Hannah Whatley

@dragon-snapper @ethryndal @northerner @graciegirl @winter-rose @jess Anyone else on? I’m going till 2.

@bethanysinkyroses ESTP?

This discussion is getting weirder every hour. @emma-flournoy Nope. I’m not. 😉 Hint: every guess has been way off base. Your last was closer though.

(Pretty wicked design skills there, by the way, Snapper. Do you have any experience with graphic design?)

@mark-kamibaya WHAT!?!? The earth revolves around the sun???????

Here, have some fun with this. (one piece of language, fyi)

@Dragon-Snapper yes, I love that! It’s called a monogram. We haven’t discussed that, have we @Hope? Or at least the one you came up with didn’t… er… work. 😛

@Hope nope, why should I elaborate? It wasn’t my idea. *cheeky grin* XD

*coughs* Writing in the Light, for those of the curious, is a very difficult thing to put a unique logo to. Aside from light rays and candles and lanterns and other such highly cool, highly overused symbols. Therein, apparently, lies its difficulty and unsuitableness.

Kate out.

@Mark-Kamibaya yes. Most people do use it as a classification system, which bothers me to no end. If you dig down deep and really get to understand the process though, you’ll see the sixteen types are really only a general summary of probabilities built on the common tendencies/stereotypes of the different functions. (Not cognitive functions;…[Read more]

Oh, I think I get it! My username is Bethany’s Inky Roses, haha. So you picture this girl sinking roses?! That’s funny! My username other places is inkyrose. 😉 Here it has my name too.

@mark-kamibaya Sinking Roses? I’m confused. :p

@dragon-snapper Yep. 😀

@dagon-snapper Yep. 😀

@hope I like Writing In The Light a lot. The first thing that came to my mind when I saw you were looking for another name though was “LightWrighter publishing”

Just a brainstorm idea.

@dragon-snapper I’m editing. I estimate I’ll be on for another twenty minutes.

@mark-kamibaya I think the creepy part is the association with the occult. HOWEVER, it’s worth something that Myers and Briggs TRIED to be scientific. I actually do agree with you, Mark, that there should have been more peer review, etc. It’s not scientific unless you follow the Method.
Y’all are right to think that people go looking for religion…[Read more]

@mark-kamibaya Looks like I didn’t phrase myself very well. I didn’t mean to say that psychology is a pseudoscience. What I meant was that I think it tends to include a lot more pseudoscience than a lot of other scientific arenas (i.e. meteorology). I think this is because, for the materialist, it is the closest to a religion they can get. So what…[Read more]

@stewie-plotter Where are we now, Professor? I’ve signed up two people so far. 😀 Any progress by you Serfs?

HA!
Believe it. 😛

@Daeus

@emma-flournoy Hmm. So which is the dominate type, do you think? Have you ever typed yourself by your cognitive functions?