by hillary_step 85 Replies latest jw friends
LOLOLOL. My sweeping generalization produced the most appropriate response. Thanks, sixy!
he has 50% less testosterone in his system
Tellmeaboutit. This is the second joke God played on mankind. About the time women figger out how fun sex is, the men are sagging.
Hillary... actually, as people age, their auxiliary functions tend to become stronger. That is true for male thinkers, male feelers, female thinkers, and female feelers.
So not only does Myers-Briggs not combust over that point... it's actually part of the theory.
Euphemism,
Hillary... actually, as people age, their auxiliary functions tend to become stronger. That is true for male thinkers, male feelers, female thinkers, and female feelers. So not only does Myers-Briggs not combust over that point... it's actually part of the theory.
lol...
So when Dr Boeree, using Meyer-Briggs concluded that the population of the world neatly divided into two camps, 'thinkers' and 'feelers', and that the 'feelers' are women, and the 'thinkers' are men...how old was the Meyer-Briggs testing pool? What countries were represented?
This makes my point even more clearly Euphemism, and clearly shows the absurdity of such universal tests being applied beyond fixed boundaries, my complaint from post one on this thread.
Best regards - HS
PS. I think if we talk enough we might end up agreeing....lol
Hillary, for the umpteenth time...
So when Dr Boeree, using Meyer-Briggs concluded that the population of the world neatly divided into two camps, 'thinkers' and 'feelers', and that the 'feelers' are women, and the 'thinkers' are men.
Dr Boeree did not say that the feelers are women, and the thinkers are men! He said that two thirds of women are feelers, and two thirds of men are thinkers. That means that one third of all women--a very large proportion--are thinkers, and one third of all men are feelers.
I have never heard that.
gidgetgirl
Euphemism for the umpteenth time,
This is what he said :
Half of all people are thinking and half are feeling, but the proportions differ when we start looking at gender: The MAJORITY of men are THINKERS and the MAJORITY of women are FEELERS.
Capitals my own. This is what I contend is a ridiculous assumption, for the many and varied reasons that I have repeatedly noted on this thread.
This is what he wrote that YOU keep alluding to :
but we should note that a good third of men are feelers, and a good third of women are thinkers, so it is not a simple "men vs. women" kind of thing.
I contend that this to a ridiculous assumption, for the many and varied reasons that I have repeatedly noted on this thread. I keep on asking for verfication of source material for these findings. Country? Culture? Ages? Education? etc. Where is this source material and evidence? It is not represented anywhere that I can find, for imho obvious reasons.
Stereotypes do the greatest harm when they prevent individuals from being what they in fact are!
This is the only thing that Dr Boeree writes that I can agree with. You seem to feel that I am the only person who disagrees with Meyer-Briggs findings when it comes to the gender dominated measurements. I am not, they have been consistently criticized by many of their peers when measurements are ascertained outside of set boundaries. That you agree with their findings does not make them, or Dr Boeree for that matter correct, and until you can show me the source pool for their findings, I will remain a very dubious critic of these tenous 'results'.
Best regards - HS
Hillary... every time I point out a mistaken claim that you make, you change your claim. This is getting old.
If you want to poop in the sandbox, go ahead. I'm leaving.
Euphemism is absolutely right and you are totally wrong hillary-step.
Euphemism,
Hillary... every time I point out a mistaken claim that you make, you change your claim. This is getting old. If you want to poop in the sandbox, go ahead. I'm leaving
Rubbish. Go back and read all my posts, they *all* stand on the same ground. You agree with claims made by Meyer-Briggs that are suspect for the reasons that I have clearly outlined. To re-iterate, such tests applied outside defined boundaries cannot hope to be remotely accurate and to draw conclusions from them on this basis is nonesensical. I am certainly not the first person to crticize Meyer-Brigss on these grounds and will not be the last.
You also hijacked this thread while paying no attention to its purpose as outlined in my opening paragraph, though you did eventually and at the very least partially align your self with the WTS nonsense quoted in it, though of course like the WTS you provided absolutely no scientific data for your views.
I agree with what I think Bradley is trying to say, although I would have worded it differently. I would have said: "There is some truth to the notion that on average, women tend do be a bit more feelings-oriented than men."
For example, your basis for this statement would be? What is sadly missed in the whole of this debate is of course the slightest bit of provable evidence for such drastic claims, either from yourself or Bradley.
As to the sandpit, well I would never even think of playing in it as it has already been well 'pooped' in by others.
Take care Euphemism, and thank you for the debate - HS
Bradley,
Euphemism is absolutely right and you are totally wrong hillary-step.
lol...Judging from your latest emotional fruit-fight with your mother you might need to adjust your views on the 'thinker', 'feeler' camps and pronounce yourself totally confused.
HS
