N - myths

[developer]

I am concerned about the turn several threads are taking recently. Basically, one gets the impression, as if there were a need to associate N - ness with good qualities as in contrast to S - ness.

On one side, there are several discussions about how N is correlated to IQ. Although this correlation seems to exist, that does not mean that Ss are by definition less intelligent, indiviudally, as Ns. We are just looking at two slightly shifted Bell curves here, but with both containing a very wide range of individual values. The approach to statistics used by some posters actually serves to reinforce the notion that N does not always need to be correlated with high IQ.

On the other side, some posters argue that no high level Nazi could have been an N. These posters do not seem to have seen much original footage of speeches done by high level officials of that regime (I have). I fully agree with Uber's assessment of several persons mentioned in his post (although I may not agree with his enthusiasm for these persons). I am afraid that this terrible ideology did infiltrate N - brains just as well as S - brains.

I am very conscious and appreciative of Jennifer's comment in an earlier thread, where she said that many Ns are suffering so much in RL, that they need to blow off some steam here in this forum. This is a valuable argument, but I think we are not doing ourselves or the MBTI a big favour by propagating the myth of the N as some superior being.

[Santtu]

I have started some threads on those topics. I dont hold great merit to correlation, I approach it in a scholarly fashion.. I surely don't approach it in the way that "see, these people are better on average in thing X, they are better!"

I am sorry if I have upset you. I don't think that person's future or fate or whatever is determined by statistical correlations. I hold that IQ has value and I don't step back from it.

What I think is that it is unfortunate that this MBTI is connected to IQ, because MBTI is supposed to be something that's equally good for everyone, regardless of their MBTI type. Now here what we have is that an ability, or a trait, is encoded withing. I think it's unfortunate, but we can work around it.

I think you are sensitive to the discrimination that sensory orientated people face. I understand it; I feel bad by being typed as some idiot who mistakes superman for something real and who believes in healing crystals and and some damned idiot theories. I really resent the bad stereotypes we N people face; I've even began to think that perhaps I'm S instead, because I appreciate reality more, and I keep reality and fantasy separate. I don't know. It would be equally false to state that S people can't comprehend anything further than what is blatantly obvious and in-their-face. The reality is not very much so.

In any case, I'm hoping to work with you to improve the perception of S on this forum. I

[Jennifer]

Originally Posted by developer

I am very conscious and appreciative of Jennifer's comment in an earlier thread, where she said that many Ns are suffering so much in RL, that they need to blow off some steam here in this forum. This is a valuable argument, but I think we are not doing ourselves or the MBTI a big favour by propagating the myth of the N as some superior being.

Thank you, I appreciate that.

I missed the Nazi argument, although I think I saw the thread somewhere around here. Going by simply what knowledge I've picked up through osmosis over the years, I find it likely there were lots of T types high up in the rankings of the Nazi party -- both ST's and NT's. It seems absurd to me that someone would try to exclude NTs from that list. iNtuitive people might step beyond the tangible boundaries more often and challenge status quo, but we still just are as able to be swinangled into believing in a particular cause, especially if we've been immersed in it for a long time. We have the same human inclinations to turn a blind eye to things that challenge what we want to believe.

Is there a way we approach the topic in a positive way (i.e., "S's are good because...") rather than the negative? I don't know, I'm just brainstorming and trying to think of an approach that would erase as much of the wall of separation as possible... although realistically I think there will always be some friction there...

[Xander]

One thing occurs to me is that perhaps this is being looked at from the wrong end. Much as in many cultures certain types of people are seen as better because they posses certain traits (honest to god I find most "achievers" to be the most boring and dull witted of people). Perhaps in defining what traits are desirable we are describing Ns more than Ss and hence it's seen as desirable to be an N and undesirable to be an S?

On these forums it seems that those who are deep and consider things greatly, those who can see past the surface and reveal deeper meaning are treated with more respect... well that sounds more N than S to me.

So perhaps there is a bias against Ss...but there again perhaps we ask for it.

[proteanmix]

MYTH: Intuitives ALWAYS intuit/sense the correct pattern and sensors rarely if ever sense/intuit a correct pattern or patterns at all. Pattern detection is regarded as being completely within the domain of intuitiveness and that an intuitive's pattern/connection recognition abilities are rarely if ever incorrect. If an intuitive intuited a pattern or connection between or within events, that pattern is inerrant.

If a sensor intuits (I don't know if this is the proper term for what I'm describing) it's less thorough and comprehensive than an intuitive's. And within intuitives, a dominant intuitive (INJ or ENP) will have superior pattern/connective intuitions than an auxiliary intuitive.

[cafe]

I am too well-aware of the many pitfalls of being an intuitive to have much of a sense of N superiority. Two INs in a marriage can be fun, but you can also do an incredible amount of fumbling and tripping. We have done so many seriously stupid things . . . some days I think we really need someone to take care of us. Someone with some sense.

[Santtu]

It is also an incredible myth that N are so helpless that we have to be taken care of. This is one of the most distasteful myths I've come across. Am I the only one who's seen this?

[proteanmix]

Originally Posted by Santtu

It is also an incredible myth that N are so helpless that we have to be taken care of. This is one of the most distasteful myths I've come across. Am I the only one who's seen this?

Well it doesn't help when Ns themselves say they can barely remember to put their shirts on the right way.

[cafe]

Originally Posted by proteanmix

Well it doesn't help when Ns themselves say they can barely remember to put their shirts on the right way.

*checks collar and seams* Whew. Frontwards and right side out. Day's going good so far.

[Jennifer]

Originally Posted by proteanmix

MYTH: Intuitives ALWAYS intuit/sense the correct pattern and sensors rarely if ever sense/intuit a correct pattern or patterns at all. Pattern detection is regarded as being completely within the domain of intuitiveness and that an intuitive's pattern/connection recognition abilities are rarely if ever incorrect. If an intuitive intuited a pattern or connection between or within events, that pattern is inerrant.

That's far too extreme.

The allowance is that people who practice a function more (and naturally) will logically be "better with it" than those who have avoided it their whole lives.

So ISxJ's have Ne as their inferior. I don't think you can avoid the conclusion that this function gets developed later in life, and it's far more typical for them to have paranoid fears based on wanton Ne usage, than Ne that is drawing more realistic conclusions.

At the same time, it's not uncommon for those with N as a primary to be severely lacking in their perception of the tangible world. They haven't practiced it, they've ignored it most of their lives, and they are far behind a natural S.

And so on.

It's what logic predicted and what I have experienced personally with the people I interact with.

(I hope this qualifies/explains anything I have personally said in the past on this topic.)

You should also note that since functions develop with practice, some of this can be compensated for. You're really describing "raw" partially developed personalities here.

If a sensor intuits (I don't know if this is the proper term for what I'm describing) it's less thorough and comprehensive than an intuitive's. And within intuitives, a dominant intuitive (INJ or ENP) will have superior pattern/connective intuitions than an auxiliary intuitive.

Theoretically. Just as a dominant judging function with intuition as the auxiliary will tend to evaluate and prioritize those connections better than the dominant intuitive.

But there is overlap, because sometimes dominant judgers people are forced to use their Ne more often, and vice versa.

Originally Posted by proteanmix

Well it doesn't help when Ns themselves say they can barely remember to put their shirts on the right way.

In our family, it's the ESFP who routinely puts on his clothes inside-out or backwards or tries to leave the house with only one shoe on.