对MBTI理论的思考（第一部分）

转载自：http://www.douban.com/group/topic/10110935/ http://www.socionics.com/articles/mbti.htm Things to consider about MBTI® theory (Part 1) 对MBTI理论的思考（第一部分） 18 February 2007 by Sergei Ganin You have probably noticed that the types on this website have slightly different acronym: three capital letters followed by a small "j" or "p" instead of the traditional four capital letter acronym. This is because there is a slight incompatibility between the MBTI® and Socionics/Jungian type due to the inconsistency in MBTI theory. This incompatibility sometimes (note sometimes) appears between Introvert types. As for Extrovert types - MBTI theory, Socionics and Jung seem fully compatible. 你可能已留意到，在这个网站上采取的类型缩写稍有不同：三个大写字母后紧跟一个小写的“j/p”，而非传统的四个大写字母缩写。这是由于MBTI理论的内部矛盾，致使在MBTI理论与Socionics/荣格类型之间存在着轻度的不一致。这种不一致有时（注意：有时）出现在内倾类型中。至于外倾类型，MBTI理论，Socionics与荣格似乎完全一致。 The reason for this is that when Myers was designing MBTI, she took Jungian typology as the basis for her project. According to Jung, people can be Extroverts (E) or Introverts (I), Thinking (T) or Feeling (F), Sensing (S) or Intuitive (N). So Jungian types ended up looking like this: 出现这种情况的原因是当迈尔斯在设计MBTI时，她将荣格的心理类型学作为其项目的基础。根据荣格的说法，人们可能是外倾（E）或内倾（I），思考（T）或情感（F），感觉（S）或直觉（N）。所以荣格心理类型学最终看来就是这样—— Extraverted Thinking type　外倾思考型 Introverted Thinking type　内倾思考型 Extraverted Feeling type　外倾情感型 Introverted Feeling type　内倾情感型 Extraverted Sensing type　外倾感觉型 Introverted Sensing type　内倾感觉型 Extraverted Intuitive type　外倾直觉型 Introverted Intuitive type　内倾直觉型 Jung also indicated that along with the main function, type could have a secondary function as well, which is different in nature to the primary function. In other words, the type with a main preference for T or F could also have a secondary preference for N or S and types with a main preference for N or S could also have a secondary preference for T or F. The two variations of the same core type would be different from each other, for instance, F type with preference for S would be different from F type with preference for N, and so on. 荣格还指出，伴随主要功能，每个类型还可能有个次要偏好功能，这与主导功能在本质上不同。换句话说，主要偏好T/F的人可能同时会伴有有N/S作为次要偏好，而主要偏好N/S的人同样也会在T/F上有次要偏好。同样类型核心的两种变化导致它们之间有所不同，例如，F型中更偏好S者与更偏好N者表现不同，以此类推。 Myers was particularly interested in the mental processes that were dynamically opposite like E vs. I, S vs. N, T vs. F., because this would allow to formulate a bipolar question - if you prefer one thing then you do not prefer its opposite, theoretically. 迈尔斯与对于那些动态相反的心理过程，例如E/I、S/N、T/F，有着特别的兴趣，因为这使得设定迫选表格成为可能——理论上讲，如果你喜欢某事，那么你就不会喜欢它的对立面。 Myers was faced with the challenge of how to identify which mental process would be the main and which one would be the secondary. For example if a person would show a preference for N and T, then would this be N that is the main preference and T that is the secondary, or vice versa? 而她所面临的挑战则是确定哪种心理过程是主要的，哪种是次要的。例如，如果一个人同时展示了对NT的偏好，那么是先N后T呢，还是相反？ If you are not familiar with Jungian work on types, there are two more definitions that Jung used to describe his types - Judgement and Perception (Some sources call it Rationality/Irrationality, perhaps due to the differences in translation). All his eight types Jung divided into two groups. Judging types became all Thinking and all Feeling types, Perceiving types became all Sensing and all Intuitive types. 如果你对荣格的心理类型学不熟，这儿还有两个定义是荣格用来描述他的类型学的——判断与感知（有些材料里称为理性/非理性，可能是由于翻译的不同）。荣格将八种类型分为两组。判断型里包括所有的思考型与情感型，感知型则包括所有的感觉型与直觉型。 