User Tag List

First 1234 Last

Results 21 to 30 of 40

  1. #21
    Plumage and Moult proteanmix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Enneagram
    1w2
    Posts
    5,514

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Andy K Octopus View Post
    I think S types are badly misrepresented as dull and unimaginative on many MBTI descriptions, and that even here people fail to see that N and S are not signs of intelligence or aptitude or even of imagination
    No way! How did you reach that conclusion?
    Relationships have normal ebbs and flows. They do not automatically get better and better when the participants learn more and more about each other. Instead, the participants have to work through the tensions of the relationship (the dialectic) while they learn and group themselves and a parties in a relationships. At times the relationships is very open and sharing. Other time, one or both parties to the relationship need their space, or have other concerns, and the relationship is less open. The theory posits that these cycles occur throughout the life of the relationship as the persons try to balance their needs for privacy and open relationship.
    Interpersonal Communication Theories and Concepts
    Social Penetration Theory 1
    Social Penetration Theory 2
    Social Penetration Theory 3

  2. #22
    Senior Member developer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    117

    Default

    Just came back from a meeting and saw what controversy I have started. So, out of bad conscience, I just googled ISFJ, went to the first link (Typelogic, why are they always the first?) and copied the second paragraph for all of you:

    ISFJs are often unappreciated, at work, home, and play. Ironically, because they prove over and over that they can be relied on for their loyalty and unstinting, high-quality work, those around them often take them for granted--even take advantage of them. Admittedly, the problem is sometimes aggravated by the ISFJs themselves; for instance, they are notoriously bad at delegating ("If you want it done right, do it yourself"). And although they're hurt by being treated like doormats, they are often unwilling to toot their own horns about their accomplishments because they feel that although they deserve more credit than they're getting, it's somehow wrong to want any sort of reward for doing work (which is supposed to be a virtue in itself). (And as low-profile Is, their actions don't call attention to themselves as with charismatic Es.) Because of all of this, ISFJs are often overworked, and as a result may suffer from psychosomatic illnesses.

    Well, in the divison I run I have a department head who is ISFJ (professionally tested). She leads her large team with grace and authority, has an excellent sense for details while at the same time never missing the big picture. She is kind and diplomatic, but nobody of her people would dare to challenge her on an order. So, yes she is an ISFJ, but neither the randomly chosen Typelogic profile nor any other profile gets anywhere close to what she is like. I have another department head who is ISTJ, and it is the same story. Another one ESTJ, one of the finest and smartest people I know, everybody is in awe of her. I could go on, but you get the point.

    This is not about whining in one direction or the other (I really could not care less), I just think ist is a fact, that most S - type descriptions are not valid for anybody with an IQ above 90.

    Now flame me, if you please......

  3. #23
    Senior Member ptgatsby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Posts
    4,474

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by developer View Post
    This is not about whining in one direction or the other (I really could not care less), I just think ist is a fact, that most S - type descriptions are not valid for anybody with an IQ above 90.

  4. #24

    Default

    I have some thoughts on why the S descriptions are not that accurate.

    This is just idle theorizing (i.e. I haven't looked for evidence) on my part, but...

    1. Most of the theory was developed by Ns. I think Jung, Myers, and Briggs were all Ns (all INs, possibly all INFs). It is not much of a leap to think that a theory developed by Ns would not describe Ss that well. I think it also does less of a job on Ts also. Probably E's too, but I am not in a position to tell. I don't think the official descriptions are more or less flattering. But apparently they are not accurate.
    2. The theory was developed to help misfits feel less like a misfit. If you look at the choice to not include Neuroticism or ("clinical") information is some (weak) evidence that this was part of the motivation. Perhaps "misfit" S's will find their descriptions more accurate? Just guessing. A lot of the N's on this site (self-included) are long time, "misfits".


    Then again, as pt has pointed out several times, perhaps they just need to come up with an intelligence neutral test (and description set).

    Accept the past. Live for the present. Look forward to the future.
    Robot Fusion
    "As our island of knowledge grows, so does the shore of our ignorance." John Wheeler
    "[A] scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy." Richard Feynman
    "[P]etabytes of [] data is not the same thing as understanding emergent mechanisms and structures." Jim Crutchfield

  5. #25
    Protocol Droid Athenian200's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    8,828

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by developer View Post
    This is not about whining in one direction or the other (I really could not care less), I just think ist is a fact, that most S - type descriptions are not valid for anybody with an IQ above 90.
    I think you're just biased because you view the things described as typical Sensor activities as unworthy of attention, or superfluous. S's would be proud of those qualities. It's only from an Intuitive perspective that those things are menial and boring. If anyone dislikes those sort of activities, doesn't care about tradition, isn't very practical, likes abstract fields, etc, then they are N's. It's as simple as that.

    Now flame me, if you please......
    Consider it done.

  6. #26
    Senior Member Lookin4theBestNU's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ENFj
    Enneagram
    2w3
    Posts
    801

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Athenian200
    Consider it done.
    Ummmmmm was that your flame? It seemed a bit more like a firecracker or something. If so, please feel free to "flame me" at anytime.
    "At points of clarity, I realize that my life on earth is meaningless, and that I am merely a pawn in a bigger game. A game I cannot possibly understand or have control of. Thankfully, before depression sets in, I drift back into my cloudy, bewildered daily routine." **Joel Patrick Warneke**

  7. #27
    only bites when provoked
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    2,127

    Default

    What about us HPLS people?
    I 100%, N 88%, T 88%, J 75%

    Disclaimer: The above is my opinion and mine alone, it does not mean I cannot change my mind, nor does it guarantee that my comments are related to any deep-seated convictions. Take everything I say with a whole snowplow worth of salt and call me in the morning, if you can.

