Impression of Sensors: On here vs IRL

[ladyinspring]

The difference between "sensors" here and in real life is I get to see what the introverted ones have to say and how they think about things. People in general are more introspective in online forums.

But as far as character and intelligence and all that, unlike seemingly the majority of "intuitives" on type forums, I have had plenty of good experiences with "sensors" in my life and already knew what a gift they can be. I don't think the "sensors" here are smarter than the average "sensor" in any way, shape, or form. That is one thing that is not different, they are every bit as smart in real life, and there are dumb "intuitives" everywhere. I have had way too many smart "sensor" friends and family and even co-workers to buy that. I have known people from all over the world, urban and rural, educated and not at all. I have known dumb people and smart people, and most of the smart people I have known have been "sensors" (probably because I haven't known too many "intuitives" very well, just 5, and yes they were all more or less smart, even if at least one was very socially stupid).

The only reason I am participating in this forum at all is the large minority of "sensors" here. It is such a refreshing change. The various numbers of "sensor"-haters on the internet (usually NPs I am sad to say) really, really tick me off. It's funny, when I found this forum I was prepared to come in fighting because I was feeling feisty and the last forum I left was intpcentral, which is filled with very stupid people who happen to be "intuitives". But I see I don't have to fight.

And ESs will discuss this kind of thing (well, I don't know about ESTs, but I know a lot of ESFs), but not usually by typing in an online forum. Or reading it in a book. They more like talking about psychology stuff in an offline kind of discussion.

 

[NewEra]

Yeah, maybe it's my background, but most of the S's I know in real life are just as intelligent and open as the S's on this forum.

 

[maliafee]

Hell no. The sensors I see (read as: pay notice to) in my classes are stupid fucking punks, and the ones i see at jobs/shops around here are crude, ignorant and just sleezy. I find the sensors online (and particularly here) to be just..... awesome all around, and dont seem to have the "flaws" many sensors bear IRL

prolly just self-selection methods pertaining to internet use, really. Computer illiteracy correlates with low/poor education, afterall

It is my opinion that because of these undesirable Ss, many Ns miss-type the decent Ss they do meet as Ns. Yes, I just said that.

 

[ladyinspring]

It is my opinion that because of these undesirable Ss, many Ns miss-type the decent Ss they do meet as Ns. Yes, I just said that.

lol, I agree with you. And umm, including themselves. There are some Ss masquerading as Ns all over the type world. A lot of Ss want to be Ns when they are introduced to typology because they read biased books like "Please Understand Me II" or they come to forums and websites where N is pretty much the epitome of everything good and S is just "they have a good sense of smell or something."

Also, many Ns miss-type the stupid/evil Ns they meet as Ss.

 

[Siúil a Rúin]

It is my opinion that because of these undesirable Ss, many Ns miss-type the decent Ss they do meet as Ns. Yes, I just said that.

I agree. That is rather insightful. When prejudice against Sensors is at its worst, the category is so narrow that few people would really fit into it.

lol, I agree with you. And umm, including themselves. There are some Ss masquerading as Ns all over the type world. A lot of Ss want to be Ns when they are introduced to typology because they read biased books like "Please Understand Me II" or they come to forums and websites where N is pretty much the epitome of everything good and S is just "they have a good sense of smell or something."

Also, many Ns miss-type the stupid/evil Ns they meet as Ss.

I agree with this as well. The prejudiced texts is one source and then online the history of this particular strain of MBTI forums has some relationship to the old "iNuitive Central" which by nature favored Ns. I would say in general that the kinds of negative prejudice against Sensors is ironically lacking in the ability to understand the theory and see all the dimensions of the people involved. People who do type based on negative stereotypes are not particularly intuitive or objective or whatever.

 

[maliafee]

THANK YOU, both.

lol, I agree with you. And umm, including themselves. There are some Ss masquerading as Ns all over the type world. A lot of Ss want to be Ns when they are introduced to typology because they read biased books like "Please Understand Me II" or they come to forums and websites where N is pretty much the epitome of everything good and S is just "they have a good sense of smell or something."

Also, many Ns miss-type the stupid/evil Ns they meet as Ss.

I agree. That is rather insightful. When prejudice against Sensors is at its worst, the category is so narrow that few people would really fit into it.


I agree with this as well. The prejudiced texts is one source and then online the history of this particular strain of MBTI forums has some relationship to the old "iNuitive Central" which by nature favored Ns. I would say in general that the kinds of negative prejudice against Sensors is ironically lacking in the ability to understand the theory and see all the dimensions of the people involved. People who do type based on negative stereotypes are not particularly intuitive or objective or whatever.

 

[Jeffster]

A lot of Ss want to be Ns when they are introduced to typology because they read biased books like "Please Understand Me II"...

Are you asserting that "Please Understand Me II" is biased in a way that makes "Ns" out to be superior to "Ss?" If so, can you cite specific examples of this? Because I'm an "S" and I didn't find it that way at all.

 

[Walking Tourist]

That is very true.
I worked hard to try to fit myself into an N box. I did see N as very positive when I first learned about typology.
Also, I wanted to have more positive traits than just a good sense of smell. I wanted people to ask my opinion on a wide range of topics, not just, "Can I use this food or has it gone bad?"

lol, I agree with you. And umm, including themselves. There are some Ss masquerading as Ns all over the type world. A lot of Ss want to be Ns when they are introduced to typology because they read biased books like "Please Understand Me II" or they come to forums and websites where N is pretty much the epitome of everything good and S is just "they have a good sense of smell or something."

Also, many Ns miss-type the stupid/evil Ns they meet as Ss.

 

[Amira]

S is just "they have a good sense of smell or something."

LOL! :yim_rolling_on_the_ Absolutely classic!

 

[garbage]

Sensors here are pretty much like the sensors I see in real life. So are intuitors, feelers, thinkers, judgers, perceivers, and so on. Undoubtedly, though, my interactions with those groups here shape how I categorize people in real life.. so it's no wonder I see similarities between those on the forum and those in real life.

Are you asserting that "Please Understand Me II" is biased in a way that makes "Ns" out to be superior to "Ss?" If so, can you cite specific examples of this? Because I'm an "S" and I didn't find it that way at all.

That's the way I saw that particular book, too. Gifts Differing, however, seemed to have that bias.

 

[ladyinspring]

Are you asserting that "Please Understand Me II" is biased in a way that makes "Ns" out to be superior to "Ss?" If so, can you cite specific examples of this? Because I'm an "S" and I didn't find it that way at all.

I should say that I love PUMII because it introduced me to type and I still think temperament theory is the most helpful and useful thing in typology.

The Temperament Talk group has been going over the bias and whatnot for years, although obviously they love the theory and have much respect for the book. I don't have the book in front of me so if you're really interested you can go there and do a search for "bias" or "Keirsey bias".

temperamenttalk

From what I can remember, the NF description just seems better than all of the others and makes people, especially Feelers, want to identify as NF even when they aren't. For example, the NFs are the only ones Keirsey describes as caring deeply about their relationships with people (as a primary concern). Yet he presents SP as the opposite of NF, as the tactical-minded users and manipulators of tools including people. So an ISFP teacher who cares deeply about relationships and whose relationships and values are of primary importance may not see themselves in that description, even if the overall pattern fits.

And from my personal memories, the SJ section of the book, while accurate at its most basic levels, is rather horribly dour and sour in tone. I refuse to read it or recommend it to anyone else. Keirsey clearly doesn't like SJs and that's okay, because he got the basics right, but it's hard reading. The tone would not make anyone want to identify as SJ, even if the conclusion seems inescapable. Please Understand Me, the original, was much less biased.

I prefer Linda Berens Temperament book.

 

[Jeffster]

From what I can remember, the NF description just seems better than all of the others and makes people, especially Feelers, want to identify as NF even when they aren't.

Hmmm..interesting. I'm a very strong "Feeler" and I didn't see it that way at all. If anything, when I read that, I want to give the Idealists a hug because it seems like they have a tremendous burden to carry, with that whole "eternal search for Self" thing, and the struggle with authenticity. It made me glad that I'm not saddled with those feelings, and was actually the final step for convincing me that there's no way I could be an NF. So, for me it had the total opposite effect, despite my believing that many NF causes are noble and admirable, it didn't make me want to BE one.

And from my personal memories, the SJ section of the book, while accurate at its most basic levels, is rather horribly dour and sour in tone. I refuse to read it or recommend it to anyone else. Keirsey clearly doesn't like SJs and that's okay, because he got the basics right, but it's hard reading. The tone would not make anyone want to identify as SJ, even if the conclusion seems inescapable.

Again, it would be nice to have some specific examples, though I can see how some of the section on "Guardians" could be interpreted this way. I think Keirsey makes a great effort, though, to point out that he believes it's a good thing there are so many SJs, because there are many things they do that others take for granted. He expands on this in his latest book, "Brains and Careers" when he goes into more detail about all the "logistical saving" that most people don't think about like water storage, electrical power, bridges being properly constructed, and many more, basically a positive view of the folks who are the "glue of society" holding things together, and making the exploits of the other temperaments possible.

The only sections of PUMII where I thought he was a little too narrow with the Guardians was the one on mating and the one on children, because he makes it sound like all SJs are kind of "goody-goody" and never make trouble or hastily jump into relationships, which obviously isn't true.

 

[ColonelGadaafi]

I can imagine sensors here having a certain intreset, in theoretical concepts, and N field's. Unlike the vast majority of sensors who only see the practicality of the E-net. So you could say that sensors here have an inclination towards traditionally N schools of intreset, and of course discussion.

However to answer the question. No i don't think Sensor's here are much diffrent. More intelligent?, arguable(most likely-unlikely). They are just diffrent in field of intreset.

 

[BerberElla]

No, a negative opinion on sensors wasn't something I could create once I found out about MBTI and sensors, because I already had a really smart sensor friend who I admire greatly.

 

[Saslou]

I find Sensors on here and IRL to be about the same. Although my SP family and friend would not entertain this kind of thing for a second.

Hmmm..interesting. I'm a very strong "Feeler" and I didn't see it that way at all. If anything, when I read that, I want to give the Idealists a hug because it seems like they have a tremendous burden to carry, with that whole "eternal search for Self" thing, and the struggle with authenticity. It made me glad that I'm not saddled with those feelings, and was actually the final step for convincing me that there's no way I could be an NF. So, for me it had the total opposite effect, despite my believing that many NF causes are noble and admirable, it didn't make me want to BE one.

The only sections of PUMII where I thought he was a little too narrow with the Guardians was the one on mating and the one on children, because he makes it sound like all SJs are kind of "goody-goody" and never make trouble or hastily jump into relationships, which obviously isn't true.

I have just finished 'survival games personalities play'. Very interesting read. Of the 4 types i wanted to be mostly associated with NF's, (Ahhh, logic and feelings). I have now come to a conclusion. I don't like how the SJ's are portrayed but still i don't want to be anything else. Everyone is potentially screwed up one way or another.
You said it, this whole 'goody-goody' bull. Its to narrow of a box and people fall for it.
"If the book said it, then it must be true". lol.

 

[Unique]

I don't know where these myths come from

You could have an absolute twit of an INFP and an awesome ESTJ

Has nothing to do with type

SJs are the most common types, there's a higher chance of running into bad ones, thats it, end of story.

If you think Ns are all brilliant you just haven't met enough of them yet

Oh and as for S's being different online, just no.