# Thread: Sensor Bias at MBTIc

1. Originally Posted by Nocapszy
Or they give up. It's not all about problem solving though.
right, so the person using N has a chance to get it right, and the person not using N won't no matter what. therefore, you can solve problems with N that you can't solve without it.

and what is life besides problem solving? seriously?

Doesn't have to be. Using a unique solution to a problem is creative, but problem solving in and of itself isn't inherently creative.
example: you know the quadratic formula (x = (-b+- sqrt(b^2-4ac))/(2a)). you've seen a bunch of examples of how to solve it.

then you're taking a test, and you come across a problem y=x^4+2x^2+1. Si says you can't solve it with the quadratic equation because it's not in the right form. so you use N, and figure out that you can use a=x^2 b=2x and c=1. then you can solve it.

i know not all intelligence is math. but it even works interpersonally. say you're disagreeing with someone, and neither of you are using N functions. you'll continue to disagree forever. but if someone realizes (N) that you're starting from different premises, you can reword some stuff, and come to consensus.

you HAVE to use N in a lot of situations, or you won't get very far. i guess if you live a life where everything is given to you, it doesn't really matter. but success != intelligence.

"Intelligence is an umbrella term used to describe a property of the mind that encompasses many related abilities, such as the capacities to reason, to plan, to solve problems, to think abstractly, to comprehend ideas, to use language, and to learn. There are several ways to define intelligence. In some cases, intelligence may include traits such as creativity, personality, character, knowledge, or wisdom. However, some psychologists prefer not to include these traits in the definition of intelligence."

knowledge, planning, and using language don't necessarily depend on N. but the rest of the traits do.

2. Originally Posted by Dana
Edahn: As someone of authority, you have an opinion that carries a lot of weight, so you might want to consider the consequences of saying something like, Sensors? whether it be in jest or not.
Dana?

3. Originally Posted by Mycroft
For as long as I've been a member of this message board, there has been the constant murmur of a "bias toward sensors". Figurative fists are shaken in the non-direction of a nebulous "they" that look would look down upon sensors, yet no specific examples are ever cited. Rather than the sneering hate-mongers often alluded to but never nailed down with concrete example, I see the MBTI equivalent of limousine liberals who act as though sensors are helpless retarded children who need to be defended and protected.

That was tolerable; humans, being humans, have always and will always enjoy basking in the tender warmth of their own magnanimity. However, the arrival of posters whose entire MO is to "edify" the rest of us, be it through the use of passive aggression or, most recently, good-old-fashioned deception, is more than enough. I come to this board to discuss MBTI and to participate in discussion with people who will understand what I mean when I throw in some MBTI lingo. Not to be patronized and sermonized.

If someone is displaying a bias, confront them with it. Right there in the thread. For everyone to see. For the rest of your fellow posters:

Spare them the lessons.
Here! Here!
Great suggestion!

4. Originally Posted by Wandering
No we don't. We all have the same information available to us, true, but none of us actually perceives all that information - we can't, our brain would explode. So we filter, we select. And Sensors and iNtuitives use different filters, and consequently don't absorb the same information.

Saying that an SP, for example, uses the same information I do, would be ridiculous, considering how incredibly *little* I am aware of my surroundings. They take in information I don't even notice, and vice versa.
Don't send me searching for it. Just quote it.

What is the relevance of the definition of cognitive in cognitive processes?

5. Originally Posted by Seanan
There's a difference, also, between bias and calling a spade a spade. If someone in my home talked to me the way I've been talked to by "SJs" here, they would be escorted to the door and told never to return... .
Yes, but are you sure they are S types, or are they misreporting their type. One INTP identifies himself as an ESFJ.

By the way, you're kind if off topic, since this thread is about S types being bullied by N types, not the other way around.

6. Originally Posted by Nocapszy
Don't send me searching for it. Just quote it.
No prob:
Originally Posted by Wandering
N is correlated with the traditional view of intelligence, because use of N functions is how we traditionally *define* intelligence, as in IQ.

So saying that Ns are generally more intelligent is just saying that Ns use the N functions more often and better. Well, duh

What is the relevance of the definition of cognitive in cognitive processes?
You ask weird questions, you know. How can the definition of cognitive in cognitive processes NOT be relevant?

But anyway: yes, I'm fully and openly "evading" your questions. Or more precisely: since you have already once (openly) questioned my integrity, there is absolutely no point in me trying to have an honest discussion with you, since probabilities indicate that you will repeat this kind of maneuver anytime you don't like what I'm saying or doing. What do *I* have to gain in such a situation??

7. Originally Posted by dissonance
you're only saying that because you think you're an S. i think you're an ENFP.

and of course N functions are correlated to intelligence. if you use no N functions, you never broaden your context or try to see other viewpoints. Ss that are smart are smart because they use N functions.

if you're facing a problem and you can't come up with a solution, you gotta use N functions. otherwise you'll beat your head against a wall forever. EVERYONE uses N functions. Ns just use them more often than Ss.

(i'm gonna get attacked for this)
No, I'm saying that because I believe it to be true. As I stated before, I didn't disparage intuition by saying that it makes people unable to see plain facts in front of their face. I honestly don't think that being intuitive necessarily correlates with higher intelligence (just as I don't believe that sensing necessarily correlates witb being more "sensitive" or "sensible"). These are just two points on a spectrum of how people look at and interpret the world. I honestly think you don't know me well enough to comment here. I could be any combinatory amalgamation of 4 letters and still realize this. I really thought that these sensory "bias" claims were overblown and somewhat silly, but some of the post in this forum are leading me to believe that they have some credence.

8. IMO, it's evidence of bias against sensors that people like pure_mercury who are clearly bright & clever are "elevated" to iNtuitive status.

9. It's disgusting, Ivy.

10. Originally Posted by whatever
Ns don't fit in at all where I'm from... I'm nothing if not adaptable- funny how some people picked up on it and others didn't... I almost convinced myself
Funny, but aren't SPs, by definition, also adaptable and open-minded?

Towards the beginning, you seemed to be almost the stereotypical ESTP (I truthfully wouldn't have guessed ISTP, either), but sometimes I wonder if some of your posts back then were made up and you just started off by playing a stereotypical ESTP role to mess with our minds!

I think the narrow-minded perception people place against S types actually comes from its alleged correlation to lower IQ scores and lower Openness on the FFM. (Most of the factors on the FFM Openness factor aren't even measured on the MBTI.)

#### Posting Permissions

• You may not post new threads
• You may not post replies
• You may not post attachments
• You may not edit your posts
•