>>12763144Big Five is just MBTI + Neuroticism (cf. Emotional regulation). MBTI defines its continuum via dichotomies where each pole is a positive quality, whereas all other psychometric questionnaires consider singular dimensions where + or - is good and the other bad. Plus, founders of the Big Five reinterpreted MBTI in terms of Factor Analysis, showing that Big Five and MBTI are tapping into the same personality traits. Furthermore, McCrae and Costa argued that MBTIs psychometric validity and reliability are "on a par" with Big Five.
>>12763463>>12763605Cognitive functions are the reason MBTI isn't taken seriously. No formalized system of Jungian function is self-consistent, and no psychometric questionnaire has ever been able to confirm such existence. The utility and explanatory power of MBTI comes entirely from its dichotomies.
I'll put it in a language you fags can understand. There is a well known hierarchy of correlations between MBTI dichotomies and IQ.
>IN > EN > IS > ESThis is a psychometrician's wet dream. And these dichotomy pairs do not correlate to the proposed Jungian functions in any way.
