JoshuaZ comments on On the Openness personality trait & 'rationality' - Less Wrong

42 Post author: gwern 14 October 2011 01:07AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (95)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: JoshuaZ 19 October 2011 03:53:00AM 5 points [-]

At least on the types, INTP probably refers to a real phenotype (which is common on LW), but I don't know if any of the other type combinations are real.

Just wondering, are you generally classified as INTP? I've noticed that people consistently put in one of the types are more likely to think that their type is real.

Comment author: wedrifid 19 October 2011 05:52:47AM *  2 points [-]

Just wondering, are you generally classified as INTP? I've noticed that people consistently put in one of the types are more likely to think that their type is real.

At a guess yes, Hugh strikes me as someone who is naturally 'INTP' like. But the thing with the way the Myers Briggs test questions is that personal ideology and learned skills have rather too much influence. ie. Last time I did one of those tests I came out as ENFP. Which I'm definitely not, and wouldn't have got if I didn't answer the questions strictly literally.

Comment author: HughRistik 19 October 2011 08:38:55AM 3 points [-]

Like wedrifid, I test as an ENFP on online tests, but if I answer questions like I would have if I hadn't learned social skills, I come out as an INTP. The INTP profile I mentioned is freakily accurate, and not just in a horoscope type of way.

Comment author: RichardKennaway 19 October 2011 09:44:58AM 2 points [-]

The INTP profile I mentioned

Wow! All that compresses down to just four bits!

Comment author: wedrifid 19 October 2011 03:11:07PM 4 points [-]

Wow! All that compresses down to just four bits!

No. It compresses into 4 bits plus a whole bunch of extraneous knowledge of humanity and the environment. Sure, you can say it compresses down to four bits so long as you consider the language itself to already know all the basics about humans and the difference between the this and the other 15 combinations.

Comment author: RichardKennaway 19 October 2011 08:10:26PM 3 points [-]

I can't see 16 such highly detailed descriptions covering more than a small fraction of humanity.

Comment author: lessdazed 19 October 2011 09:18:50PM 6 points [-]

Nu, with horoscopes each of 12 descriptions cover all of humanity!

Comment author: wedrifid 19 October 2011 08:18:37PM *  0 points [-]

Some parts more than others I expect. Each of the details is supposed to be considered separately and with an "are more likely to" attached rather than a strict conjugation.

The interesting question is how many compressed bits the 4 bits convey. I'm guessing about 3.