A Paradigm Shift: are some types in fact, better than others?

[velocity]

i have a theory:
let's take an isfj, top functions being si and fe. si dictates certain rules or "right" ways of behaving according to ethical principles for them, so it might be very hard for isfjs to understand and accept another way of acting. with a drive to harmonize and a dislike of conflict, isfj's might easily internalize criticism. since fe correlates with accepted, "community values," sometimes, isfjs would probably feel guilt or shame of their feelings don't adhere to a social norm and it might lead them to believe they are defective, corrupt, or evil in some way. since they rarely have "objective standards" of behavior of judging others, they might have a harder time navigating a completely subjective path in times of confusion or chaos.

entj's, for example, might not recognize or understand an emotion they're experiencing, but they might largely ignore them if going down an emotional path is not efficient or logical. therefore, they may be more consistent in their moods and behavior and exhibit a "cooler head" in the midst of an upset or a joy. you profess to be all gooey on the inside, babylon, let us in on your secret!

 

[entropie]

i have a theory:
let's take an isfj, top functions being si and fe. si dictates certain rules or "right" ways of behaving according to ethical principles for them, so it might be very hard for isfjs to understand and accept another way of acting. with a drive to harmonize and a dislike of conflict, isfj's might easily internalize criticism. since fe correlates with accepted, "community values," sometimes, isfjs would probably feel guilt or shame of their feelings don't adhere to a social norm and it might lead them to believe they are defective, corrupt, or evil in some way. since they rarely have "objective standards" of behavior of judging others, they might have a harder time navigating a completely subjective path in times of confusion or chaos.

entj's, for example, might not recognize or understand an emotion they're experiencing, but they might largely ignore them if going down an emotional path is not efficient or logical. therefore, they may be more consistent in their moods and behavior and exhibit a "cooler head" in the midst of an upset or a joy. you profess to be all gooey on the inside, babylon, let us in on your secret!

Thats a good theory about the isfj !!

Concerning the entj I think there is more to it. I think they are pretty good with people, they are only dumb when it comes to themselves. (lack of the gene)

 

[INTJMom]

I believe each and every type is valuable and necessary in its own way.
None is better or more preferable.
If we were all the same, we would be in big trouble.
I don't know about the current percentage mix.
Would the world be very different if there were equal amounts of each type?
It's possible.
Better or worse? I don't know.

 

[The_Liquid_Laser]

What you find overall is that the definitions used in EQ and IQ really have nothing to do with MBTI definitions. Thinkers don't really do better on IQ tests and feelers don't really do better on EQ tests.

Instead what you find is that the tests are biased in ways that were not originally considered. IQ tests are biased toward N, while EQ tests are biased toward E.

 

[velocity]

thanks entropie!

i've had much more interactions with isfj's (my mum is one) than entj's.

extj's both theoretically have fi as their inferior function, so living their lives based on a harmonizing of values and empathy with all creatures probably wouldn't be their first priority - therefore, less agonizing about guilt, etc.


and in regards to "feelers" - intense feelings would be very demanding if you don't have an objective way to deal with them after a certain point. i don't know the difference between fi and fe in this context, but harmonizing incongruous external values or evaluating needs subjectively can get really trying. "feelers" might also have thinner psychological boundaries in interpersonal relationships which leads to a greater risk of losing their identity. so maybe "thinkers" are more capable of "handling" and compartmentalizing feelings and "feelers" are more capable of recognizing and understanding them? different types of emotional intelligence.

on a different note, i always assess my feelings within a logical framework. i must dissect them - i don't really operate on trusting or acting on my "gut feelings." feelings, for me, can exist as "misdirected thoughts." i think you'll find this to be true in t-dominant individuals.

 

[nanook]

there are two more interesting terms. entropie was allready getting at it ... "I think they are pretty good with people, they are only dumb when it comes to themselves."

intrapersonal intelligence (I'm down with that) and that weird other thing ... "interpersonal intelligence". ... basically an archaic automatism that can be found among animals as well.

 

[velocity]

intrapersonal intelligence (I'm down with that) and that weird other thing ... "interpersonal intelligence"

mm yea, i hear this.

 

[Venom]

you profess to be all gooey on the inside, babylon, let us in on your secret!

NEVERRRRRRR!!!!!!!!!!!!!

:steam:

 

[Nonsensical]

NEVERRRRRRR!!!!!!!!!!!!!

:steam:

Maybe a devil on the outside, but soft and mooshy-gooshy lovey-dovey cuddly-ness on the inside, right?

 

[nanook]

Maybe a devil on the outside, but soft and mooshy-gooshy lovey-dovey cuddly-ness on the inside, right?

as seen on southpark.

 

[CJ99]

Well as far as i can see how intelligent someone is is as much a philisophical question as a scientific one, if not more so. So different people will have different answers to the question as they have different philosophies.

 

[velocity]

Well as far as i can see how intelligent someone is is as much a philisophical question as a scientific one, if not more so. So different people will have different answers to the question as they have different philosophies.

you should share yours. unless that was it.

 

[velocity]

Henry “Dick” Thompson

what an untrustworthy name.

 

[Athenian200]

Well, I would say that most types are indeed better than INFPs.

Although, sadly, I would have to say that NFs in general are kind of a "third wheel." We do add something, but the world could easily go on without us, even if it were a bit more violent, selfish, and corrupt (and even that is debatable, and would depend on how far the SJs would go to curb these things without any influence from NF ideals having ever existed).

 

[velocity]

Well, I would say that most types are indeed better than INFPs.

Although, sadly, I would have to say that NFs in general are kind of a "third wheel." We do add something, but the world could easily go on without us, even if it were a bit more violent, selfish, and corrupt (and even that is debatable, and would depend on how far the SJs would go to curb these things without any influence from NF ideals having ever existed).

find yourself an entj protector marshall! result:

 

[entropie]

Well, I would say that most types are indeed better than INFPs.

Wow, was that INFJ and sarcasm, I am really impressed

 

[lorkan]

Why are we even disscusing this? Ofc IxFx have betterr intelligence then ExFx (or any E for that matter).

Btw what's the definition of EQ, in your opinion? Is it feeling for others? Deeds for others? Greatest inner fantasy world? Sustain longest in a passionate state? Most information about certain feelings? Best at describing feelings?

 

[527468]

Even if EQ and IQ were correct determiners of intelligence, what logic says that a smarter person is better than one who is gifted or one who contributes more to society's wealth?

 

[Moiety]

If feeling doesn't equate to emotional intelligence, then thinking likely doesn't equate to logical intelligence. Therefore, INFPs don't necessarily lack it.

My thoughts exactly.

 

[527468]

My thoughts exactly.

Well a person who is highly logical still gets a choice of preferring logic to feeling.

This person could chose INFP, thus rely on their ethical value system more than their "advanced" logical system. Doesn't mean at all they are thinkers. It's a preference.