Bias against "S" types

[ptgatsby]

I think it is important to be honest with what type theory... and personality... means. There will be "better" characteristics, no matter how much you hide it... not because they are inherently so, but because the values of society and such always have a preference.

For example, saying that S and Ns are equally intelligent requires disclaimers because Ns do have quite an edge on Ss as far as IQ goes, along with quite a few other performance measurements.

But it is a real mistake, an N mistake ironically, to apply broad statistics to individuals. Understanding the influences, etc is important but it is very easy to fall into cognitive biases, such as Ns over-valuing their own traits and under estimating Ss... and that's what happens. For example, it's easy to show that Ns are not particularly more successful - they don't dominate rank or monetary values... not even academic circles. It just depends on what you are measuring and how it relates.

Just ask how you change when you see something you dislike - for example, a perceived SJ trait. It has been shown here and elsewhere that we project traits that we want to see... group identity, etc. I learned about that first hand.

As for the beating things into the "S", I can't tell you how irritating it is to have someone say "The sky is red because..." and simply put their hands on their ears and chant "my logic is good! my logic is good!". Ns are smarter, if you go by IQ, but they aren't very efficient. In that sense, they are downright stupid. Ss carve a more direct line to what they want... Sometimes it can be good, sometimes not so good.

An example from this board is the degree of knowledge that the Ss tend to have on the topic they are talking about versus the knowledge that the entire Ns have. Ns will claim something without any backing at all - just a thought, an opinion, etc. Very rare is it validated. I find this common among Ns in RL as well. If I want to know how to do something, it's a straight line - I figure what I have to do, then do it... least until I get distracted Only INTJs seem to have that trait, and often it is... how do you say... less direct and more "my way".

["?"]

Originally Posted by athenian200

It really isn't fair to the more intelligent/insightful Sensors, and the bad parts are caricatured.

Not to pick on you Athenian, but we can also make inferences.

["?"]

Originally Posted by ptgatsby

For example, saying that S and Ns are equally intelligent requires disclaimers because Ns do have quite an edge on Ss as far as IQ goes, along with quite a few other performance measurements.

Not sure about Canada, but the US found I.Q. test socially and economically biased, with no real value in determining true intelligence. I agree with Keirsey on one thing, the fact that intelligence varies in types, thus a comparison between any type outside one's own temperament is apple/orange. Stategic intelligence cannot be measurably compared with tactical, logistical or diplomatic intelligence since they each measure something different. Besides, I know some ISTJs that would run circles around most when it comes to intellect.

["?"]

Originally Posted by Andy K Octopus

I have noticed their seems to be considerable "bias" against S types here from some posters. I just read a comment about how some person couldn't be an "S" because "S" types lack "vision" and "creativity". I think that S v. N has nothing to do with intelligence or imagination or creativity.

Since vision is most likely the result of using Ni, MBTI enthusiasts have determined that SP and/or SJ types use it more than Ne dominant or auxilary users. Common sense would suggest that creativity will best be utilized by those who are comfortable with irrationality. Te and Fe users are too exacting. I think Lenore Thomson gives a great illustration in her book, in comparing Ti vs Te. In defense of this group, some are coming around in appreciating the flawed stereotypes.

[FDG]

Originally Posted by ptgatsby

If I want to know how to do something, it's a straight line - I figure what I have to do, then do it... least until I get distracted Only INTJs seem to have that trait, and often it is... how do you say... less direct and more "my way".

Sorry, is there any other way to do something? How can you do something without knowing how?

ike flawed versions of S, who dont dance as well, are akward, make less effective administrators, and everything what matters to each invividual S.

Everybody can learn to dance well, be coordinated, and do household chores, it's just a matter of exercise.

[wildcat]

Originally Posted by developer

Recently, there was a thread on this forum about why there are not more Sensors signing up. Well, I guess this thread provides the answer.

Personally, I think that David Keirsey's book is one of the main reasons for this bias on the net. While it describes Ns prettty well, it is incredibly condescending about Ss. Lots of MBTI websites quote Kersey and so this biased attitude spreads around. Some people hail Keirsey like a guru, but I think he did significant damage to the MBTI community.

Yes.

Read the Ptypes. Written by the Ss priests.

