User Tag List

First 3456 Last

Results 41 to 50 of 59

Thread: risk taking!

  1. #41
    Senior Member alcea rosea's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    7w6
    Socionics
    ????
    Posts
    3,665

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by INTJMom View Post
    I know a couple of ENFPs who are great salesmen. Maybe those are the sort of risks they are willing to take.
    Selling can be scary!
    That's more the risk I might take except that I couldn't be a salesman.

  2. #42
    Senior Member ptgatsby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Posts
    4,474

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Alcearos View Post
    ENTP'S maybe but ENFP'S are not risk takers!
    I'm not anyway.
    I did a bit more reading... within MBTI, risk takers are;

    E>I, P>J, +T>F, N>S That is to say, Almost all Es are higher risk takers than Is, Ps are generally higher than Js and strong Ts are higher than average Ts and Fs (of which there is only slight differences, but still favors T).

    However, this changes when you get to risk bearers or willingness to take risks (outside of sensation seeking, like gambling). Js are more willing to take on risks over the long term (ie: investments) relative to the sensation seeking risks. Ps are still high risk bearers, but Js aren't as risk-averse, making both fairly risk-accepting.

    So I'd change what I said before, T>F... but within that, strong T>weak T, where weak T is very similar to Fs.

  3. #43
    Senior Member INTJMom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    5,352

    Default

    Ns are higher risk takers than Ss? Hmmm.
    No offense, but I can't agree, based on my own observations.

    Or is that a typo?

    In the area of "physical risks" I say STP.

  4. #44
    Senior Member substitute's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    4,601

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Alcearos View Post
    ENTP'S maybe but ENFP'S are not risk takers!
    I'm not anyway.
    Try telling that to my ENFP brother, who drives around as though he were on an F1 circuit!!!

    I'm also a big risk taker. For the adrenaline, the challenge, and the nonchalant look I can give to the cautious ones who lecture me beforehand, when it pays off with no harm done despite all their protestations.

    Truth is, I don't actually consider a lot of the stuff I do as risk taking, that other people do. They think it's terribly risky because they'd never do it, never have done it, and don't really know from experience the true risk level. Some people seem to think that disobeying The Law will result in being smote down by a lightning bolt from heaven, and this blinds them to being able to assess the true risk factor. When it's something I've done before and am completely confident about, I know with a sorta secret insider info type of thing, that the risk isn't as high as they think. I try to tell them, but they don't listen. When I pull it off every time, they stand in shock and awe, and I'm just like

    Most of the risks I take are to do with legal things or just corner cutting with procedures, or perhaps confronting or otherwise subverting the powers that be, either immediate or remote (managers, city counsellors or governments). I take some physical risks too, and some things that are a combination of all, such as driving an illegal car to a place where I go trespassing on private land/property to explore a derelict/ruined building that's falling to pieces, with DANGER signs everywhere. But in that case, I've carefully (and correctly) assessed the situation and decided that the likelihood of anyone being harmed or caught by the law is negligible.

    My brother and I both very frequently take 'lack of forward planning' types of risks, such as making a long journey to a random place with camping gear in the car and kids, with no money on us, trusting that we'll be able to find somewhere to camp out and a way to get money and food en route, that kinda thing, where other people say we're reckless and irresponsible, but we just frown with incomprehension because we've NEVER GONE WRONG YET, as opposed to the people who lecture us, who frequently encounter problems that freak them out, despite all their careful planning.

    It frustrates me a heck of a lot though, when that simple fact - the fact that I've never led them wrong in many years - never seems to register as a reason to ffs trust me!!

    INTJMom - I might tentatively hypothesize that perhaps N's are bigger risk takers in the legal/abstract way, whilst perhaps S's have the prize with risks in the physical way...??

    My ISTP friend is very safety conscious though... I have an old car that has no rear seat belts and doesn't require them by law because of its classic/vintage car status legally. He won't travel in the back of the car (and no it's not because of my driving!! lol). He also won't ride his bike if there's even a minor fault. Whenever he does handy jobs for me he's always the only one wearing the goggles and protective gloves etc., though maybe he just likes doing that for the image! lol
    Ils se d�merdent, les mecs: trop bon, trop con..................................MY BLOG!

    "When it all comes down to dust
    I will kill you if I must
    I will help you if I can" - Leonard Cohen

  5. #45
    not to be trusted miss fortune's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Enneagram
    827 sp/so
    Posts
    20,124

    Default

    the one thing that I'm always very careful about is always remembering to buckle my seatbelt!

    (that and always remembering to use different cutting boards for meat and vegetables!)

    the whole traveling somewhere unprepared sounds about right though- I tend to leave without telling anyone where I'm going and with no preparations all of the time- it bugs the hell out of some more cautious people I know (like an ENTJ roommate who couldn't stand it for some odd reason) but it's never gone wrong yet, so I'm not worried!
    “Oh, we're always alright. You remember that. We happen to other people.” -Terry Pratchett

  6. #46
    Senior Member ptgatsby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Posts
    4,474

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by INTJMom View Post
    Ns are higher risk takers than Ss? Hmmm.
    No offense, but I can't agree, based on my own observations.

    Or is that a typo?

    In the area of "physical risks" I say STP.
    There is no agreement within MBTI. Jungian views have Ns being dramatically more sensation seeking and risk taking. Financial MBTI views have Ss more willing to accept pure risk (larger more frequent swings). Sensation seeking seems split between E and N in MBTI, but it's not part of the actual testing (which is kind of ironic, actually).

