MBTI dating, relationships and attraction: TheMindBehind.Net

Is there a link between MBTI and sexual attraction and relationships, and what precisely is that link? Sexual attraction and relationships is a topic scientists don't fully understand yet, they understand tiny parts of the whole process and they understand it on very high abstract levels but they absolutely do not understand the whole topic. There are many abstract psychological theories about it, but nothing very useful that can be scientifically proven yet exists. Evolutionary psychology probably gives the best combination of usefulness and academic correctness so far, with incredible explanations of the “why” behind irrational sexual desires, but it cannot say much about individual cases. Popular dating teachers and mainly female conventional wisdom can tell you many do’s and do not’s related to dating, but they usually cannot explain why there practical tools sometimes do not work at all, and often only work temporary. Furthermore popular dating advisers even accuse each other from teaching counterproductive material all the time and their material often creates serious moral questions.

Than what can the role of Myers Briggs be in this topic that seems almost impossible to figure out? Well, Dr. Keirsey provides a theory of what MBTI types match best in his book “Please Understand Me II”, I really like his theory but if I look at it objectively I have to conclude that the argument lacks any scientific backbone. The book “Just your type” provides an explanation of how all the different types handle relationships, with a special focus on the values of the different partners involved. This is quite safe for criticism as it very MBTI like is build upon the idea that all combinations are equally good and it has an appendix with statistics. The problem with both this book and the statistics in this book is that it is all based around human values and the questionnaires are based upon simple questions about relationship satisfaction. Therefore it’s very superficial and filled with material like: “ESTJ’s might be annoyed by the disinterest for housework of the ENFP”. This might be a true statement but it says nothing about what is going on beneath the surface. The problem with having people fill in questionnaires about this topic is that people usually don’t understand themselves well enough to do this. I believe we aren't clear about what we want or what we are really attracted too, so asking this in a questionnaire doesn’t has any value unless you want to figure out what people think they are attracted too.

The aim of this article will not be to solve this question but to just explore the existing dating and relationship knowledge to broaden your perspective on the topic and to make based on that a very weak link to Myers Briggs and to Keirsey’s theory about Myers Briggs. But also to make you understand the weakness of that link.

One of the basic principles evolutionary psychology is based around is the idea of social status, which can be defined as your rank in society. This ranking system happens totally unconscious and might differ from person to person. Yet we are very aware of it, we respect and follow the people we rank high and we don´t even want to talk to person we rank low. The basic idea is that social status is what creates attraction and a balance of social status is the key to a good relationship. In this article we will limit the whole dating and relationships topic too just this principle. My theory about MBTI relationships and dating is that it can predict how we see and judge someone’s social status and therefore has an influence on what types we are attracted too, even though like said before this influence is usually overshadowed by other factors.

This changes the question into: How do 2 certain types see each other’s social status? However, this gives way too much combinations too cover in an article so we will go to an abstracter level: What preferences are attracted to each other? This still gives 8 variations to explain, so we will get to the most basic point: Do two preferences need to be similar or opposite to be attracted to each other? This also brings us to probably the oldest and most debated question in conventional dating wisdom: Does similarity attract or do opposites attract?

Does similarity attract or do opposites attract?
In conventional dating wisdom there is an old debate whether opposites attract or whether similarities attract. I think this debate is wrong because it obviously isn’t that black and white. It's easily shown by extreme examples: I have never heard about a retard attracting a top scientist, so opposites do not always attract. And males are usually attracted to females plus I never heard about twins dating each other, so therefore similarities also do not always attract. This Myers Briggs dating attraction theory therefore is a mix of opposites and similarities, yet a consistent one.

Debate for opposites attract:
There is an ancient Greek myth to explain why opposites often attract. The Greeks thought that god created one supreme sex before he created males and females. However, that one sex got very powerful, and the gods started to fear them. So they decided to split the one sex into males and females. Therefore, human’s wouldn´t be busy anymore with seeking to challenge the gods in greatness, but they would be on a quest to unite with their other half. Because without their other half they aren´t able to be great and to do godlike things, like creating new humans. So the symbolic wisdom here is that we as human beings are incomplete and the other sex makes us whole.

For the readers who do not blindly trust in the wisdom of Greek mythology I have also got an explanation from evolutionary psychology. Evolutionary psychology believes in the survival of the fittest, therefore your kids have the biggest chance on survival when your partner can make up for your weaknesses and when your partner hasn't got the same weaknesses in his or her DNA. Scientist even figured out that women can smell whether a man's DNA will fit well with there own, and if so they are more likely to be attracted to that person. This is also why people are less likely to be attracted to family members. So evolutionary psychology makes clear that opposites attract.

Debate for similarity attracts:
Evolutionary psychology states that we are attracted to people of high social status, but what is high social status? One girl might think a rock star is of high social status, the next one thinks an entrepreneur is of high social status, the next one might think a scientist who is trying to change the world is of high social status, the next one thinks just a good guy with a stable job is of high social status and the next one thinks the drugs dealer with an expensive car is of high social status. In other words there is huge disagreement about who is of high social status. So how do we decide or learn what is high social status? We learn it from our environment. So if someone grew up in a ghetto it’s more likely that she will be attracted to the drugs dealer with the expensive car because these people are high status there, while the female PhD student is probably more interested in the entrepreneur or the scientist who is trying to change the world. In other words, we are attracted to the highest status person of our own little environment. So similarity attracts too.

Translation to MBTI
Now let’s translate this too the Myers Briggs personality type indicator to see how that applies to their dating, relationship and marriage theory. The perception function (iNtuition vs Sensing) deals with how we see the world, therefore I think it relates to the similarity attracts argument because when you see the world similar, similar people and traits are seen as high social status. And I think the other three functions relate better too the opposites attract argument and therefore I will link them to that argument. This would bring us exactly to Keirsey’s theory that the first function (Introversion vs Extroversion) works best opposite, the second function (iNtuitive vs Sensing) works best similar, the third function (Thinking vs Feeling) works best opposite and the fourth function (Perceiving vs Judging) works best opposite. Dr. Keirsey looks more at the temperaments though and believes that NT works with NF and SJ with SP so we could state that the 2nd function (iNtuitive vs Sensing) is most important and the 1st function (Introversion vs Extroversion) is least important. And the statistics in “Just your Type” also show that the iNtuive vs Sensing function is most important, so this seems a reasonable theory.

Myers Briggs personality type assessment

Sidenote
I have gotten a couple of e-mails from people trying to fight this theory with personal experiences. To save time I have decided to add my standard answer to these E-Mails. When deeply in love many people believe that they and their partner were meant for each other. Therefore, it can be really hurtfull when there is a theory going around that you and your partner weren't meant for each other at all. I understand that, because this theory did the opposite for me. Therefore, I want to emphasize that this theory is very abstract, unproven and just very weak overall. Because science and psychology just know very little about this topic and MBTI isn't a complete system at all. I also noticed that some people have gotten their own or their partners type very often wrong. Assessing a personality is way harder than most beginners and free online tests assume. So if you haven't gotten a very good understanding of Myers Briggs yet, it might be a good idea to read the mbti theory and assessment articles on this website. Or to get some professional information.