Tal's shortest?

Posted by Brian C. on September 30, 1999 at 23:41:46:

In Reply to: Tal's short test posted by Dafyd on September 29, 1999 at 18:16:40:

Just take it again (and again) until the scores match your expectation.
Q.E.D.

Less facetiously, I think all test require a naive taker and a counselor
to interact in a results discussion. The tests are a process not an
event. With a little insight, it becomes hard to answer naively, because
of the anticipoated outcome. (How would a ___ answer this? Oh, this sorts
six and two. etc.) Defenses are hard to avoid. Personally, I suspect written
instruments (tests) appeal to rational types and, paradoxically, irrational
types, By that I mean that the empirist like the concrete (5) and the
perceivers are gratified by some non-judgemental validation (4.) See,
we are not strange, we're 5, 4, or 5w4, or 4w5, whatever; but unlike the
rest. The other types seem less fascinated with results IMHO.

Personally, the tests have only curiousity value for me. SAT, MMPI, MBTI,
RHETI, EECB, IQ, EQ, Height, Weight, Age, Ethnicity, Gender: they all have
an insight into who, what, we are. Only in the experience of our being
and/or creative generation is encounter meaningful. (IMO!) To know you,
I must erxperience you through your creative output or personal interaction
with you. Otherwise, I can only excperience my/your/our fantasy of who we
are.

Follow Ups:

• BTW: You have been missed Dafyd. Brian C. 23:50:48 9/30/99 (1)
  • Thanks Dafyd 13:39:52 10/02/99 (0)

Post a Followup