    If you include a lot of research, the strongest predictor of multi-factor risk is openness, which is generally very close to N. No forms of risk prefer O- (more or less S).

    There are three things to remember;

    1) We remember the extremes more than the norms, and as such, extreme STPs are probably much more memorable. However, the T and P being strong can create an image of them being more risk-takers than the average STP is (and likewise, the NTP might not be as attention grabbing in their risk taking).

    2) There are twice as many Ss, which may give the impression that the majority of risk takers are Ss.

    3) There is a tendency to define Ss as risk takers, leaving the impression that S = risk takers. This is not an accepted definition (and it seems like there are two camps - the ones that think the test should show that S = risk takers, when in fact they are the more stable, less likely to try new things kind of people... and the other, which thinks that the test should just test for the functions and let the correlations take care of themselves.)

    The only part that may create a S risk imbalance would be the "Experimental" aspect of Ss, which is not reflected in other models.

    There is no clear answer, except for the E and P, which are clearly risk-taking/sensation seeking correlated. The N/S seem to depend on what type of risk (and Ns are actually more thrill seeking than Ss by most measurements.)

  7. #47
    Senior Member prplchknz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    MBTI
    yupp
    Posts
    29,782

    Default

    For some reason when some one says you shouldn't do something it's bad idea. If you don't tell my why it's a bad idea I'm going to whatever i shouldn't be doing, that or if I just don't believe you.
    In no likes experiment.

    that is all

    i dunno what else to say so

  8. #48
    Senior Member substitute's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    4,601

    Default

    Yes... my ISTJ friend tends to pour cold water on every exciting thing I do or talk about. He's always the one who says it's stupid, irresponsible, reckless, that it'll never work, it can't be done, etc etc, and that is indeed the only effect it has on me: to make me more determined to do it, to prove him wrong. And I do, every time, and yet he never changes his opinion of my risk assessment skills.
    Ils se d�merdent, les mecs: trop bon, trop con..................................MY BLOG!

    "When it all comes down to dust
    I will kill you if I must
    I will help you if I can" - Leonard Cohen

  9. #49
    Senior Member prplchknz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    MBTI
    yupp
    Posts
    29,782

    Default

    My friend told me that they would never manipulate genes to make the enezyme in the liver that makes you see and something about making someone invisible. And I said yet. I have faith that someone will find a way to make people actually invisible. So I won't because whenever I like a data I can't read it instead I see like a horsey or a kitty in the way the lines make an abstract picture. and I'm not sure me going "Look a butterfly!" would earn much respect. And I'm not that smart. Ok so not exactly risk, let me think of something I've done.I have faith in invisibility perhaps not in our lifetime. (PS my friend's the bio major not me, so I don't know the techinical terms of things)

    yea I love to scuba and want to sky dive but I no so many people terrifed of it, same with swimming in the ocean. They're like your going be taken out by the undertow or you're going to get bit by a shark I've been playing in the ocean since I was 7 I have yet to get bitten or drown. Luckily their was a wooden table right beside me.
    In no likes experiment.

    that is all

    i dunno what else to say so

  10. #50
    Senior Member INTJMom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    5,352

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ptgatsby View Post
    There is no agreement within MBTI. Jungian views have Ns being dramatically more sensation seeking and risk taking. Financial MBTI views have Ss more willing to accept pure risk (larger more frequent swings). Sensation seeking seems split between E and N in MBTI, but it's not part of the actual testing (which is kind of ironic, actually).

    If you include a lot of research, the strongest predictor of multi-factor risk is openness, which is generally very close to N. No forms of risk prefer O- (more or less S).

    There are three things to remember;

    1) We remember the extremes more than the norms, and as such, extreme STPs are probably much more memorable. However, the T and P being strong can create an image of them being more risk-takers than the average STP is (and likewise, the NTP might not be as attention grabbing in their risk taking).

    2) There are twice as many Ss, which may give the impression that the majority of risk takers are Ss.

    3) There is a tendency to define Ss as risk takers, leaving the impression that S = risk takers. This is not an accepted definition (and it seems like there are two camps - the ones that think the test should show that S = risk takers, when in fact they are the more stable, less likely to try new things kind of people... and the other, which thinks that the test should just test for the functions and let the correlations take care of themselves.)

    The only part that may create a S risk imbalance would be the "Experimental" aspect of Ss, which is not reflected in other models.

    There is no clear answer, except for the E and P, which are clearly risk-taking/sensation seeking correlated. The N/S seem to depend on what type of risk (and Ns are actually more thrill seeking than Ss by most measurements.)
    All your facts are messing with my intuition! :steam:





    Thank you for the explanation. You're right. I think it's "the pizazz factor" that makes STPs look like the big risk takers.

Similar Threads

  1. [SJ] SJs, do you hate taking risks?
    By NewEra in forum The SJ Guardhouse (ESFJ, ISFJ, ESTJ, ISTJ)
    Replies: 36
    Last Post: 06-07-2017, 07:06 PM
  2. Replies: 67
    Last Post: 01-09-2014, 05:40 PM
  3. SPs and Taking Risks
    By gromit in forum Enneagram
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: 02-18-2011, 06:34 PM
  4. Taking risks
    By BRMC117 in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 08-18-2010, 02:13 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO