I should share this experience on here to see if anyone else shared similar or had an opinion. Why do I now feel that I'm being ridiculed or persecuted for taking the test and sharing my experience? (Sensitivity being one of the traits by the way)

In terms of sheer vastness and size we may well be insignificant. On the other hand we could be the most significant thing in the universe. Depends on your point of view and how common or rare, or relatively complex we are (we in the sense of conscious life, especially deep thinking technological life). You said yourself "we find meaning in many things" then you said "there is little meaning to living" again depends on your point of view. There maybe no meaning at all, in that the universe may not require meaning to operate and that meaning is nothing more than an applied human condition.

I liked that the tests predicted results consistently and the descriptions of the traits for that personality type match my own. Why would I like or dislike what personality I 'am? I can't change who I 'am, but maybe I can learn from it? Yes, they were a surprise. As I stated in my OP, I was asked to complete the test as part of a job interview. It had never occurred to me previously to ever bother to do so. I was sceptical of the test because I assumed total ambiguity. When I got the result I had absolutely no idea what this particular type was, or what it meant. This is when I decided to look more into it and do further independent tests. I was then even more surprised to find that each test revealed the same result. Since then I have investigated even more into this particular personality type and the more I delve the more it reveals traits that very accurately match my own which I had never previously considered. So my conclusion is that the tests appear to be less ambiguous than I first assumed and appear to be quite accurate (at least in my own experience) Either that, or I'm far more predictable than I assumed. Interesting article, thanks A couple things I noted from the article is that it mentions the test having "yes" or "no" answers to the questions. This wasn't the case in any of my tests I completed, it was set as a scale with the absolutes at either end and the option to lean towards either way or remain neutral. Not sure if this would any bearing on the results though. More to the other point, it says near the end of the article that there is nothing wrong with "taking the tests for fun". Focusing on this last point, I was asked to do the test as part of a job interview. It is not me who is advocating that these tests serve any purpose. I was just surprised by the results I experienced, which has then raised my interest, which is the fun part! Non of that (my bold) reflects my own personal experience. I took 4 totally independent tests and got the same result each time. In addition non of the answers were binary, I either got a choice of 7 positions or a slide scale. I do however agree with "it depends" even with the multiple options there were still a selected few of the questions were i thought to myself exactly this. At these points i tended to go with a neutral position or very slightly leaning either side. I can't argue with any of this, I totally agree (my bold). Lets hope that the personality test I have taken is not used as a decisive negative tool against me then in this instance. I'll keep you all posted on the outcome of the job, I may also get to ask what influence the personality test had in the decision either way.

I can't, Though not sure what you mean by "flattered", each personality type has what's considered "pro's and con's" so not really a competition or any suggestion one type is better than another. It just interested me that I completed 4 independent tests, answered each question with honesty and the results were identical. From a scientific standpoint this suggests that the results reflect what "general" category my personality does indeed fall into. I'm not suggesting that these tests are by any means robust, but there appears to be less ambiguity than I first assumed. I had no idea on the range of types and/or what traits each type assumes. I came out as INFJ on all 4 tests, I then did some research on the assumed traits for this personality type and it reflected almost exactly my personality. So what else should I conclude from this? Maybe someone with more expertise on this can share their thoughts? It's all still very new to me and therefore I consider myself maybe ignorant or rather naïve.

So prior to the incident you were an Atheist and immediately after you did a 180 and changed your view to full belief. The important thing is that you are happy and if it required belief in a deity to achieve such then that's fine. Many atheists are happy in life without belief in a greater power. Personally I believe in love, to love all things and including yourself is the key to happiness. I don't need a god to do this, thanks

As per the title. I recently, as part of a job interview, was asked to complete a Jung / Myers-Briggs test to reveal my personality. I agreed, as I found this interesting since I had never ever considered doing this previously. Possibly naively, I was sceptical of such tests as I felt they are open to ambiguity since it's my belief that personalities though possibly similar between people follow a spectrum and are unique rather than fit within a category. Anyway, cutting to the chase I completed the test and my result was : INFJ - Introvert. Intuitive. Feeling. Judging. Which turns out to be the rarest personality type with only around 1.5% of the world's population estimated to fit in this category. To confirm this result I subsequently did other similar tests with different questions and received the same result each time. After doing some more research on this type of personality I do have to admit, with all honesty, that I display the vast majority of traits associated with INFJ people, my partner also confirms this from her experiences living with me all these years. Your thoughts on the subject?

Unfortunately such an event doesn't prove the existence of god. It's not uncommon to hear reports of "miraculous" survival incidents. Sometimes what seems impossible with odds stacked against, on further scrutiny turns out to be a viable, though not necessarily likely, but realistically possible outcome. Often the victim of such an event feels (understandably so) a euphoric sense of spiritualism. Near death experiences can have such an effect on people. But good for you, in that you survived and that this event may change your life outlook, hopefully for the better. Whether than includes a belief system in deity or just the realisation that life is not only fragile but precious, especially when faced with your own and those you love's mortality.

Yeah, I like to watch Lex Fridman's pod casts. He does often have some very interesting people on the show. Yeah, I think this is the point he was making by similarity. Cells appear to work in much the same way.

I think I understand where you are coming from, though you are the "Riddler" of this forum and unlike the super sleuths of the comic book world I'm often unable to decipher your posts!! What is value and what does this mean? First we have to establish value in its fundamental form from which we can all agree. Value for me can be defined - That which is most difficult to attain or replace that is most wanted or required. Money in the form of an object is just matter, this based on my definition has value that is dependent on what it is made of, whether cheap metal, paper, gold or in digital form. However, money as a symbol of worth against goods or service has value that may be required or wanted and possibly difficult to attain.