The article's supposition ignores a (or the) likely cause of the over-representation of INTJ articles (if this is indeed even true) and then goes on to support related errant logic streams. More precisely there is a sampling error in trying to correlate the prevalence in the general population of a phenomenon with the frequency of internet blogs on the subject.
Using this logic, I expect to see dinosaurs, flying cars, and the zombie apocalypse. But I don't. What gives?
AnINTJ (not verified)says...
The article's supposition ignores a (or the) likely cause of the over-representation of INTJ articles (if this is indeed even true) and then goes on to support related errant logic streams. More precisely there is a sampling error in trying to correlate the prevalence in the general population of a phenomenon with the frequency of internet blogs on the subject.
Using this logic, I expect to see dinosaurs, flying cars, and the zombie apocalypse. But I don't. What gives?