WEBVTT - How Personality Tests Work

0:00:01.120 --> 0:00:04.600
<v Speaker 1>Welcome to Stuff you Should Know from how Stuff Works

0:00:04.600 --> 0:00:13.720
<v Speaker 1>dot com. Hey, and welcome to the podcast. I'm Josh Clark,

0:00:13.800 --> 0:00:17.560
<v Speaker 1>There's Charles W Chuck Bryant, there's Jerry over there, and

0:00:17.760 --> 0:00:21.119
<v Speaker 1>this is Stuff you Should Know. Yeah, a couple of

0:00:22.800 --> 0:00:27.600
<v Speaker 1>I T J. This is I don't remember what I am.

0:00:27.600 --> 0:00:31.880
<v Speaker 1>We've taken it before. How Stuff Works hosted it years back.

0:00:31.960 --> 0:00:34.720
<v Speaker 1>Do you remember. Yeah, we had, like many companies do,

0:00:34.840 --> 0:00:37.600
<v Speaker 1>as you'll see, we had when we were under Discoveries

0:00:38.560 --> 0:00:41.720
<v Speaker 1>tender Wing. They paid for someone to come to our

0:00:41.760 --> 0:00:47.839
<v Speaker 1>office and administer the Myers Briggs personality tests at gunpoint. Yeah,

0:00:48.440 --> 0:00:50.440
<v Speaker 1>I don't remember, but I'm pretty sure I was in

0:00:50.600 --> 0:00:54.960
<v Speaker 1>E n F P. I. I don't remember what I was.

0:00:55.520 --> 0:00:57.680
<v Speaker 1>I'll probably say like three different things as we go

0:00:57.800 --> 0:01:00.400
<v Speaker 1>through this one, like just looking at it again, pretty

0:01:00.400 --> 0:01:03.280
<v Speaker 1>sure I was an E n F B. Can he

0:01:03.560 --> 0:01:14.160
<v Speaker 1>stands for pisces right? Or pooper? Yeah, let's see extroverted intuitive? Okay,

0:01:16.319 --> 0:01:20.960
<v Speaker 1>what is the F stand for feeling? Is a spoiler? Yeah,

0:01:20.959 --> 0:01:23.880
<v Speaker 1>feeling pooper? So we're what we're talking about where it

0:01:23.920 --> 0:01:25.959
<v Speaker 1>sounds like we're saying strings of letters, They actually do

0:01:26.040 --> 0:01:28.360
<v Speaker 1>make sense if you're familiar with what Chuck just said,

0:01:28.360 --> 0:01:33.399
<v Speaker 1>the Myers Briggs type inventory, which if you are in

0:01:33.480 --> 0:01:37.119
<v Speaker 1>corporate America and have been a part of corporate America

0:01:37.240 --> 0:01:41.080
<v Speaker 1>for more than probably three years, there's probably a pretty

0:01:41.200 --> 0:01:46.119
<v Speaker 1>good likelihood that you've taken the Myers Briggs type inventory

0:01:46.240 --> 0:01:49.960
<v Speaker 1>for sure. Like it's really widespread. I love it. I

0:01:50.000 --> 0:01:54.400
<v Speaker 1>saw something like percent of companies in America use it.

0:01:55.000 --> 0:01:58.120
<v Speaker 1>It's a lot. Yeah, it was eighty nine of the

0:01:58.160 --> 0:02:02.040
<v Speaker 1>Fortune one use it, right, And then I saw another

0:02:02.080 --> 0:02:05.600
<v Speaker 1>status It was from two thousand one though, so I'm

0:02:05.600 --> 0:02:11.160
<v Speaker 1>not sure how current it is, right, but they said that, um,

0:02:11.240 --> 0:02:17.120
<v Speaker 1>the the I think British companies somewhere between ten and

0:02:18.080 --> 0:02:22.560
<v Speaker 1>of British companies use them. So I mean it's who knows.

0:02:22.600 --> 0:02:26.120
<v Speaker 1>It's pretty wild. Guess that sounds like. But once they

0:02:26.120 --> 0:02:31.399
<v Speaker 1>have their own. No, the Myers Briggs test, they don't

0:02:31.400 --> 0:02:33.600
<v Speaker 1>call it a test, as we'll see, but the the

0:02:33.760 --> 0:02:39.280
<v Speaker 1>test um is, it's worldwide, it's translated into tons of

0:02:39.320 --> 0:02:43.239
<v Speaker 1>different languages. They and no, it's it's the Myers Briggs test.

0:02:43.280 --> 0:02:46.720
<v Speaker 1>And there's tons of knockoffs. There's tons of personality tests

0:02:46.760 --> 0:02:50.560
<v Speaker 1>in general, which really is the larger umbrella the Myers

0:02:50.600 --> 0:02:53.400
<v Speaker 1>Briggs test falls under, but it's probably the most famous

0:02:53.400 --> 0:02:56.760
<v Speaker 1>of all time, at least as far as pop culture goes. Yeah,

0:02:56.840 --> 0:02:59.600
<v Speaker 1>we're gonna hit on everything from ror Shack to the

0:02:59.639 --> 0:03:03.240
<v Speaker 1>Myers Briggs, but we're gonna hit on them. But the

0:03:03.360 --> 0:03:05.600
<v Speaker 1>m B T I definitely UM is more of the

0:03:05.639 --> 0:03:09.160
<v Speaker 1>focus of this one because of its ubiquity, right, because

0:03:09.200 --> 0:03:12.680
<v Speaker 1>most people know it, and because it's uh one of

0:03:12.720 --> 0:03:17.120
<v Speaker 1>the overlooked past times in the United States to take

0:03:17.200 --> 0:03:21.160
<v Speaker 1>pot shots at the Myers Briggs type inventory. Sure, it's fun.

0:03:23.520 --> 0:03:29.040
<v Speaker 1>Uh So categorizing one's personality is nothing new. Uh, and

0:03:29.080 --> 0:03:32.680
<v Speaker 1>that's what these tests aim to do. Um for various

0:03:32.680 --> 0:03:36.600
<v Speaker 1>reasons which will go over later. But um, going back,

0:03:36.640 --> 0:03:39.800
<v Speaker 1>and this was a Grabster article, correct, that's right, so

0:03:39.920 --> 0:03:42.520
<v Speaker 1>you know it's good. Yeah, and Grabster was just our

0:03:42.520 --> 0:03:45.760
<v Speaker 1>show in Toronto. Yeah he was for the second time

0:03:46.200 --> 0:03:49.200
<v Speaker 1>he stood up and like did that victory shake? Did

0:03:49.200 --> 0:03:52.200
<v Speaker 1>he do that? No, he did. I'm a big fan

0:03:52.240 --> 0:03:54.320
<v Speaker 1>of that. That's old school. Oh it is. It's a

0:03:54.320 --> 0:03:56.760
<v Speaker 1>good way to go. It looks like you should be

0:03:56.760 --> 0:03:59.760
<v Speaker 1>wearing those dolphins shorts and just having crossed the finish

0:03:59.800 --> 0:04:02.920
<v Speaker 1>line and then you're doing that. Um. So Yeah, it's

0:04:03.000 --> 0:04:06.840
<v Speaker 1>nothing new trying to categorize personalities. Um, way back in

0:04:06.840 --> 0:04:10.400
<v Speaker 1>the day, Uh, I know, on our Grave Robbing Live

0:04:10.480 --> 0:04:13.320
<v Speaker 1>Grave Robbing episode, we talked about the four humors, and

0:04:13.320 --> 0:04:17.200
<v Speaker 1>we've talked about them before, um, before medical science was

0:04:17.360 --> 0:04:21.640
<v Speaker 1>kind of a real thing. Um, it was an early attempt.

0:04:22.400 --> 0:04:26.240
<v Speaker 1>They talked about the four fluids, the four humors black bio,

0:04:26.440 --> 0:04:31.839
<v Speaker 1>yellow bile, phlegm, and blood. Uh and and imbalance in

0:04:31.880 --> 0:04:34.880
<v Speaker 1>those will cause disease. But they were also this is

0:04:34.880 --> 0:04:38.359
<v Speaker 1>something I didn't know, These are also linked to uh,

0:04:38.440 --> 0:04:43.720
<v Speaker 1>corresponding personality types. Yeah. So like the word melancholy in English,

0:04:44.040 --> 0:04:48.880
<v Speaker 1>it's an adaptation of the Greek words I believe for

0:04:49.760 --> 0:04:54.520
<v Speaker 1>black bile. There it is and and melancholy personalities were

0:04:54.560 --> 0:04:59.600
<v Speaker 1>associated with an overabundance of black bile. And Um, basically

0:04:59.640 --> 0:05:02.840
<v Speaker 1>you're alancholi, you're you're a depressed person, or you're very

0:05:02.880 --> 0:05:07.239
<v Speaker 1>reserved or quiet. And for thousands of years people thought

0:05:07.640 --> 0:05:10.720
<v Speaker 1>guy's got a lot of black bile. Yeah, that explains

0:05:10.760 --> 0:05:14.840
<v Speaker 1>his personality. The other ones are pretty pretty um interesting too,

0:05:14.920 --> 0:05:20.680
<v Speaker 1>like flag matic, uh flegmatic, I've seen flag I've heard

0:05:20.680 --> 0:05:23.599
<v Speaker 1>flag magic. I've seen it too. So like when you

0:05:23.680 --> 0:05:27.040
<v Speaker 1>cough something up, you call it flag him. Sometimes it

0:05:27.120 --> 0:05:30.040
<v Speaker 1>depends if it had like a lot of extra chunks

0:05:30.040 --> 0:05:34.240
<v Speaker 1>in it. It's flags But flam plegmatic, I say, flegmatic.

0:05:35.160 --> 0:05:38.000
<v Speaker 1>That's very laid back. Did you know that? Well, yeah,

0:05:38.000 --> 0:05:41.479
<v Speaker 1>because I looked all these up, um, because sanguine is

0:05:41.520 --> 0:05:45.520
<v Speaker 1>one of my favorite words. Um. And that's this is Hippocrates,

0:05:45.560 --> 0:05:48.520
<v Speaker 1>by the way. He kind of further refined these concepts

0:05:48.520 --> 0:05:53.640
<v Speaker 1>of the temperament. So melancholic, flegmatic, sanguine, and what is

0:05:53.680 --> 0:06:00.920
<v Speaker 1>it caleric? Yeah, choleric, yeah, caleric. Caleric is like irritable

0:06:01.000 --> 0:06:05.080
<v Speaker 1>and short and terse and curt Yeah. But the thing is,

0:06:05.320 --> 0:06:09.880
<v Speaker 1>there's something weird here, right if you are a thinking

0:06:10.320 --> 0:06:14.000
<v Speaker 1>human being who is not in a vegetative state right now,

0:06:14.839 --> 0:06:18.400
<v Speaker 1>and for all we know at this point in medical science,

0:06:18.520 --> 0:06:21.159
<v Speaker 1>maybe even if you are in a vegetative state, you're

0:06:21.160 --> 0:06:25.800
<v Speaker 1>probably thinking, Uh, it doesn't seem like anyone I've ever

0:06:25.839 --> 0:06:31.080
<v Speaker 1>met is just flagmatic or just choleric, or just sanguine

0:06:31.920 --> 0:06:35.560
<v Speaker 1>or just melancholy. Sometimes I'm all four of those things.

0:06:35.800 --> 0:06:38.960
<v Speaker 1>Sometimes I go through those things all four in a day,

0:06:39.000 --> 0:06:41.520
<v Speaker 1>depending on how weird the day is. Sometimes I go

0:06:41.560 --> 0:06:43.280
<v Speaker 1>through all four of those within the course of one

0:06:43.320 --> 0:06:48.040
<v Speaker 1>happy hour. Sure, okay, right, And and that's kind of

0:06:48.040 --> 0:06:50.640
<v Speaker 1>the point here, and it's also the basis of any

0:06:50.640 --> 0:06:54.200
<v Speaker 1>criticism from this moment in the podcast here on out,

0:06:54.800 --> 0:06:57.599
<v Speaker 1>is that this whole thing that started back with the

0:06:57.640 --> 0:07:00.640
<v Speaker 1>four Humors and continues on to this in the guise

0:07:00.680 --> 0:07:05.320
<v Speaker 1>of personality tests, is an attempt to take a human

0:07:05.360 --> 0:07:10.480
<v Speaker 1>personality and say you're this, you're this one type, You're

0:07:10.520 --> 0:07:13.560
<v Speaker 1>this type, this is your type, this is what you're like, right,

0:07:14.240 --> 0:07:17.640
<v Speaker 1>And the human personality just too complex, too squishy, too

0:07:17.720 --> 0:07:22.480
<v Speaker 1>jelly like to be boxed into one thing like that. Yeah,

0:07:22.560 --> 0:07:24.880
<v Speaker 1>And we'll get into all the criticisms. So that definitely

0:07:24.920 --> 0:07:30.720
<v Speaker 1>is the leading criticism that is, Ah, well, we'll say that, Um,

0:07:30.720 --> 0:07:33.000
<v Speaker 1>that was a tease. It was good tease, because a

0:07:33.040 --> 0:07:38.400
<v Speaker 1>flagmatic one. All these classifications though, um, that we talked

0:07:38.400 --> 0:07:41.640
<v Speaker 1>about now are or most of them at least or

0:07:41.720 --> 0:07:44.480
<v Speaker 1>drive late at the feet of one man when called

0:07:44.680 --> 0:07:49.600
<v Speaker 1>young Yeah, who wrote a book called psychological types. How

0:07:49.640 --> 0:07:52.360
<v Speaker 1>do you say it? Though? In in German? I don't know.

