"Belief in the most infamous brain myths, such as the idea we only use 10 per cent of our brains or that 'some people are left-brained, others right-brained', remains rife, according to this survey"https://digest.bps.org.uk/2018/03/05/belief-in-brain-myths-and-child-development-myths-continues-even-among-those-whove-studied-psychology/ …
I've met a lot of smart psychology students. I've also met a lot of psychology students who think that Myers–Briggs, astrology, and tarot cards are valid measures of human psychology.
-
-
why are you putting Myers–Briggs and astrology on the same level?
-
I didn't really intend to portray them as being on the same level. I don't think MBTI is magic woo-woo, just that it isn't nearly as predictive of behavior as people think. It's fine to play around with it in good fun, but...
-
The issue is when people assume that their traits are fixed and fundamental to their identity, think that MBTI allows them to deeply understand any individual based on their type, or make life choices based on what some random website tells them is "in line" with their type.
-
well said
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
valid as psychometric tools would be a hell of a mistake. valid as symbolically rich games that can be useful for developing intuition is another thing entirely.
-
This is completely on the money.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Smart and naive are not mutually exclusive, I'm afraid. Students are smart on average (well, I don't see them that way, but objectively speaking...) Doesn't make them judicious.
-
But yes, I know a lot of students who exercised better judgement. My friend who went exploring with me and ended up drinking beer in a chapel, for example.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.