[wildcat]

Originally Posted by ptgatsby

I think it is important to be honest with what type theory... and personality... means. There will be "better" characteristics, no matter how much you hide it... not because they are inherently so, but because the values of society and such always have a preference.

For example, saying that S and Ns are equally intelligent requires disclaimers because Ns do have quite an edge on Ss as far as IQ goes, along with quite a few other performance measurements.

But it is a real mistake, an N mistake ironically, to apply broad statistics to individuals. Understanding the influences, etc is important but it is very easy to fall into cognitive biases, such as Ns over-valuing their own traits and under estimating Ss... and that's what happens. For example, it's easy to show that Ns are not particularly more successful - they don't dominate rank or monetary values... not even academic circles. It just depends on what you are measuring and how it relates.

Just ask how you change when you see something you dislike - for example, a perceived SJ trait. It has been shown here and elsewhere that we project traits that we want to see... group identity, etc. I learned about that first hand.

As for the beating things into the "S", I can't tell you how irritating it is to have someone say "The sky is red because..." and simply put their hands on their ears and chant "my logic is good! my logic is good!". Ns are smarter, if you go by IQ, but they aren't very efficient. In that sense, they are downright stupid. Ss carve a more direct line to what they want... Sometimes it can be good, sometimes not so good.

An example from this board is the degree of knowledge that the Ss tend to have on the topic they are talking about versus the knowledge that the entire Ns have. Ns will claim something without any backing at all - just a thought, an opinion, etc. Very rare is it validated. I find this common among Ns in RL as well. If I want to know how to do something, it's a straight line - I figure what I have to do, then do it... least until I get distracted Only INTJs seem to have that trait, and often it is... how do you say... less direct and more "my way".

Yes ptGatsby.

I agree in the main line.

N=intuition?
No.

How do the STPs arrive in their practical application in the art of engineering?
By intuition.

How does their intuition differ from our intuition?
They are quicker.

As you say (between the lines) MBTI is not equitable.

[Athenian200]

Originally Posted by "?"

Not to pick on you Athenian, but we can also make inferences.

Did I say you couldn't? I made that inference as a statement of opinion, and to show my own knowledge. Not to imply that you were incapable of such an inference on your own. This is actually a good example of how Sensors and Intuitives don't live up to their stereotypes. You're the one jumping to conclusions and reading into things, and I only meant exactly what I said by that remark.

[Xander]

Why does the legendary "S Type" draw so much fire? Well because it is the venting dummy for all those intuitive type who have to put up with day after day of being force fed the sensor made framework which is so common in society.

Is this fair to the individual? Of course not.
Is restraining the response to the point of banning it? Also and equally no.

Of course the best solution is to realise that it's not the type that is the source of the irritation but the behaviour (however that does step away from MBTI which would seem to be contra to the concept of this board), or to realise that you may be typed as XXXX but you are not THE type XXXX.

I do think that some are discouraged from posting on here and that this limits the possible "catchment" of posters but I also think that this is inevitable. Hell I'm discouraged from posting on many occasions and I'm an N. It's all to do with what people discuss, what is encouraged and what is discouraged. If people see "we don't like Ss" and walk away then they probably wouldn't be of benefit to this forum anyway. If they see their own behaviour being targeted then that's more personal but someone slating their type without singling out the behaviour and making it personal should be taken more as misunderstanding (okay perhaps that's an N approach and not an S approach but really how many unbalanced people do you want on a forum?).

Basically it's something which is unavoidable. You have differing sides and are focused on a theory which allows a person to label certain behaviours (correctly or otherwise) with precision. As we have all (AFAIK) undertaken the test to find out which insults apply to us we're all signing up for a certain level of abuse. That's the bottom line.

[Mycroft]

As this is the only message board I post on, I'm not sure what the situation is like elsewhere, but here at MBTIc I've seen far more threads and posts taking issue with people looking down their noses at Ss than actual threads and posts by people looking down their noses at Ss...

In response to what PT posted:

Seeing Ns who are not, themselves, geniuses taking pride in being an N because Ns are statistically overrepresented amongst geniuses reminds me of the fat guy at work who talks about how "we" hit 3 home runs and beat the Yankees last night.