0:07:52.760 --> 0:07:55.560
<v Speaker 1>It's um, oh, where is it? Let me see there

0:07:55.560 --> 0:08:00.440
<v Speaker 1>it is. I I can't even begin to do it. Uh,

0:08:00.680 --> 0:08:08.400
<v Speaker 1>psycho psycho sorry, psychologic is yes, psychological type. That's not fair.

0:08:09.320 --> 0:08:11.560
<v Speaker 1>It's so tiny. That was the problem because you, oh yeah,

0:08:11.600 --> 0:08:15.680
<v Speaker 1>I do ten point well you know me, you do

0:08:15.800 --> 0:08:21.000
<v Speaker 1>like sixteen point times new Roman paper, and I don't

0:08:21.040 --> 0:08:22.680
<v Speaker 1>want to waste it, but I also have to do

0:08:22.800 --> 0:08:25.880
<v Speaker 1>my job. Maybe I should go double sided, but then

0:08:26.040 --> 0:08:29.360
<v Speaker 1>my highlighter gets in the way. Oh yeah, it would

0:08:29.360 --> 0:08:32.079
<v Speaker 1>be a problem. Everything would be highlighted. You might as

0:08:32.080 --> 0:08:34.160
<v Speaker 1>well just dip the whole page and yellow ink or

0:08:34.240 --> 0:08:37.839
<v Speaker 1>something exactly. Um. So, anyway, Young wrote this book, that

0:08:38.000 --> 0:08:43.439
<v Speaker 1>book uh German, and had it translated to English a

0:08:43.480 --> 0:08:47.880
<v Speaker 1>couple of years later, and he created these four categories

0:08:48.200 --> 0:08:55.160
<v Speaker 1>uh sensation, intuition, thinking, and feeling. So those were his

0:08:55.280 --> 0:08:58.600
<v Speaker 1>four that kind of most of these modern tests are

0:08:58.679 --> 0:09:02.520
<v Speaker 1>based on in somewhere or another. Yeah, and um, it's

0:09:02.559 --> 0:09:05.600
<v Speaker 1>really almost impossible that I guess we could just save

0:09:06.559 --> 0:09:09.199
<v Speaker 1>all the criticisms for the end and just pile them on.

0:09:09.440 --> 0:09:12.040
<v Speaker 1>But it's it's really tough to talk about the stuff

0:09:12.400 --> 0:09:15.080
<v Speaker 1>and not like, as you present one fact, talk about

0:09:15.120 --> 0:09:18.800
<v Speaker 1>the problem with that fact as it relates to modern incarnation.

0:09:19.200 --> 0:09:20.520
<v Speaker 1>What do you think we should do? Should we just

0:09:20.559 --> 0:09:23.560
<v Speaker 1>save them like you say, because I can buy my time,

0:09:24.120 --> 0:09:26.079
<v Speaker 1>let's save the okay, and then you can just like

0:09:26.880 --> 0:09:29.400
<v Speaker 1>I'm not even trying, like I'm not I'm not going

0:09:29.440 --> 0:09:31.920
<v Speaker 1>crop circle here. I'm just saying like there's just there's

0:09:31.920 --> 0:09:34.760
<v Speaker 1>just a lot wrong with this. But um, even before

0:09:34.880 --> 0:09:39.680
<v Speaker 1>Young who created these the concept of the modern concept,

0:09:39.720 --> 0:09:42.000
<v Speaker 1>i should say, of personality types, and he created the

0:09:42.120 --> 0:09:45.760
<v Speaker 1>idea of introvert and extrovert, which say what you will

0:09:45.800 --> 0:09:47.599
<v Speaker 1>about you And and a lot of psychologists have a

0:09:47.679 --> 0:09:50.760
<v Speaker 1>lot to say about him, not necessarily the nicest things

0:09:50.840 --> 0:09:54.640
<v Speaker 1>to say, but introversion and extra extra version is so

0:09:55.440 --> 0:09:59.920
<v Speaker 1>widely accepted inside and out of the field of psychology

0:10:00.080 --> 0:10:02.959
<v Speaker 1>that I mean, if that were his only contribution to

0:10:03.080 --> 0:10:06.199
<v Speaker 1>the field, that's that's enough to to engrave it on

0:10:06.280 --> 0:10:08.959
<v Speaker 1>your tombstone for sure. Yeah. And each of those um

0:10:09.200 --> 0:10:13.360
<v Speaker 1>for psychological types he was talking about or modified by

0:10:14.120 --> 0:10:17.360
<v Speaker 1>whether or not you're introverted or extroverted, they all kind

0:10:17.400 --> 0:10:20.280
<v Speaker 1>of work together too. That was like the right, that

0:10:20.400 --> 0:10:22.760
<v Speaker 1>was the main thing is how you how you approach

0:10:22.880 --> 0:10:25.520
<v Speaker 1>life is introverted extrovert, and everything else is like a

0:10:25.640 --> 0:10:29.560
<v Speaker 1>sub it's kind of a sub section of that or something. Yeah,

0:10:29.679 --> 0:10:31.480
<v Speaker 1>And and one of the issues with this, and I

0:10:31.520 --> 0:10:33.760
<v Speaker 1>don't think this is part of the criticism, but I

0:10:33.880 --> 0:10:35.760
<v Speaker 1>was gonna say I thought we were saving he was.

0:10:36.920 --> 0:10:40.640
<v Speaker 1>This was based on his ideas. It wasn't like he

0:10:41.800 --> 0:10:45.240
<v Speaker 1>had all this research and all this data. He was

0:10:45.280 --> 0:10:48.600
<v Speaker 1>a deep thinker and he sat around and and thoughts

0:10:48.640 --> 0:10:50.920
<v Speaker 1>of these things, right exactly, and then he wrote entire

0:10:51.000 --> 0:10:53.319
<v Speaker 1>books based on him. Yeah. But he's a very well

0:10:53.400 --> 0:10:58.680
<v Speaker 1>respected psychoanalysts, and he was part of the early movement

0:10:58.840 --> 0:11:01.800
<v Speaker 1>for psycho and elysis with Freud, they were they were

0:11:01.880 --> 0:11:05.920
<v Speaker 1>colleagues or young was much younger, um. But they eventually

0:11:06.120 --> 0:11:09.360
<v Speaker 1>said I don't like you anymore. Were parting ways. Um.

0:11:10.240 --> 0:11:14.679
<v Speaker 1>But as as all as psychoanalysis was really kind of

0:11:14.840 --> 0:11:17.560
<v Speaker 1>establishing itself, And if you want to know more about

0:11:17.640 --> 0:11:20.160
<v Speaker 1>that background in the origins psychoanalysis, go listen to her

0:11:20.280 --> 0:11:23.120
<v Speaker 1>how pr works the live show. We talked a lot

0:11:23.160 --> 0:11:26.800
<v Speaker 1>about that. Um. But as this was going on and

0:11:26.920 --> 0:11:29.800
<v Speaker 1>it was starting to kind of dominate the field of psychology,

0:11:30.440 --> 0:11:34.000
<v Speaker 1>there was a whole other movement, a parallel movement that said,

0:11:34.320 --> 0:11:36.320
<v Speaker 1>you know what, we think all that's a little mushy.

0:11:36.840 --> 0:11:40.720
<v Speaker 1>We like the idea of being able to quantify psychology.

0:11:41.480 --> 0:11:44.800
<v Speaker 1>And so even before Young there were guys like Alfred Bennet,

0:11:45.360 --> 0:11:49.280
<v Speaker 1>who was one of the indirect fathers of the Intelligence

0:11:49.360 --> 0:11:53.800
<v Speaker 1>test i Q test UM, a pair of researchers named

0:11:53.840 --> 0:11:56.839
<v Speaker 1>Gray and wheel right um, and plenty of others who

0:11:56.960 --> 0:12:00.640
<v Speaker 1>wanted to say no, no, no, no, you can study psychology.

0:12:00.679 --> 0:12:03.640
<v Speaker 1>You can study things like the human personality, and you

0:12:03.679 --> 0:12:05.640
<v Speaker 1>can type of fire, and you can add numbers. You

0:12:05.720 --> 0:12:10.000
<v Speaker 1>can quantify this stuff, and in doing so, we will

0:12:10.200 --> 0:12:13.760
<v Speaker 1>prove psychology as a science as well. So this, this

0:12:13.920 --> 0:12:20.080
<v Speaker 1>whole movement to typify people and put them into convenient, um,

0:12:20.480 --> 0:12:25.240
<v Speaker 1>almost numerical categories, came out of this urgent need to

0:12:26.320 --> 0:12:30.679
<v Speaker 1>science to establish a scientific basis for psychology. Yeah, and

0:12:30.880 --> 0:12:33.000
<v Speaker 1>Young Uh, he's kind of laid the table for this.

0:12:33.160 --> 0:12:37.600
<v Speaker 1>And many years later, although not that many, um, there

0:12:37.679 --> 0:12:40.839
<v Speaker 1>was a woman named Katherine Cook Briggs uh and she

0:12:41.000 --> 0:12:46.680
<v Speaker 1>was working on this with her daughter, one Isabelle Briggs Myers.

0:12:47.559 --> 0:12:50.199
<v Speaker 1>Think you see where this is going. Uh. This is

0:12:50.240 --> 0:12:52.520
<v Speaker 1>post World War two when they women were kind of

0:12:53.120 --> 0:12:55.959
<v Speaker 1>for the first time really going into the workforce in

0:12:56.120 --> 0:12:59.760
<v Speaker 1>full uh and on mass and so they thought, well,

0:12:59.800 --> 0:13:02.960
<v Speaker 1>maybe we can put together some personality types to find out, um,

0:13:03.080 --> 0:13:05.679
<v Speaker 1>what kind of jobs these women might be suited for,

0:13:05.960 --> 0:13:09.400
<v Speaker 1>what types of jobs they might enjoy. Um. So they

0:13:09.440 --> 0:13:14.599
<v Speaker 1>started working together on this and um, as legend has it,

0:13:14.800 --> 0:13:20.280
<v Speaker 1>the mom Catherine Briggs Cook Briggs, she was doing her

0:13:20.360 --> 0:13:24.280
<v Speaker 1>thing and then saw Young's works and said, I gotta

0:13:24.360 --> 0:13:26.800
<v Speaker 1>start over. This is this is the stuff. She had

0:13:26.800 --> 0:13:30.560
<v Speaker 1>already been working on a personality test, but apparently, according

0:13:30.640 --> 0:13:34.400
<v Speaker 1>to the legend, through her work into the fire I said,

0:13:34.440 --> 0:13:37.000
<v Speaker 1>I'm starting from scratch because she's dramatic. She was a

0:13:37.080 --> 0:13:43.079
<v Speaker 1>voracious reader, especially of um the psychology, the new psychology

0:13:43.160 --> 0:13:45.679
<v Speaker 1>books that were coming out of Europe. She didn't read Young.

0:13:46.320 --> 0:13:49.160
<v Speaker 1>She did well eventually, but yeah, and then it seems

0:13:49.160 --> 0:13:51.800
<v Speaker 1>like it kind of came along later. Well, so, yeah,

0:13:51.880 --> 0:13:55.199
<v Speaker 1>there's a there's kind of a weird discrepancy in the history.

0:13:55.240 --> 0:13:56.640
<v Speaker 1>And I don't know if it's just it hasn't been

0:13:56.679 --> 0:13:58.719
<v Speaker 1>covered right or if there is a weird discrepancy. But

0:13:59.120 --> 0:14:03.240
<v Speaker 1>supposedly she initiated it, and so it would have been

0:14:03.320 --> 0:14:09.199
<v Speaker 1>contemporary or shortly after Young's Psychology or Personality Types was

0:14:09.280 --> 0:14:13.800
<v Speaker 1>translated into English in n So. But it was her

0:14:13.880 --> 0:14:16.520
<v Speaker 1>daughter Isabelle who really took it and ran with it

0:14:17.360 --> 0:14:20.360
<v Speaker 1>because of World War Two in the need for women

0:14:20.400 --> 0:14:25.160
<v Speaker 1>in the workplace. Uh So they you know, kind of

0:14:25.240 --> 0:14:28.320
<v Speaker 1>kept some of young stuff built on that kind of

0:14:28.560 --> 0:14:31.760
<v Speaker 1>stripped some of it away, most notably a lot of

0:14:31.800 --> 0:14:34.560
<v Speaker 1>the unconscious stuff. They might have thought that was a

0:14:34.600 --> 0:14:37.880
<v Speaker 1>little too weird for you know, the modern American workforce.