Judging types according to Jung: 荣格类型中的判断型 Extraverted Thinking type　外倾思考型 Introverted Thinking type　内倾思考型 Extraverted Feeling type　外倾情感型 Introverted Feeling type　内倾情感型 Perceiving types according to Jung: 荣格类型中的感知型 Extraverted Sensing type　外倾感觉型 Introverted Sensing type　内倾感觉型 Extraverted Intuitive type　外倾直觉型 Introverted Intuitive type　内倾直觉型 How could this have helped Myers? Simple, if a person scores as ENT (Extravert and Intuitive and Thinking) their type could be either Extraverted Intuitive type (Perceiving group), or Extraverted Thinking type (Judging group). Which one it is, would be defined by knowing if the type was Judging or Perceiving. So everything was already concluded in Jungian research. However the preference for Judgement/Perception was not explored by Jung in his work as well as all the other preferences, so Myers decided to come up with her own Judgement/Perception scale instead. She probably figured, if people use their preferred judging process to order the external (!) world - they are Judging types, but if they use their preferred perceiving process to experience the external (!) world - they are Perceiving types. 这对迈尔斯有何帮助？简单说来，如果一个人的结果为ENT（外倾直觉思考），那么他或是外倾直觉型（感知组），或是外倾思考型（判断组）。至于究竟属于哪种，则决定于知晓他到底是判断型还是感知型。看似荣格的研究已经把所有的工作都弄好了。但对于J/P这一维度，荣格并没有像其他维度一样深究，所以迈尔斯决定搞一套她自己的J/P分类法来替代。她可能推定，如果一个人对外（！）偏好判断过程——那就是判断型，但如果他对外（！）偏好感知过程——那就是感知型。 Have a look: 现在来看一下（以下是说主导功能）—— Jung: Sensing and Intuition are P functions, always! Myers: Sensing and Intuition are P functions, but only if they are extraverted! Socionics: Sensing and Intuition are P functions, always! 荣格：感觉和直觉是P的功能，始终如此！ 迈尔斯：感觉和直觉是P的功能，但只有在它们外倾时！ Socionics：感觉和直觉是P的功能，始终如此！ Jung: Thinking and Feeling are J functions, always! Myers: Thinking and Feeling are J functions, but only if they are extraverted! Socionics: Thinking and Feeling are J functions, always! 荣格：思考与情感是J的功能，始终如此！ 迈尔斯：思考与情感是J的功能，但只有在它们外倾时！ Socionics：思考与情感是J的功能，始终如此！ Maybe Jungian definition of J and P was not clear enough to be implemented practically at once, but what was absolutely clear is that Sensing and Intuitive types he called P and Thinking and Feeling types he called J. 或许荣格定义的J/P不够清晰，难于即时理解应用，但他将感觉与直觉类型称为P，而将思考与情感类型称为J，这点还是足够清楚的。 Now let's have a look at the official MBTI correspondence between Jungian type and MBTI type: 现在让我们将MBTI理论与荣格心理类型学比较一番—— Jung —— MBTI theory Extraverted Thinking type —— ENTJ, ESTJ Introverted Thinking type —— INTP, ISTP Extraverted Feeling type —— ENFJ, ESFJ Introverted Feeling type —— INFP, ISFP Extraverted Sensing type —— ESFP, ESTP Introverted Sensing type —— ISFJ, ISTJ Extraverted Intuitive type —— ENFP, ENTP Introverted Intuitive type —— INFJ, INTJ 荣格——MBTI 外倾思考型——ENTJ，ESTJ 内倾思考型——INTP，ISTP 外倾情感型——ENFJ，ESFJ 内倾情感型——INFP，ISFP 外倾感觉型——ESFP，ESTP 内倾感觉型——ISFJ，ISTJ 外倾直觉型——ENFP，ENTP 内倾直觉型——INFJ，INTJ This table clearly shows incompatibility between MBTI and the Jungian definition of J and P. According to Myers, Introverted Thinking and Introverted Feeling types appeared to be P instead of J, and Introverted Sensing and Introverted Intuitive types appeared to be J instead of P. 这张表格清楚地揭示了MBTI与荣格心理类型学在J/P定义上的不一致。按照迈尔斯的定义，内倾思考与内倾情感型是P型而非J型，而内倾感觉与内倾直觉型则成了J型而非P型。 So, why this obvious mistake has not been rectified? First of all whether you want it or not, MBTI types obtained via MBTI test results (under ideal conditions) are actually quite compatible with Jungian type. The reason for this is that despite Myers wrongful, one-sided J/P definition, MBTI J/P questions often (not always) identify one's preference for Jungian J/P. The problem however is that there are three kinds of MBTI type profiles in existence: 那么，为什么这样明显的错误没有被纠正呢？首先，不论你是否希望如此，通过MBTI测试（在理想状况下）所得的MBTI类型结果是与荣格类型实际上完全相容的。此乃由于尽管迈尔斯对于J/P的定义片面而欠妥，但MBTI问卷中J/P项的定义通常（虽非总是）与荣格类型中的J/P偏好相一致的。但问题是，存在三种MBTI类型描述—— 1. Type descriptions empirically gathered from the observation of people who took the MBTI test. These profiles are compatible with Jungian types. 1.类型描述是通过对于做了MBTI测试的人群的实际观察经验得来。这些描述与荣格的心理类型完全相符。 