Drew Burney

Yeah.

Okay.

Okay.

Cool.

But let me bring you down.

repeated tests on this like actual empirical tests where you go out and you actually try to sit down and parse this all out right there's really bad reliability with this test somewhere between a third and half of the people who retake it even just a few weeks later get different results okay okay so right away i don't know if you were taking a a blood test of some kind or something and a third to half the time you got something different would you rely on that test no absolutely you wouldn't right it's a more of a coin flip than it is a personality test at that point right

The other problem, which you've already alluded to as well, is the kind of the binary nature of these labels that you have.

Jung never actually said these were even categories necessarily.

He's like, these are spectrums probably of something that you can shade towards one end of this or the other.

And yet it doesn't matter if you're 51% extroverted, you're an extrovert.

You're an E. On that day, if you're 51% of anything, you're that thing.

No, there's actually a continuum and again, kind of a distribution around which you kind of float.

Unlike the Big Five 2, the MBTI actually does not predict very much at all.

Whereas the Big Five does predict like the job performance like I talked about, relationship satisfaction, mental health.

MBTI, we cannot reliably predict any of those things.

Any of those real important outcomes that we would hope they would predict just doesn't predict it.

There's no measure of neuroticism.

There is like a subcomponent that they kind of try to throw in.

It's like, I think it's

assertive versus tumultuous.