Does True Randomness Actually Exist? ( ^&*#^%$&#% )

I am reliably informed that the following types are associated with personality disorders:

INTJ, INTP, ISTP, ISTJ, ESFP, ISFJ, ESTP, ESFJ, ESTJ, ENTJ, ENTP, ISFP, INFJ, INFP

and the following aren't:
ENFJ, ENFP

See http://interweave-consulting.blogspot.com/2013/06/personality-disorders-and-psychological.html

here's a sub- of PPD's just in case ur interested.

Here is a description of disorders that tend to be more common in different personality types. Generally makes sense to me: for example, I recognise the weakness at interpersonal relationships! 16personalities.com says INTJ are "clueless in romance". I also find doing boring repetitive tasks absolutely intolerable. I can recall precisely this. But I fail at the tests for egocentricity - rather I am aware of both my strengths and weaknesses - some people are blind to the latter.

For whatever reason INTP is reported to be the type with the most problems. But I feel sometimes people with unusual strengths (creativity or musicality or intellectualism) have balancing weaknesses. I would say Kurt Goedel was probably an INTP.

[Interesting fact: Myers and Brigg, who came up with the personality type analysis were both female psychologists. Good to see ladies having things named after them in science!]

 https://www.quora.com/Which-mental-illnesses-are-INTJs-more-likely-to-develop

Richard Rawlings, M.S Psychology, University of Melbourne (2013) (Answered February 7, 2019)
Originally Answered: What mental illness would an INTJ be prone to have?
I am an INTJ. A few studies have been done around mental illness and MBTI personalities, i’ll explain some that i know.

INTP’s have an astoundingly high rate of personality disorders in comparison to the others.
Anything with E and J have at a fundamentally higher level of egocentricity.
INTJ’s when put under boring repetitious jobs have had a higher rate of depression than other personality types working in the same slot.
INTJ’s often have interpersonal problems over problems with self since they often think and act too quick and methodical for other people to catch up.
INTJ’s generally cannot express emotions they feel as easy as others and this can lead to emotional issues, however general they are quite emotionally stable.
ENFP’s have the highest rate of substance abuse.
ENTJ’s have a higher rate of psychopaths and sociopaths.
INFP’s have the highest rate of anxiety disorders.
ENFJ’s are often the most emotionally effected by judgement, however do not succumb to peer pressure.
ISTJ’s are all around pretty passive, this is the most common personality type however, being up to 18% of people.
ESTJ’s have the highest rate of cluster B personality disorders and are often characterised by exploitative behaviour.
ISFP’s generally become thrill seekers or video game addicts because they feel like life has nothing new left to experience or explore for them.
Overall INTJ’s have interpersonal problems over self bound problems, however they are predisposed to arrogance and egocentricity, while also being potentially rebellious forming into depression if they’re forced into the wrong environment.

Personally, I would say the human world is full of people with different strengths and weaknesses, and we all need different types of people to complement ourselves.

Anyone disagree?

Not thought that of him, but I have thought Van Gogh had some sort of vision disorder, and I have read that there may be some truth in this.

Turning a weakness into a strength in style?

what even we talking about? i thought this forum was gonna be like a place to joke around, but.... what?

No, he just wasn't as talented as Manet.

We're actually here to talk about you.

My personality type is brilliant, btw. Brilliant people are not brilliant all the time but they can live with it, for obvious reasons. INTJ etc is bulklsh££t.

Karl Jung, on which the ridiculous Myers-Briggs types are based, wasn't as talented as KJ imagined. Incidentally, his hangup was religion whereas Freud's was sex. But the idea of 16 personality types is stupid and psychologists who accept the ideas are not good psychologists.

Psychology is a science because you can quantify things and relate them. It is a soft science because it can be really difficult to define what the things are, and often impossible to be precise about the way in which they relate. But that first sentence makes it worthwhile.

The very substantial weakness of the neat and tidy 16 way classification is that it completely fails to take into account the strength of the different factors - how far they are from the middle line.  Someone who is almost average in all of the dimensions will have an almost random personality type according to the definition. More importantly, for an individual, some characteristics will be strong, others less so, and this would clearly seem to matter. (According to the percentages, I could be described as NTJ, as those are the relatively strong characteristics. Indeed, I have been ENTJ before, if I recall).

To be honest, I can't see any hint of that in the OP of this particular forum. There are plenty of others like that though.

Come on, this thread is deluged with randomness.

Can't disagree with that!

On Monet's eye disease

Yes but that doesn't mean that taking various perceived personality types like introvert/extrovert and doing a plan of combinations and what they should mean is scientific. More like fantasy. My wife's a professional psychologist and I know she would reject it. The whole thing is just to try to make money. I mean, the Myers-Briggs rubbish.

To be precise, she is a Rogerian person-centred psychotherapist, by profession. There's no way she would buy into such a mechanical, authoritarian approach. She would say it's fundamentally harmful because it makes false categorisations.

Must be highly accurate source, from Stanford NEWS. Stanford has got to be one of the greatest television broadcasters, eh?

elroch: "I once did a test to see if I was narcissistic as well, out of interest. Turns out I am not. But I would say I would have been more so when I was younger."

im not in the mood of being politely correct so i'll just be transparent about it..
your comments show great ignorance about psychology in general and narcissism in particular. to be bold.. If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck?
thing is that its kinda bore me to make this thread to be all about you.. you already have 2 threads dedicated to that.. i'll try to take a second look at it when im sober.. lol

Why, oh, why?

I know that this is a chess site with about 96% immature people who can't manage to focus on anything for more than five minutes, but ........

5 minuts may seem like infinity for youthful minds like the prawn cookie monster, or the average minute man.. i better sign off.. good night!