Intuition Bias Vs. Knowledge

[ThatGirl]

Something I have always wondered about.

When dealing with facts in intuition... Where did your intuition come from? Why are you not picking up on this other intuitive thing?

I think sometimes the barriers between intuition and simple intelligence get muddied.

Some people think if others cannot pick up on, or agree to, the ideas they themselves create and know is true, this is an intuition error. 404=sensor.

When in fact there should be a sub category for intuitive (intelligence) sensory (intelligence).

I think both trains will inter-lap with type descriptions. I think this is where MBTI cannot define. And so, this is the ultimate confusion, most people experience when trying to type themselves.

Oddly enough, it is also the most regulated topic. This due to stereotypes and preconceived notions. Sensibility, and that the ultimate drive of type theory seems to be universal recognition and justification. More so than say, ability.

Free thought thread.

Thoughts?

 

[Athenian200]

I think that a lot of people define the dichotomies poorly. They think their own assumptions are intuition, are what anyone's intuition would tell them, and think that other people not sharing their assumptions means they're not intuitive.

The thing about Intuition, is that it's always shaped by your experiences and the facts to which you've been exposed. If you learned something new, it's possible your assumptions would change. Intuition just tries to fill in the gaps, to see what is immediately beyond the obvious, and sometimes it's wrong.

For this reason, Sensors should not be considered ignorant. They are just less willing to trust in certain kinds of assumptions and hunches, preferring to rely on personal experience and the observable. Sometimes this leads them closer to the truth, other times it leads them astray.

I would say that type theory doesn't measure ability at all, but rather focuses on preferences. It's possible for someone to prefer a function that they don't actually use well, in theory. Normally, people prefer the functions they're skilled in and use a lot, but there can be exceptions. That's why I don't think function use/skill is a good measure of type, and distrust the cognitive function tests.

 

[ThatGirl]

I think that a lot of people define the dichotomies poorly. They think their own assumptions are intuition, are what anyone's intuition would tell them, and think that other people not sharing their assumptions means they're not intuitive.

The thing about Intuition, is that it's always shaped by your experiences and the facts to which you've been exposed. If you learned something new, it's possible your assumptions would change. Intuition just tries to fill in the gaps, to see what is immediately beyond the obvious, and sometimes it's wrong.

For this reason, Sensors should not be considered ignorant. They are just less willing to trust in certain kinds of assumptions and hunches, preferring to rely on personal experience and the observable. Sometimes this leads them closer to the truth, other times it leads them astray.

I would say that type theory doesn't measure ability at all, but rather focuses on preferences. It's possible for someone to prefer a function that they don't actually use well, in theory. Normally, people prefer the functions they're skilled in and use a lot, but there can be exceptions. That's why I don't think function use/skill is a good measure of type, and distrust the cognitive function tests.

Right, but what I am saying is that an intellectual sensor can experience many of the same problems/contingencies an intuitive can. And so the identification theory is wrong. This is where the system is incomplete.

At least, this is what typology fails to account for. If we could calculate the difference between the two.

The intellectual sensor. The retarded intuitive.

The system would become more universally principled. More complete.


It is a sort of universal fact that intelligence levels will distort the theory of reality.

 

[ThatGirl]

Let me try to explain better, before people hate me.

A sensor who is very intelligent will naturally pick up on things others are unaware of.

Well, that is kind of an N description too.

So people who are intelligent may sometimes, miscalculate the experience. "I identify with this, makes so much sense."

And it will, due to type descriptions, and the understanding that intuition is somehow not universally understood.

This is in fact an intellectual disconnection.

If I am wrong, that kind of proves type bias. N=more intelligent.

I am guessing anyone of above average intelligence can relate to N type descriptions.

 

[entropie]

Right, but what I am saying is that an intellectual sensor can experience many of the same problems/contingencies an intuitive can.

Intresting in that regards is the question "how many" ?

Have you ever talked to a sensor about theorethical physics for example. It can be frustrating. There's basically a mathematical model or a holistic thought concept that makes sense to someone who can imagine that it could make sense. I lately explained to my work colleague, who is an intelligent isfp, the concept of virtual particles and what they have to do with hawking-radiation. It's ultimatively difficult to keep up his intrest, because some of the things are so far out that he sees no real world application and has the attitude to say the information isnt worthy of his attention.

If this would happen with one particular sensor now, I'ld say ok: he just doesnt like astronomy. But since I like to explain those things often and to many people, I can say I encounter this attitude often. Most sensors only listen to me because they are polite, this is sad on the one hand.