0:14:38.680 --> 0:14:40.960
<v Speaker 1>Uh So, what they ended up coming up with was

0:14:41.320 --> 0:14:45.080
<v Speaker 1>the the m B t I Myers Briggs Type Indicator, right,

0:14:45.240 --> 0:14:48.080
<v Speaker 1>very famously. Yeah, and they had they had a publishing

0:14:48.360 --> 0:14:50.760
<v Speaker 1>arrangement with one group, I can't remember what they were called,

0:14:50.760 --> 0:14:52.760
<v Speaker 1>but they thought it didn't do very well, and then

0:14:52.800 --> 0:14:57.000
<v Speaker 1>in they went with another publishers C P P. And

0:14:57.040 --> 0:15:01.000
<v Speaker 1>they're the current publishers of the Myers Briggs Type Indicator.

0:15:01.400 --> 0:15:05.760
<v Speaker 1>And since then, that's when it's ubiquity, like just really spread,

0:15:06.000 --> 0:15:09.680
<v Speaker 1>was starting in the seventies and and now it's just

0:15:10.000 --> 0:15:14.160
<v Speaker 1>it's basically married to corporate America. Should we take a break, Sure,

0:15:14.680 --> 0:15:18.200
<v Speaker 1>go get married to corporate America. As if we aren't already.

0:15:18.320 --> 0:15:19.800
<v Speaker 1>All right, we'll come back and we'll talk a little

0:15:19.840 --> 0:15:23.360
<v Speaker 1>bit about personality tests in general, and then focus in

0:15:23.440 --> 0:15:28.640
<v Speaker 1>a little more on the m B T I S

0:15:28.680 --> 0:15:52.640
<v Speaker 1>K a good shouldn't all right, So UM personality tests

0:15:52.760 --> 0:15:54.960
<v Speaker 1>is just there are many many ways you can get

0:15:55.000 --> 0:15:59.400
<v Speaker 1>evaluated psychologically by a professional. This is just one way,

0:15:59.640 --> 0:16:02.560
<v Speaker 1>and you get your head measured with calipers and back

0:16:02.600 --> 0:16:04.200
<v Speaker 1>in the day they didn't give you a bunch of

0:16:04.360 --> 0:16:06.840
<v Speaker 1>jugs and see what you do. There's a lot of ways.

0:16:08.000 --> 0:16:10.840
<v Speaker 1>But these tests generally, UM, as grabs her points out,

0:16:10.880 --> 0:16:16.720
<v Speaker 1>falls into a couple of types, projective and objective. Projective

0:16:16.760 --> 0:16:19.920
<v Speaker 1>tests or things like the roar check test where you're

0:16:19.960 --> 0:16:24.240
<v Speaker 1>shown something some kind of stimulus and it's open to

0:16:24.360 --> 0:16:27.120
<v Speaker 1>interpretation and you tell them what you think about it,

0:16:27.560 --> 0:16:29.680
<v Speaker 1>and someone sits back very quietly and taps on a

0:16:29.920 --> 0:16:34.800
<v Speaker 1>pad of paper and makes an evaluation. And then objective

0:16:34.960 --> 0:16:39.520
<v Speaker 1>are more like these personality tests, their standardized assessments that

0:16:39.600 --> 0:16:43.720
<v Speaker 1>people use UM and while it's subjective what you put down,

0:16:43.920 --> 0:16:47.600
<v Speaker 1>they are then evaluated again by a professional. Right. But

0:16:48.200 --> 0:16:52.080
<v Speaker 1>ultimately that objective name is a bit of misnomer because

0:16:52.640 --> 0:16:56.200
<v Speaker 1>on the end of it it's still interpreted by a person,

0:16:56.920 --> 0:17:01.200
<v Speaker 1>which is therefore makes it subjective, right, and which, depending

0:17:01.240 --> 0:17:02.960
<v Speaker 1>on who you ask, is the fatal flaw of all

0:17:03.080 --> 0:17:06.640
<v Speaker 1>personality tests. It should be the like a good songs

0:17:06.640 --> 0:17:08.720
<v Speaker 1>from the seventies had a little parenthetical at the end

0:17:08.720 --> 0:17:14.119
<v Speaker 1>of the title. Should just say subjective also in parentheses? Baby.

0:17:16.400 --> 0:17:20.879
<v Speaker 1>Um So the Big five are and and this is

0:17:21.800 --> 0:17:23.960
<v Speaker 1>the Big five. I get the feeling or the psychological

0:17:24.040 --> 0:17:28.600
<v Speaker 1>tests that that legit psychologists are more in favor of

0:17:29.119 --> 0:17:31.960
<v Speaker 1>over something like the m b t I that right. Yeah,

0:17:32.040 --> 0:17:34.600
<v Speaker 1>it's not just there's tests to suss out the Big five,

0:17:34.640 --> 0:17:37.000
<v Speaker 1>the Big five or the personality types of the field

0:17:37.080 --> 0:17:39.520
<v Speaker 1>as psychology has come up with that. Yeah, but the

0:17:39.600 --> 0:17:42.399
<v Speaker 1>tests that that you utilize, that right, they kind of

0:17:42.640 --> 0:17:44.840
<v Speaker 1>think are more legit than the m b t I. Yeah,

0:17:44.920 --> 0:17:48.560
<v Speaker 1>there's not a psychologist alive who uses the m b

0:17:48.720 --> 0:17:51.800
<v Speaker 1>t I and their regular practice. There are not not

0:17:52.160 --> 0:17:55.720
<v Speaker 1>not that not that are speaking up. I guarantee there's

0:17:55.720 --> 0:18:01.080
<v Speaker 1>someone out there. Sure it's a freewheel and type. Where's she?

0:18:02.760 --> 0:18:06.400
<v Speaker 1>Uh So? The Big five are extra version, agreeableness, openness

0:18:06.440 --> 0:18:12.040
<v Speaker 1>to experience, conscientiousness, and neuroticism. Right. It sounds like it

0:18:12.080 --> 0:18:14.560
<v Speaker 1>could be like a dating site thing that you fill out.

0:18:14.760 --> 0:18:18.240
<v Speaker 1>It's funny every time I see or hear the word neuroticism,

0:18:18.280 --> 0:18:22.320
<v Speaker 1>a bell goes off in my head, like thing just

0:18:22.440 --> 0:18:25.320
<v Speaker 1>a silent bell. Yeah, I don't know what that means.

0:18:26.200 --> 0:18:29.720
<v Speaker 1>I don't either, but it draws my attention to UM.

0:18:30.160 --> 0:18:33.439
<v Speaker 1>So some of these tests, uh, I mean it depends

0:18:33.480 --> 0:18:35.160
<v Speaker 1>on what it is that. They might not all call

0:18:35.240 --> 0:18:38.280
<v Speaker 1>them by those exact words, but they're generally using they

0:18:38.359 --> 0:18:40.440
<v Speaker 1>call them, you know, like I said, the Big Five. Yeah,

0:18:40.440 --> 0:18:42.600
<v Speaker 1>and I was, I was looking into that Big five

0:18:42.720 --> 0:18:46.080
<v Speaker 1>and um, this this site, I can't remember what it

0:18:46.160 --> 0:18:48.240
<v Speaker 1>was called, but they were basically they're going over it

0:18:48.400 --> 0:18:52.119
<v Speaker 1>like extra version is again just part of the scientific

0:18:52.240 --> 0:18:56.520
<v Speaker 1>literature at this point. Um. Agreeableness is like whether you're

0:18:56.920 --> 0:19:00.879
<v Speaker 1>how sympathetic or kind or affectionate you are? Concientiousness is

0:19:00.920 --> 0:19:03.040
<v Speaker 1>are your organized? Are your thorough? You're the type who

0:19:03.080 --> 0:19:06.359
<v Speaker 1>shows up on time? That kind of thing. Um neuroticism,

0:19:06.720 --> 0:19:10.199
<v Speaker 1>which is some kind of sometimes called emotional stability. Um,

0:19:10.480 --> 0:19:15.240
<v Speaker 1>how tense are you? How moody? How anxious? Uh? And

0:19:15.359 --> 0:19:19.200
<v Speaker 1>then like openness to experience? Right, they sometimes call that

0:19:19.320 --> 0:19:22.560
<v Speaker 1>intellect slash imagination? Do you have wide interests? Are you

0:19:22.640 --> 0:19:26.040
<v Speaker 1>an imaginative person? Are you insightful? And this this site

0:19:26.359 --> 0:19:29.520
<v Speaker 1>really went to a lot of pains to point out

0:19:29.600 --> 0:19:32.359
<v Speaker 1>that what you would call these things. The big five

0:19:32.520 --> 0:19:37.000
<v Speaker 1>personality traits are, as far as the psychologist is concerned,

0:19:37.359 --> 0:19:41.680
<v Speaker 1>just one dimension of you, the human being, and that

0:19:42.080 --> 0:19:44.360
<v Speaker 1>to get a clearer picture of you, they would also

0:19:44.440 --> 0:19:48.240
<v Speaker 1>need to study your motivations, your emotions, your attitudes, your abilities,

0:19:48.280 --> 0:19:52.760
<v Speaker 1>your self concepts, your social roles, autobiographical memories, your life stories,

0:19:53.280 --> 0:19:54.960
<v Speaker 1>and if you're starting to put all these things together,

0:19:55.440 --> 0:19:59.640
<v Speaker 1>then you can start to kind of approximate the person's personality.

0:20:00.160 --> 0:20:02.600
<v Speaker 1>But it would just it takes a lot of study

0:20:03.000 --> 0:20:06.040
<v Speaker 1>of an individual and these different components that make up

0:20:06.080 --> 0:20:09.080
<v Speaker 1>their personality to get a clear picture. So I don't

0:20:09.119 --> 0:20:12.200
<v Speaker 1>think there are any psychologists walking around saying the big

0:20:12.320 --> 0:20:15.440
<v Speaker 1>five personality types are like the beginning and end of

0:20:15.520 --> 0:20:19.280
<v Speaker 1>a personality. It's just if you put them together, you have, uh,

0:20:19.720 --> 0:20:22.240
<v Speaker 1>just a sketch of somebody's personality, and you you should

0:20:22.720 --> 0:20:25.720
<v Speaker 1>go much deeper if you're analyzing someone. Yeah, I think

0:20:25.840 --> 0:20:28.000
<v Speaker 1>I used to think this stuff was a lot neater

0:20:28.600 --> 0:20:30.800
<v Speaker 1>when I was younger, and now it kind of gives

0:20:30.840 --> 0:20:33.920
<v Speaker 1>me a little anxiety. Oh yeah, yeah, Like I just

0:20:34.040 --> 0:20:35.840
<v Speaker 1>I don't know as far as doing this to myself,

0:20:36.200 --> 0:20:39.800
<v Speaker 1>and I still enjoy therapy, Like that's different, But I

0:20:39.880 --> 0:20:42.359
<v Speaker 1>don't know, because every single one of these, Like my

0:20:42.440 --> 0:20:44.680
<v Speaker 1>answer would be, well, it depends well, I think, I

0:20:44.720 --> 0:20:47.440
<v Speaker 1>think also though um, and I don't mean to speak

0:20:47.480 --> 0:20:50.120
<v Speaker 1>for you, but one of the issues that's that comes

0:20:50.240 --> 0:20:53.600
<v Speaker 1>up for me is if somebody goes to you and says,

0:20:53.720 --> 0:20:56.040
<v Speaker 1>you know you you you rate pretty high on the

0:20:56.119 --> 0:21:02.200
<v Speaker 1>spectrum of neuroticism, Like that's obviously you're gonna obsess about

0:21:02.240 --> 0:21:04.400
<v Speaker 1>that kind of stuff, especially if they're right. It can

0:21:04.480 --> 0:21:07.560
<v Speaker 1>make you neurotic. But yeah, it's it's it's a boundary

0:21:07.680 --> 0:21:10.080
<v Speaker 1>that somebody has just established for you that you may

0:21:10.280 --> 0:21:13.879
<v Speaker 1>need feel the need to stay in because that's the

0:21:14.119 --> 0:21:17.200
<v Speaker 1>boundary that you're bound by, whether you are or not,

0:21:17.560 --> 0:21:20.320
<v Speaker 1>like this is my box, live in it. That would

0:21:20.359 --> 0:21:23.399
<v Speaker 1>be the reason it raises anxiety for me. Yeah. My

0:21:23.520 --> 0:21:25.640
<v Speaker 1>whole thing, like I said, though, is just depends every

0:21:25.720 --> 0:21:29.320
<v Speaker 1>single question that I would get asked. Well, not everyone.

0:21:29.440 --> 0:21:33.080
<v Speaker 1>Sometimes I'm pretty like set on something, but usually it's say,

0:21:33.160 --> 0:21:35.480
<v Speaker 1>I don't know. It depends on the scenario. Am I

0:21:36.400 --> 0:21:39.040
<v Speaker 1>more prone in a crowd to do X or Y?