2. Type descriptions artificially manufactured based on different functions as they appear in MBTI model. These descriptions are more accurate than the previous, but they only refer to the descriptions of extravert types obtained this way. Only extravert type descriptions are Jung compatible for the reasons explained above. All introvert type descriptions are twisted around the J and P preference. So if you have MBTI description of ISFP obtained this way, for example, you should know that it is actually Jungian ISFJ description you look at. 2.类型描述通过人为根据MBTI模型上提出的功能不同而得来。这些描述比先前的更为精准，但仅适用外倾型。按上面的解读，唯有对外倾型的描述与荣格心理类型学完全相容。而对所有的内倾型，在J/P这一维度上的描述则是被扭曲的。所以，比如说你要是看到了MBTI中由此法得到的对于ISFP的描述，你得明白你实际上看到的是荣格类型中的ISFJ的描述。 3. Mixed type descriptions obtained via combination of 1. and 2. Extravert type descriptions are, again, compatible with Jung, but Introvert type descriptions look like a compromise between J and P types. Basically, introvert type descriptions look like one-size-fit-all descriptions. 3.混合了1.与2.的类型描述。在此情况下，外倾型的描述仍完全与荣格心理类型学相容，但对内倾型的描述则成了对J/P的折衷。基本上可以说，内倾型的描述看上去成了“均码”的。 If you are an introvert type, you are in trouble. For example, you take the test and come up J. Then you read some P type descriptions to compare and find out that your type fits P profile better then J. You look further and decide that you might be J after all. Or is it P? 如果你是内倾型的，那你就有麻烦喽。举例来说，你做了MBTI测试，知道自己是个J。然后，你读些关于P的描述来进行比较，发现你可能更像个P而不是J。你继续看下去，最终确定你仍旧是个J——或者，P？ The core of the problem is in Myers deciding to connect J and P with the external world, even though Jung wrote that J and P are independent of E and I. The extrovert types apparently do not suffer just as bad from this mistake. 问题的核心在于，迈尔斯将由对外功能来确定J/P，尽管荣格写的是J/P对于I/E维度是独立的。外倾型似乎不受这个错误的影响。 There are two solutions to this problem: 对这个问题，有两种解决办法—— 1. A very simple solution. Let's admit that MBTI type and Jungian type are quite different, and drop all the relations between them. This will not solve the internal MBTI inconsistency problem (test results vs. modelling), though. 1.一个非常简单的解决办法。让我们承认，MBTI类型与荣格类型是完全不同的，并放弃它们之间的所有联系。但这无益于解决MBTI理论内部测试结果与模型推论间的不一致。 2. An even simpler solution. Let's finally agree that Jungian definition of J and P is the one to use. This eventually will straighten up MBTI model as for introverted types. The problem here is that so many researches and publications have been carried out using the faulty MBTI model and at the end of it all, those works will only be good for recycling purposes. 2.一个更简单的解决办法。让我们最终同意荣格关于J/P的定义是唯一的。这最终将导致对MBTI模型中的内倾类型的清理。这里遇到的问题就是，已经有那么多的研究工作和出版物乃是基于不完善的MBTI模型，如此一来这些成果仍可被回收利用。 So for the time being, in order to separate the Jung compatible four-letter type acronym from the one that is not compatible with Jung, it is advisable to use a small letter "p" or "j" at the end of the four letter abbreviation. This would mean that the type is different from MBTI type and also fully compatible with Jungian theory and Socionics as well. 所以暂时来说，为了将与荣格类型相容的四字母缩写与同荣格类型不相容的区别开来，适当的方式就是用小写字母“p/j”放在四字母缩写的最后一位。这就表示这些类型不同于MBTI类型，而与荣格类型和Socionics完全相容。 In conclusion, MBTI is actually one of the most popular psychometric tools of today. In fact, it is so well-known that MBTI type stands next to astrological type by its popularity. Despite this, MBTI theory has no proper method of verifying test results. The only verification tools available are the profiles of sixteen types accompanying the test. The problem with this is that the profiles are poorly written, reminding one of astrological interpretations and giving only vague answers regarding the accuracy of the test results. Sadly, MBTI is widely used to implement important decisions, including screening for employment, education, etc., which is arguably an ethical practice. 总之，MBTI是如今最流行的心理测量工具之一。事实上，它的出名程度几乎堪比星座。尽管如此，MBTI理论并没有合适的方法来核实测试结果。唯一可行的核实方法是查看随测试结果而来的16型描述。如此一来问题就是，这些描述是如此的干瘪，让人联想到星座的解释，对于精准的测试结果只能给出模糊不明的答案。令人遗憾的是，MBTI对某些重要决策，包括职业与教育规划等，起了广泛的影响。这大概是个伦理实践问题。