  8. #28

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by athenian200 View Post
    I think you're just biased because you view the things described as typical Sensor activities as unworthy of attention, or superfluous. S's would be proud of those qualities. It's only from an Intuitive perspective that those things are menial and boring. If anyone dislikes those sort of activities, doesn't care about tradition, isn't very practical, likes abstract fields, etc, then they are N's. It's as simple as that.
    I find the notion of being limited to a career field by "personality type" even more frightening than being limited by IQ. There is no substitute for reflection, exploration, and (if possible) apprentencship to learn what you like and what you are capable of.

    I have no idea, whether the descriptions/career fields picked out by MBTI is flattering on unflattering (I read them at the same levelof flattery, roughly), but I consider the career-field stuff wrong on principle. Most fields need diversity (of background, opinion, and style) to stay a striving and vibrant field. I think any type can do any job, and I think every field needs every type.

    Note: I don't own a copy of Do What You Are So I don't know what advice it (or any MBTI based source) gives in this regard (because I just dismissed that part off-hand).

    Here is part of the Table of Contents of the Amazon Preview, however.

    Members by self reported type-dwya-jpg

    What do you think?
    Attached Images Attached Images

    Accept the past. Live for the present. Look forward to the future.
    Robot Fusion
    "As our island of knowledge grows, so does the shore of our ignorance." John Wheeler
    "[A] scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy." Richard Feynman
    "[P]etabytes of [] data is not the same thing as understanding emergent mechanisms and structures." Jim Crutchfield

  9. #29

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by developer View Post
    I think that it reflects a much deeper problem within the MBTI community. Actually, one should expect a lot of ISTJs and ISFJs in a forum like this: MBTI is a very practical and useful tool, and it helps you to get along better with other people, so this should very much appeal to the values of SJs. I see a lot of ISTJs contributing to other online forums (e.g. special interest forums like TimeZone), so the medium should be okay for them as well. This forum here is very friendly and accepting, so the tone should not scare away anybody either.

    I think the reason why this forum as well as all other MBTI forums gets so little traction with Sensors is that most of the S type descriptions are offensive for any intelligent person. If you are a calm and orginized person, according to MBTI you can be only a Scientist (INTJ), a Sage (INFJ), a Peacounter (ISTJ), or a Doormat (ISFJ) - sorry for the exaggeration. If you happen to be an N, those descriptions are very flattering (who would not like to be a deep mystic or a super bright mastermind), but if you clearly test on the S side, the options are not flattering at all.

    I have a number of super bright ISTJs and ISFJs as friends and associates, and I know the descriptions are way off the mark. Most of you seem to realize that either. But as long as you see what you currently get when you google ISFJ or ISTJ, we will not see many Sensors here.

    I agree completely. I think the S descriptions are done poorly by the overwhelming majority of the sources. I avoided telling many S friends to read the written description (and rather try to explain it to them)... because often one of these negative outcomes occur:

    [A] they believe it thoroughly and feel dejected (they can't be as smart as Ns)

    [B] they mistype themselves and choose N (especially the ones with ivy league educations, high test scores, very accomplished etc)

    [C] think the theory is bullshit


    Furthermore, I think the majority N types types believe this. It helps confirm their own notions of intellectual superiority since more of their self esteem is involved in how "smart" they are.

    I find many S types refreshing in the work place, because they are less likely to have intellectual ego (and occasionally this fact makes actually makes them more productive in solving a theoretical problem - not just sweeping floors).

    I personally find dumb N's ten times worse then dumb S's - because the N's really believe they have all the answers (even when they're wrong) while looking down at you condescendingly, the entire time they're talking with you. I usually don't get that sense when an S type disagrees with me on a topic.
    Last edited by meanlittlechimp; 10-05-2007 at 03:25 AM.

  10. #30

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by athenian200 View Post
    It's only from an Intuitive perspective that those things are menial and boring. If anyone dislikes those sort of activities, doesn't care about tradition, isn't very practical, likes abstract fields, etc, then they are N's. It's as simple as that.
    I disagree, many S types also find repetitive physical work boring and demeaning, the same way some N types might find accounting or finance boring. Many S types find tradition boring (namely Artisan types) and moreover - I find many NJs more tradition bound than SPs.

    I guarantee you there are many S's in the "abstract" fields you're talking about. I think there are more S's in law, medicine, engineering and politics than N's. N's might be over-represented (considering their portion of the population); but I would bet anything there are more S's in absolute numbers in these "abstract" fields.
    Last edited by meanlittlechimp; 10-05-2007 at 03:26 AM.

Similar Threads

  1. [NF] NFs, Self-Knowledge & Type: Learning about Yourself from Others of Your Type
    By Afkan in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 09-18-2010, 03:44 PM
  2. I hate self-reporting tests!
    By onemoretime in forum Online Personality Tests
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 08-10-2010, 03:50 PM
  3. Are INTJs the most self-aware type?
    By mollyowens in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 104
    Last Post: 01-04-2010, 12:57 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO