安裝 Steam
登入
|
語言
簡體中文
日本語(日文)
한국어(韓文)
ไทย(泰文)
Български(保加利亞文)
Čeština(捷克文)
Dansk(丹麥文)
Deutsch(德文)
English(英文)
Español - España(西班牙文 - 西班牙)
Español - Latinoamérica(西班牙文 - 拉丁美洲)
Ελληνικά(希臘文)
Français(法文)
Italiano(義大利文)
Bahasa Indonesia(印尼語)
Magyar(匈牙利文)
Nederlands(荷蘭文)
Norsk(挪威文)
Polski(波蘭文)
Português(葡萄牙文 - 葡萄牙)
Português - Brasil(葡萄牙文 - 巴西)
Română(羅馬尼亞文)
Русский(俄文)
Suomi(芬蘭文)
Svenska(瑞典文)
Türkçe(土耳其文)
tiếng Việt(越南文)
Українська(烏克蘭文)
回報翻譯問題
I see a lot of reasonable comments about MBTI, but we shouldn't forget the fact that Myers-Briggs is based on Jung's theories. (I'm not saying his theory is flawless, I'm saying he has an authority in term of psychology.) There is a lot of meaningful psychological researches that are also based on Myers-Briggs by divers organizations. I truly understand that dividing our personalities in 16 types could sound ridiculous, but those 16 types are just a number. It also contains systematic explanations of how it can change organically depending on each situation and mental status. The number of 16 is not the matter. They are just major category like how we divide human races for example.
Psychometric tests (and other research tools) are evaluated on validity and reliability. 16P scores high in first and low in second. Enneagram scores low in either. Serious research demands both high, so neither test is good enough to be called "scientific", but one even less than another.
Now, truly just curious, what is thatspring-like thing in that picture?
no idea why, but that's the main question i have at the moment, lol...
8 Challenger -> ESTP
8 Protector -> ENTJ
8 Nonconformist -> ENTP
8 Diplomat -> ESTJ