You got mixed between Si & Fi, and other instances. And, it's not just you, I can too (as my knowledge of functions is quite basic), and I'm going to guess that most of us on this board are the same. However, even with such rudimentary understanding, how do you, with intellectual integrity, go ahead and generalize with such confidence that you are correctly ascribing whatever you see in a person? And, then sit comfortably in your decision of summing up a person in such manner.
Heck, I'm at fault for ascribing a type to people in my life, who haven't seen an MBTI specialist to get their type, and I will ponder over the actions of that person, rising from my assumption of their type. There's holes to that method. But, as long as it's used for 'good', and not for negative othering, assuming bias about them due to whatever 'type' I've ascribed, I dunno, I can then still sleep at night.
Actually between two friends, where one has tested as an ENTJ (through her career counsellor) and the other, who I assume is an ISTP (the sensing is very apparent in him), the latter is the one to more likely go off in their own head/daydream than the ENTJ. And when he speaks, if I shed the layers of what he said, there's a lot of intuitive thoughts, he just likes to lay it out more concretely (how it applies to the here and now) when he finally decides on his contemplation.You're right that an S-type person could have better N than an N-type. A brilliant ESTP is probably better at all of his functions than a mentally retarded ENTP.
We had the most apparent disagreement thus far, it seems, on this thread. From one ENTP to another.But again, look at the posts on this thread. It's no coincidence that lots of Ns have a definite communication gap with Ss in general.
Don't disagree, I'm just letting you know how limited you become if you stay within MBTI when assessing a person, and to be especially carefully of the shortfalls of subscribing to MBTI if you take away anything 'negative' from a person due to assumptions held by MBTI function/type descriptions.Like I was saying earlier, it's all about averages.
Even without labelling specific functions as the culprits behind particular situations, we can still get enough information so as to be useful by directly interviewing a person regarding his functional preferences. We may not be able to say, "He's acting this way in situation x because of function y", but we can say with a reasonable amount of certainty that, given appropriate self-descriptions, he tends to prefer either Sensing or iNtuition more often than the other...and that's all MBTI really seeks to do.
Awareness is the only weapon against assumptions.