0:21:39.640 --> 0:21:43.760
<v Speaker 1>Maybe maybe not? Depends on my mood. So one one

0:21:44.200 --> 0:21:47.520
<v Speaker 1>with these other personality tests and in the whole field

0:21:47.720 --> 0:21:54.040
<v Speaker 1>in psychology of um studying traits personality traits in a

0:21:54.200 --> 0:21:59.600
<v Speaker 1>quantitative way is called psychometrics. So with these tests, the

0:21:59.680 --> 0:22:03.240
<v Speaker 1>more sophisticated ones, if they had a test taker like you,

0:22:03.440 --> 0:22:07.440
<v Speaker 1>they're designed to get around that. So they're gonna ask

0:22:07.480 --> 0:22:10.399
<v Speaker 1>a bunch of different questions about the same thing, but

0:22:10.520 --> 0:22:13.960
<v Speaker 1>in different ways, coming from different directions, so that eventually,

0:22:13.960 --> 0:22:16.040
<v Speaker 1>if you put all of them together and run them

0:22:16.040 --> 0:22:19.119
<v Speaker 1>through statistical analysis, they're actually going to come up with

0:22:19.240 --> 0:22:21.720
<v Speaker 1>your genuine answer, which is kind of one way or another.

0:22:22.400 --> 0:22:25.440
<v Speaker 1>The other way they get around this um, that kind

0:22:25.480 --> 0:22:31.200
<v Speaker 1>of hemming and hawing, I guess is um. By placing

0:22:31.240 --> 0:22:34.320
<v Speaker 1>it on a spectrum, you're not being lumped into one

0:22:34.440 --> 0:22:38.080
<v Speaker 1>category or another. It's here's one end of the spectrum,

0:22:38.119 --> 0:22:40.040
<v Speaker 1>here's the other end of the spectrum, and based on

0:22:40.160 --> 0:22:42.760
<v Speaker 1>your answers, you fall somewhere around the middle, like almost

0:22:42.840 --> 0:22:47.240
<v Speaker 1>everybody does. If you look at psychometric tests, a legitimate

0:22:47.280 --> 0:22:49.920
<v Speaker 1>psychometric test is going to basically look like a bell

0:22:50.000 --> 0:22:53.200
<v Speaker 1>curve where most people are going to be distributed toward

0:22:53.240 --> 0:22:56.520
<v Speaker 1>the middle. I think, what, that's why gives me anxiety?

0:22:56.560 --> 0:22:59.120
<v Speaker 1>It's like, what's the point? Don't box me in it's

0:22:59.119 --> 0:23:03.880
<v Speaker 1>a great question. UM. Well, I think the second half

0:23:03.920 --> 0:23:06.719
<v Speaker 1>of this is a lot of what's the point, you know, Uh,

0:23:06.920 --> 0:23:10.400
<v Speaker 1>so looking speaking on these tests to see if it's

0:23:10.920 --> 0:23:13.320
<v Speaker 1>actually if there is a point, if it's a valid

0:23:13.400 --> 0:23:16.440
<v Speaker 1>thing to do. Uh. There are a couple of measures

0:23:17.160 --> 0:23:20.119
<v Speaker 1>that one must look at and that psychologists do look at.

0:23:20.320 --> 0:23:23.159
<v Speaker 1>UM is it valid and is it reliable? Valid in

0:23:23.240 --> 0:23:26.040
<v Speaker 1>the sense that it really is a pretty good reflection

0:23:26.080 --> 0:23:29.760
<v Speaker 1>of Josh or Chuck or whoever. And is it reliable?

0:23:29.880 --> 0:23:32.760
<v Speaker 1>So if we take this test tomorrow or a different

0:23:32.800 --> 0:23:37.000
<v Speaker 1>test that's UM just you know, maybe different questions, will

0:23:37.040 --> 0:23:41.200
<v Speaker 1>it reprove reproduce the same result? And that's a big deal.

0:23:41.320 --> 0:23:44.840
<v Speaker 1>Like you're talking science and you're trying to have a

0:23:45.080 --> 0:23:47.800
<v Speaker 1>foundation that says, no, this is science. It's not just

0:23:47.920 --> 0:23:52.159
<v Speaker 1>a bunch of questions and hippie dippy questions that we're asking.

0:23:52.960 --> 0:23:54.800
<v Speaker 1>If you really want real data and science behind it,

0:23:54.840 --> 0:23:58.920
<v Speaker 1>you have to be able to reproduce it. Um. One

0:23:58.960 --> 0:24:01.280
<v Speaker 1>of the other things too, that these tests are designed

0:24:01.320 --> 0:24:05.440
<v Speaker 1>to do is to weed out fakers. We'll talk a

0:24:05.520 --> 0:24:11.439
<v Speaker 1>lot more about the Minnesota Multi Phasic Personality Inventory UM,

0:24:11.560 --> 0:24:14.720
<v Speaker 1>which is one of the big ones, probably the most

0:24:14.800 --> 0:24:19.520
<v Speaker 1>taken personality test in the world. Um, and it has

0:24:19.800 --> 0:24:23.040
<v Speaker 1>a lot of built in mechanisms, and apparently it's really

0:24:23.119 --> 0:24:26.520
<v Speaker 1>good at detecting people who are faking they're faking a

0:24:26.600 --> 0:24:30.320
<v Speaker 1>mental illness or who are trying to pretend that they

0:24:30.400 --> 0:24:33.760
<v Speaker 1>aren't suffering from a mental illness. It's really good at

0:24:33.800 --> 0:24:39.600
<v Speaker 1>detecting that because it's so exhaustive and um using statistical analysis.

0:24:39.960 --> 0:24:42.960
<v Speaker 1>If somebody skewed really far one way or skewed really

0:24:43.000 --> 0:24:47.479
<v Speaker 1>far the other, they're just immediately exposed as as gaming

0:24:47.560 --> 0:24:49.880
<v Speaker 1>the tests as best they can. Yeah. And one way

0:24:49.920 --> 0:24:52.600
<v Speaker 1>they do that, which is in its own way, its

0:24:52.720 --> 0:24:56.399
<v Speaker 1>own little psychology experiment at least, is by telling you

0:24:57.720 --> 0:25:01.000
<v Speaker 1>we have ways like you will be rooted rooted out

0:25:01.040 --> 0:25:03.840
<v Speaker 1>and we will know. So they tell people that beforehand,

0:25:03.960 --> 0:25:05.960
<v Speaker 1>so you're more inclined to just be like, all right,

0:25:06.000 --> 0:25:08.800
<v Speaker 1>we'll screw it. I'll tell the truth, especially when they're

0:25:08.840 --> 0:25:11.400
<v Speaker 1>sitting there like clearing the air out of a syringe.

0:25:14.600 --> 0:25:18.239
<v Speaker 1>That's creepy. All right, So let's get back to uh

0:25:18.640 --> 0:25:22.880
<v Speaker 1>CPP and the n b t I, the consulting psychological

0:25:23.040 --> 0:25:27.720
<v Speaker 1>Psychologists PRESS, and the Myers Briggs. We'll just keep calling

0:25:27.720 --> 0:25:29.360
<v Speaker 1>it a test even though they say it's not a test,

0:25:29.480 --> 0:25:33.719
<v Speaker 1>it's a it's a type inventory. Yeah. Uh, so we'll

0:25:33.760 --> 0:25:35.560
<v Speaker 1>just go ahead and break down the deal here there

0:25:35.600 --> 0:25:39.800
<v Speaker 1>are The object is to sort you into one of

0:25:39.880 --> 0:25:45.080
<v Speaker 1>sixteen different types personality types, uh, based on which side

0:25:45.119 --> 0:25:47.600
<v Speaker 1>of four pairs or dichotomy is that you're gonna fall on.

0:25:47.760 --> 0:25:51.040
<v Speaker 1>And those are UM at the very base, you're either

0:25:51.160 --> 0:25:55.520
<v Speaker 1>introverted or extroverted, Like we said, your eye, sensing or

0:25:55.600 --> 0:25:59.720
<v Speaker 1>intuition s and n um and these words they sound

0:25:59.760 --> 0:26:03.000
<v Speaker 1>little confusing, like what the heck does a sensing person mean?

0:26:03.720 --> 0:26:08.359
<v Speaker 1>It means you like the big data and empirical data

0:26:08.440 --> 0:26:11.000
<v Speaker 1>and a lot of information, right, whereas intuition is like

0:26:11.080 --> 0:26:13.359
<v Speaker 1>you just go with your gut. That's how you prefer

0:26:13.640 --> 0:26:17.879
<v Speaker 1>to be correct. Right. The next we have thinking and feeling.

0:26:18.840 --> 0:26:22.919
<v Speaker 1>Thinking being more focused on logic. Uh, that's a logic

0:26:23.760 --> 0:26:27.760
<v Speaker 1>with a t sure and objectivity. And then if you're feeling,

0:26:28.240 --> 0:26:32.280
<v Speaker 1>you're gonna be um more interested in in relationships and

0:26:32.880 --> 0:26:36.879
<v Speaker 1>harmony among your group. Plus two are pretty straightforward. And

0:26:36.960 --> 0:26:41.360
<v Speaker 1>then lastly there's judging and perceiving. Those are that's a dichotomy.

0:26:41.920 --> 0:26:46.280
<v Speaker 1>Judging is where you UM, you prefer schedules. You prefer

0:26:46.960 --> 0:26:51.280
<v Speaker 1>um decisiveness. That's how you kind of approach life and

0:26:51.400 --> 0:26:54.280
<v Speaker 1>perceiving is where you're just kind of like whatever. Yeah,

0:26:54.520 --> 0:26:58.840
<v Speaker 1>I'm not too worried about it. Um. That's almost kind

0:26:58.880 --> 0:27:00.960
<v Speaker 1>of like the difference between the type A and Type

0:27:01.000 --> 0:27:04.520
<v Speaker 1>B personalities, which, by the way, was made up by

0:27:04.560 --> 0:27:08.760
<v Speaker 1>a pair of cardiologists whose work was later secretly funded

0:27:08.800 --> 0:27:11.960
<v Speaker 1>by the tobacco industry who were looking for anything to

0:27:12.119 --> 0:27:16.600
<v Speaker 1>explain heart attacks besides smoking, so they funded type A

0:27:16.680 --> 0:27:20.680
<v Speaker 1>and type B personality research for years. Interesting, Yeah, it

0:27:20.720 --> 0:27:23.160
<v Speaker 1>really is. There's a UM just as an aside. There's

0:27:23.200 --> 0:27:28.480
<v Speaker 1>a really interesting price I think. Yeah, Prison nomics UM

0:27:29.800 --> 0:27:33.159
<v Speaker 1>article on type and type Yeah, just look it up.

0:27:33.160 --> 0:27:36.960
<v Speaker 1>I don't remember the name, right. UM. So, when you

0:27:37.040 --> 0:27:39.920
<v Speaker 1>sit down to take one of these uh not tests

0:27:40.840 --> 0:27:42.959
<v Speaker 1>with a series of questions that you answer, I think

0:27:43.000 --> 0:27:47.840
<v Speaker 1>they call them instruments, by the way, psychometric instruments, which

0:27:47.840 --> 0:27:49.760
<v Speaker 1>are basically a series of questions on a piece of paper.

0:27:49.880 --> 0:27:52.920
<v Speaker 1>It sounds like a test. Um. They will say things

0:27:53.040 --> 0:27:55.920
<v Speaker 1>like uh ed has some good examples here. When you

0:27:55.960 --> 0:27:58.080
<v Speaker 1>go on a trip, do you want everything planned out

0:27:58.080 --> 0:27:59.920
<v Speaker 1>in advance or would you rather just take each day

0:28:00.000 --> 0:28:03.160
<v Speaker 1>as it comes and do whatever you feel like. Pretty

0:28:03.280 --> 0:28:05.760
<v Speaker 1>straightforward kind of stuff. Uh. And then they also have

0:28:05.880 --> 0:28:09.440
<v Speaker 1>things like a word pairs just to see literally what

0:28:09.960 --> 0:28:16.000
<v Speaker 1>word you like better, like compassion foresight, Like which word

0:28:16.200 --> 0:28:21.440
<v Speaker 1>do you like better? Carrots or fruit? Uh? Fruit? Fruit?

0:28:22.080 --> 0:28:25.560
<v Speaker 1>That's just prettier, it is. So I'm looking back here,

0:28:25.600 --> 0:28:30.280
<v Speaker 1>I just want to say, so, I think trying to

0:28:30.280 --> 0:28:33.280
<v Speaker 1>figure out what you were. Yeah, I think e n FP.