So my question is: if intuitives and sensor are on the intellectual level quite alike, namly part of the model that in the intellectual reality models like sensor or intuitive get distorted anyways, why is it that I have the impression that the majority of Ns does rather like to talk spacetravel, while the majority os Ss are more in reality/people focused jobs.

I am not saying that my isfp has completly no ability to talk astronomy, but he hadnt had this open-ended character of discussion, I am used to by other people. This can go on forever, like we talk a week or so with no conclusion at the end, just new ideas. He was more into coming to terms and to formulate a definite answer, a graspable one. One the one hand I really like his attitude, it's good on the job, on the other hand tho I feel left out in discussions with him.

 

[ThatGirl]

You kind of just confirmed what I was saying. I have spoken to many intellectual sensors who are more than willing to entertain an idea. Why? Cause they could understand it.

I've also spoken with intuitives. Who described much of the same disconnection as you and your ISFP.

This is the type bias.

The descriptions are flawed.

 

[entropie]

I am not convinced that they are. Many people came originally to this forum because they felt the type bias in reality, so they came here to seek an answer, to understand if they really are different.

I've fundamental problems in reality to express myself and reality can be quite tough for me, I do not understand all the natural and necessary behaviours nor do I share most of the common intrests that makes it tough for me to blend in everywhere without blending out too much. If you say that's just because I am biased that may be true, yet I cant change that I never manage to perceive any given situation like anyone else.

 

[ThatGirl]

An ISFP of IQ 140 will feel just as disconnected, as an NT IQ 102. Was my point.

They will have the same argument. They see things others do not see.

They pick up on things others tend to ignore.

Others are more comfortable thinking in what they know.

Differences bring about uncertainty, and so make everyone uncomfortable.

I mean in this regard. Most intelligent people will have experienced this.

IQ is not intuition.

Nor is the ability to commonly recognize a sign more so of intuition, than intelligence.

In my opinion, intuitives are different. Why? Because they look beyond intellectual pursuits.

Pattern recognition = intelligence

The ability to look beyond= Intuition

 

[alcea rosea]

I think what MBTI says about intuition isn't how intuition is described in other books/sources.
So, the definition of intuition is quite unclear and thus it is difficult to define what it is and how has a good intuition.

And according to MBTI theory, there are 2 types of intuitive functions: extraverted intuiton and introverted intuition. And even these two descriptions are quite different from each other.

In the real life it's more difficult to describe a persons "abilities. I know people who prefer definitely sensing functions over intuitive functions and still have very strong intuition and they still listen to their intuition/hunches.

I think the definition of intuition is unclear to this day and before it is really defined, it is difficult to say who really has (naturally or learned) it and who don't have it or prefer not to listen to it. So, in that sense, it is worthless to debate over intuition when most people mean different things with the word.

 

[CrystalViolet]

I think there may be a bias in the questionnaires, but the dichotomies are false ones in MBTI.
It's actually far more accurate call the S/N pairings as a continuum. The same goes for T/F pairings.

 

[alcea rosea]

^ But on the other hand are intuition and sensing / thinking (objective decision making) and feeling (value based decision making) actually the opposites? I mean, it is possible that they aren't actually opposites but just different features of people.

 

[entropie]

Plus that it is hard to define intellectuality for Feeler types. They'ld always need to show a great deal of organization, management and detached rationality to convince their subjective insights into how a person feels are true. If they'ld go by "I have the feeling that", this society and their prevailing norms wouldnt give them the benefits of calling them intellectual, they'ld rather call them empathical. Yet in my book especially those last two words always go together

 

[ThatGirl]

You guys are crazy.

 

[CrystalViolet]

^ But on the other hand are intuition and sensing / thinking (objective decision making) and feeling (value based decision making) actually the opposites? I mean, it is possible that they aren't actually opposites but just different features of people.

You can't have one function without the other. The points of differentiation are arbitrary. Function theory is about preferences, not absolutes. That's why thinking of the tradition pairings as continuum scales work so well.

 

[CrystalViolet]

Plus that it is hard to define intellectuality for Feeler types. They'ld always need to show a great deal of organization, management and detached rationality to convince their subjective insights into how a person feels are true. If they'ld go by "I have the feeling that", this society and their prevailing norms wouldnt give them the benefits of calling them intellectual, they'ld rather call them empathical. Yet in my book especially those last two words always go together

​