0:28:33.640 --> 0:28:37.639
<v Speaker 1>Maybe I think that's what I was. We weren't the

0:28:37.680 --> 0:28:40.479
<v Speaker 1>same thing. I don't remember you. Me and I got

0:28:40.560 --> 0:28:42.200
<v Speaker 1>the same thing. She found an old email, but she

0:28:42.280 --> 0:28:45.600
<v Speaker 1>forgot to tell me what we were. Really, I really,

0:28:46.480 --> 0:28:49.400
<v Speaker 1>I don't know. The problem is would we still be

0:28:49.480 --> 0:28:52.920
<v Speaker 1>the same today? Yeah? And I think, if I'm not mistaken,

0:28:53.000 --> 0:28:54.560
<v Speaker 1>didn't we have this up on a big board in

0:28:54.600 --> 0:28:57.160
<v Speaker 1>the office for a while. So yeah, it seems like

0:28:57.240 --> 0:28:59.800
<v Speaker 1>a Jerry's nothing. That seems like a breach of protocol

0:29:00.480 --> 0:29:03.960
<v Speaker 1>sure like privacy? Yeah, well again, being forced to gunpoint

0:29:04.040 --> 0:29:06.320
<v Speaker 1>to do it was just from the start. Remember it

0:29:06.400 --> 0:29:08.520
<v Speaker 1>was kind of fun night, a fun day. We'll talk

0:29:08.560 --> 0:29:11.200
<v Speaker 1>about that as well. Um. So it's gonna cost you

0:29:11.320 --> 0:29:14.040
<v Speaker 1>if you just do this as a single individual. Um.

0:29:14.400 --> 0:29:17.680
<v Speaker 1>Not meaning not married but just a person about fifty

0:29:17.760 --> 0:29:21.080
<v Speaker 1>bucks um, although they should charge more if you're married.

0:29:21.720 --> 0:29:25.600
<v Speaker 1>More complex tests about fifty bucks. If you want our feedback,

0:29:26.000 --> 0:29:28.520
<v Speaker 1>it'll cost you an extra hundred and if you want

0:29:28.560 --> 0:29:32.880
<v Speaker 1>a career report all typed up, that'll be six And

0:29:33.000 --> 0:29:35.400
<v Speaker 1>if you um, this is fifteen hundred dollars for a

0:29:36.360 --> 0:29:38.960
<v Speaker 1>on site training classes at like what we had. So

0:29:39.360 --> 0:29:41.520
<v Speaker 1>this is a this is not very well explained. If

0:29:41.560 --> 0:29:47.000
<v Speaker 1>you want to administer the Myers Briggs personality or type inventory,

0:29:47.560 --> 0:29:51.240
<v Speaker 1>you can get certified. It's four day training course and

0:29:51.320 --> 0:29:54.920
<v Speaker 1>you pay fifteen hundred and sixteen hundred dollars. Cannot legally

0:29:54.960 --> 0:29:59.320
<v Speaker 1>administer this test or you're infringing on their copyrights unless

0:29:59.560 --> 0:30:02.880
<v Speaker 1>you're certified by CPP to do this. We should do

0:30:02.960 --> 0:30:05.080
<v Speaker 1>it with one another on the air and risk a lawsuit.

0:30:05.320 --> 0:30:08.040
<v Speaker 1>Well yeah, well you probably got a stude already with

0:30:08.120 --> 0:30:11.200
<v Speaker 1>that one question you asked out loud? Which one? Just

0:30:11.320 --> 0:30:12.840
<v Speaker 1>the one? Yeah? When you go on a trip, do

0:30:12.920 --> 0:30:15.400
<v Speaker 1>you want everything planned out in advance? I just made

0:30:15.440 --> 0:30:20.200
<v Speaker 1>that up. Oh good, I got that from Travelocity. Nice. Okay, yeah,

0:30:20.280 --> 0:30:23.280
<v Speaker 1>that little gnome whispered it in your ear. But so

0:30:23.520 --> 0:30:26.560
<v Speaker 1>you you would go and get certified, and then now

0:30:27.000 --> 0:30:30.640
<v Speaker 1>you can go around to businesses and say, hey, uh,

0:30:30.920 --> 0:30:32.600
<v Speaker 1>do you want to know more about your employees? You

0:30:32.680 --> 0:30:34.920
<v Speaker 1>want to know who's good at what? Let me come

0:30:35.000 --> 0:30:39.840
<v Speaker 1>give the Myers Briggs type inventory to your your employees

0:30:39.920 --> 0:30:42.880
<v Speaker 1>and it will be wonderful. Right, So that's how the

0:30:42.920 --> 0:30:47.160
<v Speaker 1>whole process goes. You pay to become certified, and then

0:30:47.240 --> 0:30:50.640
<v Speaker 1>you go become something of an evangelist for the Myers

0:30:50.720 --> 0:30:54.520
<v Speaker 1>Briggs tests, and you sell the test. You basically become

0:30:54.560 --> 0:30:57.719
<v Speaker 1>a salesman as well. It's a it's very interesting UM

0:30:58.120 --> 0:31:01.719
<v Speaker 1>dynamic that they have going that is, it's a good

0:31:01.760 --> 0:31:07.800
<v Speaker 1>word dynamic. Um. They want to point out that um,

0:31:09.120 --> 0:31:13.160
<v Speaker 1>the person taking the test is the expert um. And

0:31:13.280 --> 0:31:16.640
<v Speaker 1>they also use this metaphor of handedness, which I didn't

0:31:16.680 --> 0:31:20.200
<v Speaker 1>fully understand. They say things like, it feels more comfortable

0:31:20.240 --> 0:31:22.520
<v Speaker 1>to sign your name with your dominant hand, but technically

0:31:22.600 --> 0:31:24.520
<v Speaker 1>you can sign with your non dominant and if you

0:31:24.560 --> 0:31:26.520
<v Speaker 1>need to write, And I'm not sure what they're trying

0:31:26.520 --> 0:31:29.960
<v Speaker 1>to prove that. They're trying to say that despite the

0:31:30.480 --> 0:31:35.440
<v Speaker 1>m B T I pigeonholing you fully in one category

0:31:35.520 --> 0:31:38.200
<v Speaker 1>or another rather than on a spectrum they're saying that

0:31:38.440 --> 0:31:43.320
<v Speaker 1>category that it's pigeonholing you into is actually just your preference.

0:31:43.400 --> 0:31:48.440
<v Speaker 1>It's not you specifically, it's just ca Yeah, you can

0:31:48.600 --> 0:31:52.360
<v Speaker 1>to be an extrovert, but of course everybody likes their

0:31:52.400 --> 0:31:55.600
<v Speaker 1>own personal alone time, so yeah, you're going to be

0:31:55.680 --> 0:31:57.640
<v Speaker 1>an introvert once in a while, but you're an extrovert

0:31:57.760 --> 0:32:01.120
<v Speaker 1>more than than other times. Yeah, because I can't sign

0:32:01.200 --> 0:32:04.800
<v Speaker 1>my name with my left hand that I didn't like

0:32:04.880 --> 0:32:08.320
<v Speaker 1>that analogy because it literally I can barely hold a

0:32:08.440 --> 0:32:12.160
<v Speaker 1>pin with my left hand. I'm seeing you're doing it right. Wow,

0:32:13.400 --> 0:32:14.880
<v Speaker 1>If I tried to do it, it would look like

0:32:15.240 --> 0:32:19.880
<v Speaker 1>a three year old with arthritis has tried to like

0:32:20.040 --> 0:32:27.480
<v Speaker 1>scribble it out. Mine mine looks like um you d mum,

0:32:29.000 --> 0:32:32.440
<v Speaker 1>it's my signature with my left hand, And they do

0:32:32.920 --> 0:32:34.840
<v Speaker 1>they do try and point out like you said that

0:32:38.520 --> 0:32:41.200
<v Speaker 1>it's interesting because they box you in. But at the

0:32:41.280 --> 0:32:45.000
<v Speaker 1>same time they're saying, but you know, like you said,

0:32:45.040 --> 0:32:47.600
<v Speaker 1>it's just predisposition. Don't don't really think of it about

0:32:48.520 --> 0:32:50.719
<v Speaker 1>you being this type of person, even though you are

0:32:50.800 --> 0:32:54.840
<v Speaker 1>a E N F B. Like you said, it was earlier,

0:32:55.000 --> 0:32:56.920
<v Speaker 1>it was almost numbered. I mean, it is, it's lettered

0:32:58.400 --> 0:33:01.000
<v Speaker 1>this is a different way of quantify buying it. Yeah,

0:33:02.360 --> 0:33:04.760
<v Speaker 1>but without numbers. All right, you want to take a

0:33:04.800 --> 0:33:08.080
<v Speaker 1>break and then come back and and maybe do a

0:33:08.120 --> 0:33:33.320
<v Speaker 1>little criticism. Yeah, okay, that's sky. Shouldn't chuck, all right,

0:33:33.440 --> 0:33:35.800
<v Speaker 1>chuck Like I said, it's kind of a pastime in

0:33:35.880 --> 0:33:39.760
<v Speaker 1>the United States too. Two tee off on the Myers

0:33:39.840 --> 0:33:42.400
<v Speaker 1>Briggs type inventory. Yeah, this is not us here, this

0:33:42.520 --> 0:33:44.840
<v Speaker 1>is now. This is us talking about other people teeing

0:33:44.880 --> 0:33:47.840
<v Speaker 1>off on it. Yeah. It's widely been criticized over the

0:33:47.880 --> 0:33:55.800
<v Speaker 1>years from UM psychologists and well amateur no nothings like us.

0:33:56.880 --> 0:34:00.440
<v Speaker 1>One of the big criticisms is that companies use this

0:34:00.560 --> 0:34:05.160
<v Speaker 1>stuff UM and hiring and firing and promoting UM. But

0:34:05.360 --> 0:34:09.480
<v Speaker 1>even the Myers Briggs people CPP say like, don't do that.

0:34:09.800 --> 0:34:12.919
<v Speaker 1>Well I know, but they say that, but then don't

0:34:12.960 --> 0:34:15.120
<v Speaker 1>go to an office and get hired by a corporation

0:34:15.200 --> 0:34:19.960
<v Speaker 1>to administer it or go sell your services you know. Yeah, yeah,

0:34:20.560 --> 0:34:24.120
<v Speaker 1>I agreed, And that's part of the problem to me.

0:34:25.200 --> 0:34:32.160
<v Speaker 1>That is more UM the corporation's fault. Well, sure, like

0:34:32.280 --> 0:34:35.880
<v Speaker 1>if you have an HR person who's like die hard

0:34:36.840 --> 0:34:40.800
<v Speaker 1>believer in the m b t I and will hire

0:34:40.880 --> 0:34:44.240
<v Speaker 1>or fire somebody based on their m b t I type,

0:34:45.480 --> 0:34:48.080
<v Speaker 1>fire that person because you have a real dumb dumb

0:34:48.160 --> 0:34:52.480
<v Speaker 1>on your hands, and they should not be responsible for

0:34:52.760 --> 0:34:56.480
<v Speaker 1>people's livelihoods. Even I don't think they would put it

0:34:56.600 --> 0:34:59.400
<v Speaker 1>quite in those terms, but even the Myers Briggs people

0:34:59.760 --> 0:35:03.000
<v Speaker 1>say like, you shouldn't use this for hiring or firing,

0:35:03.560 --> 0:35:06.440
<v Speaker 1>and yet yes, some people do. Some people swear by this.

0:35:07.200 --> 0:35:10.960
<v Speaker 1>The impression that I have is that the Myers Briggs

0:35:11.040 --> 0:35:13.880
<v Speaker 1>people tend to think of this as more like a

0:35:14.040 --> 0:35:19.040
<v Speaker 1>team building exercise or where like a certified and b

0:35:19.200 --> 0:35:23.399
<v Speaker 1>t I administrator can come to your place, get all

0:35:23.520 --> 0:35:26.759
<v Speaker 1>your employees together, and they find out like all their

0:35:26.840 --> 0:35:30.200
<v Speaker 1>personality types. And by the way, there's not a single

0:35:30.320 --> 0:35:34.320
<v Speaker 1>negative personality type, and all personality types are equal, so

0:35:34.400 --> 0:35:37.000
<v Speaker 1>everybody gets a participant ribbon in the form of their

0:35:37.040 --> 0:35:41.759
<v Speaker 1>personality type and um. But at the same time, and

0:35:41.880 --> 0:35:44.399
<v Speaker 1>this seems to be the crux, at the same time,

0:35:44.480 --> 0:35:47.239
<v Speaker 1>everybody's finding out like, oh, you're a little different than me,

0:35:47.320 --> 0:35:49.440
<v Speaker 1>and I'm a little different than you, and we all

0:35:49.480 --> 0:35:52.400
<v Speaker 1>have differences in different perspectives, so let's celebrate that and

0:35:52.480 --> 0:35:58.640
<v Speaker 1>let's respect one another's differences. And there is the actual

0:35:58.840 --> 0:36:01.280
<v Speaker 1>point from what I underst stand up the Myers Briggs

0:36:01.440 --> 0:36:04.359
<v Speaker 1>type inventory and taking it in a corporate setting, that's

0:36:04.360 --> 0:36:07.120
<v Speaker 1>what stands out to me as what happened with us

0:36:07.360 --> 0:36:11.319
<v Speaker 1>was I remember it kind of being a fun day. Yeah,

0:36:11.360 --> 0:36:13.160
<v Speaker 1>we held goofed off and had a good time. And

0:36:13.200 --> 0:36:15.480
<v Speaker 1>the person leading it, if they're good at what they do,

0:36:15.640 --> 0:36:18.440
<v Speaker 1>which this person was, is always you know, it's always

0:36:18.480 --> 0:36:22.359
<v Speaker 1>kind of a fun person and cracking jokes and they

0:36:22.400 --> 0:36:24.920
<v Speaker 1>don't take it too seriously. None of us took it

0:36:25.080 --> 0:36:28.239
<v Speaker 1>too seriously. Uh, And we all had a good time

0:36:28.320 --> 0:36:30.560
<v Speaker 1>and it did. It was very much like a team

0:36:30.560 --> 0:36:32.560
<v Speaker 1>building thing, right. So as long as there's like a

0:36:32.640 --> 0:36:35.640
<v Speaker 1>wink wink, nudge nudge kind of thing, and that the

0:36:35.719 --> 0:36:38.800
<v Speaker 1>people who take it actually take it seriously or taken

0:36:38.840 --> 0:36:41.640
<v Speaker 1>off to the side by their hr rep to say like, no,

0:36:41.880 --> 0:36:45.000
<v Speaker 1>this is a little less serious thing, then you're taking it.

0:36:45.520 --> 0:36:48.360
<v Speaker 1>Then it's fine. But yes, once you start deciding people's

0:36:48.400 --> 0:36:52.120
<v Speaker 1>fate based on this, then you have real problems because

0:36:52.600 --> 0:36:55.240
<v Speaker 1>it's just about anybody will tell you the Myers Briggs

0:36:55.320 --> 0:36:59.800
<v Speaker 1>type inventory is based at best on some shaky science,

0:37:00.000 --> 0:37:02.440
<v Speaker 1>if at all, If you go back to the very

0:37:02.520 --> 0:37:06.120
<v Speaker 1>beginning it's based on the theories of Carl Young, which

0:37:06.160 --> 0:37:08.960
<v Speaker 1>have never been based on science. There are basically personal

0:37:09.040 --> 0:37:13.799
<v Speaker 1>observations by Young, and the psychology community has disavowed Young

0:37:13.920 --> 0:37:17.960
<v Speaker 1>in large part. So therefore anything based on his teachings

0:37:18.000 --> 0:37:21.680
<v Speaker 1>and theories is by proxy disavowed as well. But if

0:37:21.760 --> 0:37:25.560
<v Speaker 1>that weren't enough, psychology as a field loves going after

0:37:25.640 --> 0:37:29.440
<v Speaker 1>the Myers Briggs type inventory just loves it as as

0:37:29.560 --> 0:37:35.120
<v Speaker 1>totally baseless scientifically all right, so we've got UM. Shouldn't

0:37:35.239 --> 0:37:38.320
<v Speaker 1>use it to hire and fire and corporations or or

0:37:38.400 --> 0:37:42.759
<v Speaker 1>gift promotions we have not based on real science and

0:37:42.920 --> 0:37:49.160
<v Speaker 1>science and scientific data. Um. These four dichotomies are problematic

0:37:49.239 --> 0:37:53.560
<v Speaker 1>in and of themselves because everyone is on a spectrum.

0:37:53.600 --> 0:37:57.760
<v Speaker 1>You can't say, like, you know, you answered these ten questions,

0:37:58.160 --> 0:38:02.160
<v Speaker 1>you're either this or you're that. UM. And when one

0:38:02.200 --> 0:38:07.719
<v Speaker 1>of the rebuttals because I think ED interviewed someone from CPP, right, UM.

0:38:07.800 --> 0:38:12.600
<v Speaker 1>One of the rebuttals about being a non repeatable UM

0:38:12.760 --> 0:38:16.799
<v Speaker 1>experiment of sorts is like, hey, yesterday I was an

0:38:17.000 --> 0:38:19.120
<v Speaker 1>n f P and today I'm this. They'll say, well,

0:38:19.160 --> 0:38:21.439
<v Speaker 1>you know what, if you have different answers, that means

0:38:21.680 --> 0:38:23.320
<v Speaker 1>you were sort of on the cusp right there in

0:38:23.400 --> 0:38:26.520
<v Speaker 1>that center line on some of these questions, and you

0:38:26.600 --> 0:38:29.759
<v Speaker 1>might have just leapt over to that other side, which

0:38:29.800 --> 0:38:32.480
<v Speaker 1>means you're basically kind of down the center. Yet they

0:38:32.520 --> 0:38:35.760
<v Speaker 1>don't have a categorization for down the center. Yeah, because

0:38:35.880 --> 0:38:39.719
<v Speaker 1>depending on as Ed puts it, you could answer all

0:38:40.040 --> 0:38:43.759
<v Speaker 1>twenty four questions on the feeling side and you're gonna

0:38:43.840 --> 0:38:47.120
<v Speaker 1>get the same result as somebody who answered eleven questions

0:38:47.160 --> 0:38:50.359
<v Speaker 1>for thinking and thirteen questions for feeling. Right, same thing,

0:38:50.440 --> 0:38:53.800
<v Speaker 1>You're still both in an f in that respect. And

0:38:54.000 --> 0:38:56.960
<v Speaker 1>I saw elsewhere it put like if the Myers Briggs

0:38:57.040 --> 0:39:00.919
<v Speaker 1>test um measured height, you would either be taller short. Yeah,

0:39:01.080 --> 0:39:03.440
<v Speaker 1>you can say, well, actually I'm right there in the middle,

0:39:03.480 --> 0:39:06.560
<v Speaker 1>and they'd be like, well that's short, right, or for you,

0:39:06.719 --> 0:39:08.799
<v Speaker 1>it's short. For the guy who who is the same

0:39:08.840 --> 0:39:12.080
<v Speaker 1>anxect tight, they're tall right. And trust me, nobody that's

0:39:12.120 --> 0:39:14.839
<v Speaker 1>five tin likes to be considered short, right. I can

0:39:15.000 --> 0:39:17.480
<v Speaker 1>say that from experience, because you're not you're in your

0:39:17.560 --> 0:39:22.239
<v Speaker 1>average I'm average average. The fact that there isn't a

0:39:22.320 --> 0:39:25.680
<v Speaker 1>spectrum is one thing that really makes it in stark

0:39:25.800 --> 0:39:33.600
<v Speaker 1>contrast of of other much more widely accepted psychometric instruments. UM.

0:39:34.760 --> 0:39:37.520
<v Speaker 1>It also points out to the Grabster that they're The

0:39:37.680 --> 0:39:43.880
<v Speaker 1>construction of the UM instrument itself is problematic because one,

0:39:44.000 --> 0:39:47.080
<v Speaker 1>like we talked about, it's self reporting. Anytime you're self reporting,

0:39:47.160 --> 0:39:49.920
<v Speaker 1>there's going to be some weird bias in there, just

0:39:50.160 --> 0:39:55.120
<v Speaker 1>almost impossible to avoid. The other one is that UM

0:39:55.800 --> 0:40:00.480
<v Speaker 1>he says a couple of these dicademies are entangled, which

0:40:00.480 --> 0:40:02.080
<v Speaker 1>I never really thought about that, but that's a pretty

0:40:02.120 --> 0:40:08.239
<v Speaker 1>good point. So UM judging perceiving scale or correlated with

0:40:08.320 --> 0:40:13.160
<v Speaker 1>answers on the sensing intuition scale, and if you like,

0:40:13.600 --> 0:40:16.920
<v Speaker 1>this should be separated out for sure. I don't know

0:40:16.960 --> 0:40:20.520
<v Speaker 1>why they don't. I don't either, you know, because they've

0:40:20.560 --> 0:40:23.160
<v Speaker 1>really put a lot of work into this. Yeah. Um,

0:40:23.480 --> 0:40:27.320
<v Speaker 1>it's not baked in stone from the nineteen forties and

0:40:27.400 --> 0:40:29.799
<v Speaker 1>fifties and sixties, is it. No, it's not. And even

0:40:29.880 --> 0:40:33.840
<v Speaker 1>while they were creating it was an ongoing, exhaustive process

0:40:34.000 --> 0:40:38.919
<v Speaker 1>that UM, Mrs Briggs and Mrs Myers UM engaged in. Yeah,

0:40:39.000 --> 0:40:41.200
<v Speaker 1>we don't want to give they spent decades on this. Yes,

0:40:41.320 --> 0:40:44.040
<v Speaker 1>it wasn't like something they threw together. No, The problem

0:40:44.200 --> 0:40:47.360
<v Speaker 1>is is they they did it backwards. They came up

0:40:47.440 --> 0:40:50.680
<v Speaker 1>with the personality types and then set about creating the

0:40:50.840 --> 0:40:54.120
<v Speaker 1>test that would detect these personality types. Rather than going

0:40:54.160 --> 0:40:57.680
<v Speaker 1>out and testing people, seeing what personalities types emerged and

0:40:57.760 --> 0:41:00.840
<v Speaker 1>then figuring out a test to find and other people,

0:41:01.239 --> 0:41:04.440
<v Speaker 1>they did it backwards. It was based on young but

0:41:04.600 --> 0:41:06.560
<v Speaker 1>it was not for lack of trying. Like as a

0:41:06.600 --> 0:41:08.319
<v Speaker 1>matter of fact, one of the first things they did

0:41:08.440 --> 0:41:11.720
<v Speaker 1>after they started to really establish the tests was they

0:41:11.760 --> 0:41:14.960
<v Speaker 1>managed to administer it to like five thousand George Washington

0:41:15.120 --> 0:41:19.680
<v Speaker 1>University medical students, and they took those results and tracked

0:41:19.760 --> 0:41:22.000
<v Speaker 1>the students to see what fields of medicine they went in.

0:41:22.120 --> 0:41:24.600
<v Speaker 1>They like really worked on this. I read an article

0:41:24.640 --> 0:41:30.280
<v Speaker 1>in the Washington Post where um this I think Isabelle Myers'

0:41:30.480 --> 0:41:36.480
<v Speaker 1>son Um remembers their vacations were basically like fact finding

0:41:37.239 --> 0:41:40.560
<v Speaker 1>um missions all around the country, Like they would go

0:41:40.640 --> 0:41:43.759
<v Speaker 1>administered tested, like everything was about this test and they

0:41:43.800 --> 0:41:46.600
<v Speaker 1>worked on it for decades. So yeah, the problem is

0:41:46.719 --> 0:41:49.080
<v Speaker 1>it was just it's just not based on science. They

0:41:49.080 --> 0:41:54.279
<v Speaker 1>didn't follow the scientific method. So science, so science kind

0:41:54.320 --> 0:41:56.440
<v Speaker 1>of poo poos the m b T I. But wait, wait, wait,

0:41:56.520 --> 0:42:02.120
<v Speaker 1>get back here, because a lot of the criticisms fall

0:42:03.040 --> 0:42:07.480
<v Speaker 1>just as easily on every other psychometric test around. Well, yeah,

0:42:07.520 --> 0:42:09.120
<v Speaker 1>and that's one of the things that UM. I can't

0:42:09.160 --> 0:42:11.520
<v Speaker 1>remember who was interviewed in here, but UM and one

0:42:11.560 --> 0:42:14.440
<v Speaker 1>of those other articles you sent one of the um

0:42:15.239 --> 0:42:18.719
<v Speaker 1>myers are I don't know if it was. Maybe it

0:42:18.760 --> 0:42:24.120
<v Speaker 1>was a roor Shack defender, UM said, you know, like everyone, Yeah,

0:42:24.160 --> 0:42:26.319
<v Speaker 1>it was Rorshak, Like everyone's always picking on ror Shack.

0:42:26.800 --> 0:42:31.560
<v Speaker 1>When all of these psychological tests are, you know, subject

0:42:31.600 --> 0:42:35.439
<v Speaker 1>to criticism, they are, you know, I think it's really

0:42:35.480 --> 0:42:38.560
<v Speaker 1>easy for to tee off on Rorshak as well, because

0:42:38.719 --> 0:42:41.360
<v Speaker 1>I mean we're talking ink plots. Man. It is the

0:42:41.520 --> 0:42:46.920
<v Speaker 1>epitome of subjective self reporting. You're saying, I, uh, let's

0:42:46.960 --> 0:42:50.720
<v Speaker 1>see in this one, I see mom's boobs. Yeah, Mom's

0:42:50.719 --> 0:42:55.719
<v Speaker 1>boobs in that one, right, exactly so, and then from

0:42:55.800 --> 0:43:00.279
<v Speaker 1>that it was strictly up to uh. Initially, Rorschack, I

0:43:00.320 --> 0:43:05.040
<v Speaker 1>think came up with this test in nineteen I think,

0:43:05.120 --> 0:43:09.800
<v Speaker 1>so he's a Swiss psychiatrist. It was. It was initially

0:43:09.880 --> 0:43:12.400
<v Speaker 1>up to him and then later on his followers to

0:43:12.840 --> 0:43:18.799
<v Speaker 1>interpret this, which is basically like interpreting dreams and UM,

0:43:19.200 --> 0:43:22.440
<v Speaker 1>so subjective. It totally subjective from beginning end. And then

0:43:22.480 --> 0:43:27.080
<v Speaker 1>and I think a guy at Bowling Green State University,

0:43:27.800 --> 0:43:31.719
<v Speaker 1>which is right outside of Toledo, UM, came up with

0:43:31.960 --> 0:43:38.880
<v Speaker 1>this a really exhaustive interpretive test that sought to quantify

0:43:39.600 --> 0:43:43.719
<v Speaker 1>rorshack answers. Yeah, John Exner, Uh. And it was a

0:43:43.760 --> 0:43:47.560
<v Speaker 1>test called the comprehensive system a hundred and forty components.

0:43:48.120 --> 0:43:51.680
<v Speaker 1>And in this article you sent, they said that rorshack

0:43:51.800 --> 0:43:55.360
<v Speaker 1>was probably going away, UM had it not been for

0:43:55.560 --> 0:43:59.919
<v Speaker 1>Exner's accompaniment UM with this other process. Right, And even

0:44:00.040 --> 0:44:03.680
<v Speaker 1>today he's got an institute in Asheville that's dedicated to

0:44:04.960 --> 0:44:07.879
<v Speaker 1>the Rorschach test. Right. So, one thing I've noticed from

0:44:07.920 --> 0:44:12.840
<v Speaker 1>researching this is each of these personality inventories has like

0:44:13.160 --> 0:44:17.320
<v Speaker 1>its adherents and its detractors, And just judging from the outside,

0:44:17.440 --> 0:44:22.040
<v Speaker 1>it looks a lot like colts gathered around their various idols. Right.

0:44:22.400 --> 0:44:25.200
<v Speaker 1>There's like the original figurehead who came up with it,

0:44:25.360 --> 0:44:28.160
<v Speaker 1>and everybody worships them, and he's attacked by these other

0:44:28.200 --> 0:44:31.080
<v Speaker 1>followers who have a very similar figurehead. It came up

0:44:31.080 --> 0:44:33.719
<v Speaker 1>with something very similar, but it's just different enough that

0:44:34.160 --> 0:44:37.520
<v Speaker 1>that there's a huge chasm between the two. And there's

0:44:37.520 --> 0:44:41.680
<v Speaker 1>a lot of dogma surrounding it, but the Rorschach test

0:44:41.760 --> 0:44:46.520
<v Speaker 1>in particular is apparently well known to give wildly inaccurate results.

0:44:48.719 --> 0:44:51.000
<v Speaker 1>How did you do? I got two out of tin,

0:44:51.200 --> 0:44:55.360
<v Speaker 1>which means, um, I was only two to away whatever

0:44:55.480 --> 0:44:59.640
<v Speaker 1>that means from being labeled like a psychotic. So yeah,

0:44:59.719 --> 0:45:01.319
<v Speaker 1>there was to get four out of ten. I think

0:45:01.480 --> 0:45:03.759
<v Speaker 1>there's this. Oh really, I think that's what it said. Yeah,

0:45:03.920 --> 0:45:07.080
<v Speaker 1>that's close. And this is an online uh test. I

0:45:07.120 --> 0:45:09.279
<v Speaker 1>don't know if it's like how true it was to

0:45:09.360 --> 0:45:12.440
<v Speaker 1>the original or maybe the original it could be, and

0:45:12.520 --> 0:45:16.000
<v Speaker 1>then they have an algorithm that runs the analysis. I

0:45:16.080 --> 0:45:18.160
<v Speaker 1>keep seeing all kinds of things. When I looked at it,

0:45:18.239 --> 0:45:20.680
<v Speaker 1>and I've never done an ink blot test, I would say, oh,

0:45:20.760 --> 0:45:22.120
<v Speaker 1>that looks like a bat, and then I was like, no,

0:45:22.200 --> 0:45:24.680
<v Speaker 1>it's like two bunnies. And then now it looks like

0:45:24.800 --> 0:45:27.279
<v Speaker 1>a cool Mardi Gras mask. Did they did they move

0:45:27.480 --> 0:45:30.120
<v Speaker 1>to you? Did you see colors? Well, some of them

0:45:30.200 --> 0:45:33.359
<v Speaker 1>were colored, most of them were black, and they had

0:45:33.400 --> 0:45:35.560
<v Speaker 1>a the one I took at a at a one

0:45:35.640 --> 0:45:37.680
<v Speaker 1>and a two, like, um, what do you see? And

0:45:37.760 --> 0:45:41.759
<v Speaker 1>what's like a secondary thing that you see? So you know,

0:45:42.000 --> 0:45:45.799
<v Speaker 1>supposedly people who are supporters of the Rorshach tests say no, man,

0:45:45.920 --> 0:45:49.200
<v Speaker 1>there's we don't know how it's working. But if you

0:45:49.400 --> 0:45:53.160
<v Speaker 1>see movement in the Rorschach ink blots, it's suggestive of

0:45:53.360 --> 0:45:56.920
<v Speaker 1>depression or something like that. And they say, statistically it's correlated.

0:45:57.080 --> 0:45:59.640
<v Speaker 1>But like I was saying, it's also notorious for giving

0:46:00.040 --> 0:46:04.240
<v Speaker 1>incorrect results. Yeah, like saying you're you have a mental illness, right, Okay,

0:46:04.360 --> 0:46:06.840
<v Speaker 1>So there was this study in two thousand that was

0:46:06.880 --> 0:46:12.279
<v Speaker 1>given to like one mentally sound elementary school kids and

0:46:12.520 --> 0:46:16.480
<v Speaker 1>some like high percentage of them came back as borderline

0:46:16.520 --> 0:46:19.799
<v Speaker 1>psychotic because of the ror check test, right, And it's

0:46:19.880 --> 0:46:22.920
<v Speaker 1>hilarious to hear stories like that, Like I'm laughing inside

0:46:23.040 --> 0:46:26.640
<v Speaker 1>right now. But um, the problem is is you were

0:46:26.880 --> 0:46:30.320
<v Speaker 1>at the very least being labeled as psychotic, not a

0:46:30.440 --> 0:46:33.680
<v Speaker 1>label you want in society, and it was because of

0:46:33.760 --> 0:46:37.320
<v Speaker 1>this ink blot test that's a hundred years old. And

0:46:37.440 --> 0:46:42.000
<v Speaker 1>then secondly, these tests are also being submitted and accepted

0:46:42.400 --> 0:46:47.080
<v Speaker 1>as evidence in criminal trials. That's the biggest part. Child

0:46:47.239 --> 0:46:51.000
<v Speaker 1>custody cases and sile case still given real weight and

0:46:51.800 --> 0:46:55.040
<v Speaker 1>lives are changed and ruined based on looking at a

0:46:55.120 --> 0:46:58.800
<v Speaker 1>hundred year old ink blots and a person subjective analysis

0:46:58.840 --> 0:47:02.080
<v Speaker 1>of that that's not okay? Know this, Um, Howard Garb

0:47:02.200 --> 0:47:03.880
<v Speaker 1>in this one article you sent and he's a co

0:47:04.000 --> 0:47:06.920
<v Speaker 1>author of What's Wrong with the rorscheck? And he is

0:47:07.760 --> 0:47:09.360
<v Speaker 1>head of cycle, or at least at the time of

0:47:09.440 --> 0:47:12.120
<v Speaker 1>this article, he may still be head of psychological testing

0:47:12.200 --> 0:47:15.160
<v Speaker 1>for the Air Force. Uh. He said that even with

0:47:15.360 --> 0:47:18.680
<v Speaker 1>Exner's comprehensive system, he said, only ten percent of his

0:47:18.760 --> 0:47:23.799
<v Speaker 1>system even meets the most basic scientific standards. And um,

0:47:24.800 --> 0:47:28.120
<v Speaker 1>they did examine data of over thirty different ror Scheck studies,

0:47:28.640 --> 0:47:30.840
<v Speaker 1>and he said they all have a tendency to label

0:47:31.080 --> 0:47:33.960
<v Speaker 1>healthy people mentally ill. And if you're trying to get

0:47:34.000 --> 0:47:36.640
<v Speaker 1>custody of your kid, or if you are on trial

0:47:36.680 --> 0:47:39.759
<v Speaker 1>as a criminal, like it's just that's the last thing

0:47:39.840 --> 0:47:43.840
<v Speaker 1>you need is somebody subjective opinion of is it a

0:47:43.880 --> 0:47:47.120
<v Speaker 1>bunny or is it a bat? Oh? He said, a bat?

0:47:47.200 --> 0:47:50.920
<v Speaker 1>Take that kid? You know quick? Kids like I like bunnies.

0:47:51.560 --> 0:47:56.080
<v Speaker 1>The another one that that we have to talk about

0:47:56.120 --> 0:47:58.759
<v Speaker 1>is the mm P I. Now the mm P I

0:47:58.920 --> 0:48:01.160
<v Speaker 1>dash too. I think as of two thousand and twelve

0:48:01.360 --> 0:48:04.000
<v Speaker 1>they revised it dramatic. Is this one? Is that right?

0:48:04.080 --> 0:48:08.640
<v Speaker 1>It has over questions. Yeah, some of them originally were

0:48:08.680 --> 0:48:13.759
<v Speaker 1>about like your bowel movements, um, really not so questions

0:48:14.400 --> 0:48:18.759
<v Speaker 1>that supposedly really got to the heart of whether you

0:48:18.880 --> 0:48:22.520
<v Speaker 1>were mentally disturbed or not right. And it was created

0:48:22.640 --> 0:48:26.320
<v Speaker 1>at the University of Minnesota in the forties by a

0:48:26.480 --> 0:48:31.319
<v Speaker 1>psychiatrist and a neurologist, I believe, and they hit upon

0:48:31.400 --> 0:48:34.480
<v Speaker 1>a pretty clever idea. They said, we're not going to

0:48:34.640 --> 0:48:38.279
<v Speaker 1>interpret the results right and say, you know, oh, this

0:48:38.440 --> 0:48:42.279
<v Speaker 1>person said that they do feel like smashing something sometimes

0:48:42.719 --> 0:48:45.440
<v Speaker 1>and that means this. Instead, we're gonna come up with

0:48:45.520 --> 0:48:47.960
<v Speaker 1>this test of like five hundred and four questions, and

0:48:48.040 --> 0:48:52.120
<v Speaker 1>we're going to give it to the patient or the

0:48:52.640 --> 0:48:57.640
<v Speaker 1>family and staff of a mental hospital who were sure

0:48:57.680 --> 0:49:00.680
<v Speaker 1>are sane, and we're gonna take their answers and they're

0:49:00.719 --> 0:49:03.640
<v Speaker 1>going to become our control group, our baseline. So then

0:49:03.800 --> 0:49:06.920
<v Speaker 1>anybody who takes this test, we're going to compare the

0:49:07.160 --> 0:49:11.000
<v Speaker 1>test takers answers to the same control groups answers, and

0:49:11.960 --> 0:49:13.799
<v Speaker 1>you know, depending on how it relates to the same

0:49:13.840 --> 0:49:17.200
<v Speaker 1>control group, they're either mentally ill or not. You better

0:49:17.280 --> 0:49:19.680
<v Speaker 1>have gotten that control group right. Well, that's the thing

0:49:19.800 --> 0:49:22.600
<v Speaker 1>to begin with. So a group of like family and

0:49:22.760 --> 0:49:26.759
<v Speaker 1>friends in Minnesota. Is the picture of sanity throughout the

0:49:26.840 --> 0:49:29.439
<v Speaker 1>world is the basis of this test. That's a huge

0:49:29.520 --> 0:49:32.480
<v Speaker 1>problem with it to begin with, but apparently a lot

0:49:32.520 --> 0:49:35.279
<v Speaker 1>of people say, like, no, it really has It does

0:49:35.320 --> 0:49:40.359
<v Speaker 1>a pretty good job of sustening sussing out mental illness. UM.

0:49:40.520 --> 0:49:43.719
<v Speaker 1>It's also really good at detecting faker faking one way

0:49:43.800 --> 0:49:48.000
<v Speaker 1>or the other. UM. But it's it's too invasive and

0:49:48.280 --> 0:49:51.879
<v Speaker 1>when companies use it for hiring and firing, it's way

0:49:52.000 --> 0:49:55.760
<v Speaker 1>too invasive. And apparently lawsuits have been filed against companies

0:49:55.800 --> 0:50:00.960
<v Speaker 1>for using it. Well, I think that UM, most people

0:50:01.200 --> 0:50:07.040
<v Speaker 1>are far more UM troubled than they ever let on

0:50:07.280 --> 0:50:14.200
<v Speaker 1>in life. And UM part of success in life comes

0:50:14.280 --> 0:50:18.279
<v Speaker 1>down to how good you are at UM covering that

0:50:18.440 --> 0:50:21.880
<v Speaker 1>up or hiding it, or dealing with it and processing it,

0:50:22.880 --> 0:50:27.439
<v Speaker 1>terms with it. UM, it's just to find a core

0:50:27.560 --> 0:50:33.439
<v Speaker 1>group that are quote unquote saying normal people. UM, it's

0:50:33.520 --> 0:50:37.160
<v Speaker 1>just you're starting off with a problem, he asked me.

0:50:37.360 --> 0:50:40.040
<v Speaker 1>A faulty premise, right, Yeah, It's just there's no way

0:50:40.160 --> 0:50:46.080
<v Speaker 1>like everyone has their issues. They're deep dark, uh, things

0:50:46.160 --> 0:50:47.759
<v Speaker 1>that their brain that they don't want anyone to know.

0:50:47.920 --> 0:50:50.040
<v Speaker 1>Sometimes even the people closest to them don't even know.

0:50:51.000 --> 0:50:54.879
<v Speaker 1>And actually you you're in agreement with this. A sociologist

0:50:55.000 --> 0:50:59.600
<v Speaker 1>named William White who criticized the mm p I as

0:50:59.719 --> 0:51:04.120
<v Speaker 1>a tool that helped to create and perpetuate the oppressive

0:51:04.200 --> 0:51:08.400
<v Speaker 1>group think of mid century organization man, where it's basically like,

0:51:08.640 --> 0:51:11.320
<v Speaker 1>here's what we think is normal. Anything outside of that

0:51:11.440 --> 0:51:13.560
<v Speaker 1>is abnormal, and we're not going to hire you because

0:51:13.640 --> 0:51:16.160
<v Speaker 1>you don't fit into this picture of normalcy, which is

0:51:16.200 --> 0:51:20.719
<v Speaker 1>basically white crew cut Minnesota from the forties, right, that's

0:51:20.760 --> 0:51:24.520
<v Speaker 1>the picture of normalcy. That's highly debatable. The other thing

0:51:24.560 --> 0:51:26.640
<v Speaker 1>I thought was interesting is a lot of skeptics and

0:51:26.719 --> 0:51:28.880
<v Speaker 1>critics point to things like the m b t I

0:51:30.160 --> 0:51:34.640
<v Speaker 1>and saying, this is just like astrology. There is really

0:51:34.680 --> 0:51:38.759
<v Speaker 1>no different than reading your horoscope because it's all positive psychology. UM.

0:51:38.880 --> 0:51:41.680
<v Speaker 1>At the end of a of a Myers Briggs um

0:51:42.040 --> 0:51:46.160
<v Speaker 1>non test, no one walks away feeling bad. Usually it's

0:51:46.200 --> 0:51:49.440
<v Speaker 1>all sort of positive wording and like like this is

0:51:49.520 --> 0:51:52.560
<v Speaker 1>what you are. You're just this, so kind of don't

0:51:52.600 --> 0:51:54.520
<v Speaker 1>worry about it the same way you read your horoscope

0:51:54.600 --> 0:51:56.759
<v Speaker 1>in an in a given day. I mean, how many

0:51:56.800 --> 0:52:00.680
<v Speaker 1>horoscopes say like UM today you're you will be prone

0:52:00.719 --> 0:52:04.840
<v Speaker 1>to depression and wonder what it's all about. Right, maybe

0:52:04.960 --> 0:52:07.959
<v Speaker 1>you should work on your core character because people don't

0:52:08.040 --> 0:52:10.160
<v Speaker 1>like being around you that much. You don't hear that

0:52:10.280 --> 0:52:13.320
<v Speaker 1>kind of stuff but taps into what's called the Horror

0:52:13.360 --> 0:52:17.640
<v Speaker 1>effect f r r UM. There was a psychiatrist named

0:52:17.680 --> 0:52:21.200
<v Speaker 1>Bertram Horror. This is so interesting. He will take it.

0:52:21.280 --> 0:52:23.719
<v Speaker 1>It's pretty interesting stuff. Well, I mean, basically didn't he

0:52:24.320 --> 0:52:27.040
<v Speaker 1>give the same He had people take these tests and

0:52:27.080 --> 0:52:30.600
<v Speaker 1>then gave all of the people the exact same assessment,

0:52:31.280 --> 0:52:33.759
<v Speaker 1>but telling everyone it was tailored for them their own

0:52:33.800 --> 0:52:37.000
<v Speaker 1>personality assessment. And I think the people who just thought

0:52:37.040 --> 0:52:39.080
<v Speaker 1>it was favorable, we're like, this is great. Well it

0:52:39.200 --> 0:52:42.759
<v Speaker 1>was favorable. He actually called it from daily horoscopes. Well yeah,

0:52:42.800 --> 0:52:45.800
<v Speaker 1>but what were they responding positively too? Well? They it

0:52:46.000 --> 0:52:47.640
<v Speaker 1>was whether or not they wanted to feel that way

0:52:47.640 --> 0:52:50.000
<v Speaker 1>about it, so they were it was a positive assessment.

0:52:50.080 --> 0:52:52.160
<v Speaker 1>There was nothing negative in there, so it was all

0:52:52.239 --> 0:52:55.000
<v Speaker 1>positive stuff like you have a lot of unused potential.

0:52:55.160 --> 0:52:58.359
<v Speaker 1>That kind of stuff people stuff people wanted to identify with. Right,

0:52:58.840 --> 0:53:01.640
<v Speaker 1>So the more uttering it was, the more likely the

0:53:01.719 --> 0:53:04.759
<v Speaker 1>people were to say, this is an accurate assessment of me.

0:53:05.480 --> 0:53:07.399
<v Speaker 1>So just despite the fact that it was the same

0:53:07.480 --> 0:53:09.800
<v Speaker 1>one given to the entire class, he took their answers

0:53:09.840 --> 0:53:11.600
<v Speaker 1>and threw them out and said, here's your assessment, the

0:53:11.800 --> 0:53:15.520
<v Speaker 1>same one for everybody. It got like an accuracy from

0:53:15.600 --> 0:53:17.640
<v Speaker 1>the class as a whole. Well, that's what I wondered.

0:53:17.719 --> 0:53:21.000
<v Speaker 1>It was about, where those people just super honest maybe

0:53:21.239 --> 0:53:24.120
<v Speaker 1>and like, no, this is really no. People actually don't

0:53:24.160 --> 0:53:26.640
<v Speaker 1>like being around me. I'm using all of my potential

0:53:26.719 --> 0:53:29.200
<v Speaker 1>and they still don't like me. Yeah, that's what I

0:53:29.200 --> 0:53:30.880
<v Speaker 1>couldn't figure out. But I guess that makes sense. There

0:53:30.920 --> 0:53:32.960
<v Speaker 1>are people out there that are I think I would

0:53:32.960 --> 0:53:34.839
<v Speaker 1>be one of those that would be like, this isn't right.

0:53:36.000 --> 0:53:40.239
<v Speaker 1>I'm not like that sure anything else I think not.

0:53:41.200 --> 0:53:43.120
<v Speaker 1>This is a good one. We've been we've been wanting

0:53:43.160 --> 0:53:44.960
<v Speaker 1>to do this for a while. Yeah, this is a

0:53:45.040 --> 0:53:50.680
<v Speaker 1>special request by me and others. Uh. If you want

0:53:50.719 --> 0:53:52.960
<v Speaker 1>to know more about personality tests, well you can go

0:53:53.080 --> 0:53:55.880
<v Speaker 1>take them online. They're kind of huge right now. Uh,

0:53:56.080 --> 0:54:00.520
<v Speaker 1>find out what kind of um hobbit you are. I

0:54:00.600 --> 0:54:03.520
<v Speaker 1>don't know what box do you live in? Yeah? Uh,

0:54:04.200 --> 0:54:06.440
<v Speaker 1>And in the meantime, you can type personality test in

0:54:06.480 --> 0:54:08.399
<v Speaker 1>the search bar how stuff works dot com. And since

0:54:08.400 --> 0:54:13.440
<v Speaker 1>I said that it's time for listener mail. The only

0:54:13.480 --> 0:54:18.160
<v Speaker 1>thing that should live in a box is uh, temporary

0:54:18.239 --> 0:54:21.960
<v Speaker 1>housing for a pet frog that's not bad, or the

0:54:22.000 --> 0:54:24.560
<v Speaker 1>stuff you find in a tree hole that Boo Radley

0:54:24.680 --> 0:54:29.160
<v Speaker 1>left for you. Yeah, back a month in the box. Uh. Hey, guys,

0:54:29.200 --> 0:54:30.680
<v Speaker 1>feel compelled to write you today to tell you how

0:54:30.719 --> 0:54:33.080
<v Speaker 1>grateful I am for your show uh and praise your

0:54:33.120 --> 0:54:36.480
<v Speaker 1>good work. Um. Recently became a listener and I'm working

0:54:36.560 --> 0:54:38.719
<v Speaker 1>my way through the entire archive. I think a lot

0:54:38.760 --> 0:54:40.520
<v Speaker 1>of folks might be able to relate to this. Until

0:54:40.560 --> 0:54:42.719
<v Speaker 1>recently I found out I found it really hard to

0:54:42.800 --> 0:54:45.399
<v Speaker 1>relax and suffer with anxiety. Two months ago, I read

0:54:45.440 --> 0:54:48.520
<v Speaker 1>an article basically pointing out how our obsession with being

0:54:48.560 --> 0:54:53.400
<v Speaker 1>productive an associated guilt is a modern phenomenon. Um. I

0:54:53.480 --> 0:54:56.879
<v Speaker 1>think that for sure. You know, although I had heard

0:54:56.920 --> 0:54:58.960
<v Speaker 1>this before, something really clicked in my head. So I

0:54:59.040 --> 0:55:02.600
<v Speaker 1>decided to abandon to an embrace relaxation, taking control of

0:55:02.680 --> 0:55:04.759
<v Speaker 1>my own stress levels. You guys have been a big

0:55:04.920 --> 0:55:08.080
<v Speaker 1>part of this. I have taken the time to slowly

0:55:08.600 --> 0:55:11.719
<v Speaker 1>hotter around my flat, go for walks while listening and

0:55:11.840 --> 0:55:14.319
<v Speaker 1>learning to your fascinating podcast, and they've lived in my mood.

0:55:14.680 --> 0:55:18.400
<v Speaker 1>I feel mentally healthier than I ever have before. Although

0:55:18.560 --> 0:55:20.880
<v Speaker 1>the content of what you discussed might not always be positive,

0:55:20.920 --> 0:55:23.040
<v Speaker 1>the way in which you explain them in your own

0:55:23.120 --> 0:55:26.680
<v Speaker 1>views personally revived my hope and humanity. That is ridiculously

0:55:26.760 --> 0:55:29.120
<v Speaker 1>flatter and that nice. Yeah, I guess I should also

0:55:29.200 --> 0:55:31.880
<v Speaker 1>mention that a big part of my tackling anxiety UH

0:55:32.280 --> 0:55:36.480
<v Speaker 1>levels has been to abandon watching television and the psychotropic drugs.

0:55:37.360 --> 0:55:39.120
<v Speaker 1>I would be really interested to know if there has

0:55:39.160 --> 0:55:41.959
<v Speaker 1>been any research conductivity to affect TV has upon our lives.

0:55:42.360 --> 0:55:44.759
<v Speaker 1>I'm sure there has been. I haven't owned a TV

0:55:44.880 --> 0:55:47.400
<v Speaker 1>for many years, but my partner has since subscribed to

0:55:47.440 --> 0:55:50.320
<v Speaker 1>an online provider and I realized how watching TV is

0:55:50.360 --> 0:55:53.400
<v Speaker 1>not helped my anxiety. Also remember reading that after TVs

0:55:53.960 --> 0:55:57.479
<v Speaker 1>came mainstream and Bhutan their crime rate went up something

0:55:57.560 --> 0:56:01.680
<v Speaker 1>like seve my to prove an interesting topic for a

0:56:01.760 --> 0:56:05.200
<v Speaker 1>future show. Yeah, anyway, sincerely grateful, keep it up. I

0:56:05.239 --> 0:56:07.359
<v Speaker 1>am now recommending your shows to as many people as

0:56:07.400 --> 0:56:11.319
<v Speaker 1>I can. Big love from the UK, MAC, Thanks a lot, Mac.

0:56:11.400 --> 0:56:13.479
<v Speaker 1>That was great. We hear from a lot of people

0:56:13.480 --> 0:56:16.120
<v Speaker 1>actually say that we help them with their anxiety. No

0:56:16.360 --> 0:56:20.439
<v Speaker 1>idea how, but it doesn't matter, so thank you. Yeah.

0:56:21.080 --> 0:56:22.400
<v Speaker 1>If you want to get in touch of this, like

0:56:22.520 --> 0:56:24.680
<v Speaker 1>mac did, you can tweet to us at s Y

0:56:24.880 --> 0:56:27.799
<v Speaker 1>s K podcast or josh um Clark. You can hang

0:56:27.880 --> 0:56:30.880
<v Speaker 1>out with us on Facebook at Stuff you Should Know

0:56:31.120 --> 0:56:33.799
<v Speaker 1>or Charles W. Chuck Bryant. You can send us an

0:56:33.840 --> 0:56:36.480
<v Speaker 1>email the Stuff podcast how stuff works dot com and

0:56:36.560 --> 0:56:38.840
<v Speaker 1>has always joined us at home on the web Stuff

0:56:38.880 --> 0:56:45.160
<v Speaker 1>you Should Know dot com for more on this and

0:56:45.239 --> 0:56:47.759
<v Speaker 1>thousands of other topics. Is it how stuff Works dot

0:56:47.840 --> 0:56:48.000
<v Speaker 1>com