User Tag List

View Poll Results: Which Type is the Most Intuitive About People?

Voters
95. You may not vote on this poll
  • ENFP

    18 18.95%
  • ENFJ

    10 10.53%
  • INFP

    20 21.05%
  • INFJ

    31 32.63%
  • INTP

    5 5.26%
  • INTJ

    0 0%
  • ENTJ

    1 1.05%
  • ENTP

    4 4.21%
  • ISFP

    2 2.11%
  • ESFP

    0 0%
  • ESTJ

    0 0%
  • ESTJ

    0 0%
  • ISTJ

    0 0%
  • ISTP

    1 1.05%
  • ESTP

    2 2.11%
  • ESFJ

    1 1.05%
First 4567 Last

Results 51 to 60 of 69

  1. #51
    Occasional Member Evan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    1
    Posts
    4,223

    Default

    Almost every NF I know is really good at this. I know lots of other types that are, too, though...and a few NFs that aren't.

    My ISTJ friend is actually incredibly good.

    So yeah, I don't exactly know how to vote here.

  2. #52
    Senior Member GirlFromMars's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Posts
    329

    Default

    I think INFJ's!

  3. #53
    Senior Member The Outsider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    MBTI
    intp
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx
    Posts
    2,428

    Default

    Vote ESTJ!

  4. #54
    Plumage and Moult proteanmix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Enneagram
    1w2
    Posts
    5,514

    Default

    I find the voting on this poll highly inconsistent with the majority of what NFs say on this forum.

    INFJ is in the lead followed by ENFP, INFP, ENFJ. I don't understand why NFs are in the lead. Based on the type of threads most NFs start on this forum ranging from "I'm so deep into my head that relating/communicating with others is a problem" to "Durrr...I didn't even see that brick wall right in front of me!" I'm not understanding why the people who most frequently by their own admission have always felt like outsiders and different from other people can be so "intuitive" about them.

    If you have a map (which I'm guessing this means...the ability to read people well) why are people here not using it? Or is this purely theoretical which types are intuitive about others but not in reality? Why is there such a disconnect, but yet people think these types are such great people readers? In my mind, the fruits and outcomes of 'getting people' is that you'd have improved relationships with them. You know how to say things in their language. You know ways to communicate to them, to make yourself understood by them, be more understanding of their POV, make bridges, and emphasize similarities over differences but I don't see that playing out in what people are actually saying.

    If really think this thread is NF hubris talking. And, yall are sleeping on thinkers and SFs.
    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

  5. #55
    Ginkgo
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by proteanmix View Post
    I'm not understanding why the people who most frequently by their own admission have always felt like outsiders and different from other people can be so "intuitive" about them.
    Could this be, by any chance, due to the fact that they can see their differences while others cannot? Being intuitive about people doesn't necessarily imply that you can integrate within social structures. In fact, functions such as Ni and Fi prompt their users to highlight differences and similarities among people. This may make a person feel like an island.

    I feel that many of these "intuitive" types are instinctively inclined to "build bridges" among people. However, compared to real-life contexts, it is extremely hard to understand people on the internet. There aren't verbal or visual queues to work with, thus they're forced to "intuit" people through online facades.

  6. #56
    Plumage and Moult proteanmix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Enneagram
    1w2
    Posts
    5,514

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mystic Tater View Post
    Could this be, by any chance, due to the fact that they can see their differences while others cannot? Being intuitive about people doesn't necessarily imply that you can integrate within social structures.
    I understand about seeing differences. I'm asking where is the emphasis placed. I see more often than not, NFs on this forum emphasizing their differences between themselves and others. When you constantly emphasize the differences between you and someone else, you tend to fail to see opportunities to connect because your experience tells you there's nothing there to connect to. When you are able to see how similar you are to someone, you have more points of connection and the differences, even if they may be legitimate, gain less prominence. I'm not saying you should try to have the golden connection to anyone, but there will be less of that me and them attitude.

    In fact, functions such as Ni and Fi prompt their users to highlight differences and similarities among people. This may make a person feel like an island.
    If Ni is a pattern-seeking function and Fi is a universal value-seeking function then I would think they're just as capable as uniting as isolating.

    I feel that many of these "intuitive" types are instinctively inclined to "build bridges" among people. However, compared to real-life contexts, it is extremely hard to understand people on the internet. There aren't verbal or visual queues to work with, thus they're forced to "intuit" people through online facades.
    I'm not referring to internet relationships. Take a stroll through the NF section of this forum and browse through the titles of threads for a few pages and read the OPs. Read the relationship section and see what questions are being asked and note the type of the thread starter. I see just as much uncertainty and confusion about other people, their motives, what drives them as I do in casual conversation or in a Cosmo magazine. And one of the reasons why I think this view is compounded is because there are so few conversations about this happening IRL but when you come to the forum the discussion is "freer" in a sense...not because people aren't willing to discuss these things IRL but because those bridges weren't built or the platform for these types of discussions needs to have a certain atmosphere necessary in order to get people to talk and it takes people being fairly familiar with each other to have a high level of self-disclosure without the anonymity of the internet.

    And like you said online facades are coverings. The covering could truly reveal what's underneath or it could obscure it as in real life, but there is a meaningful difference between internet communication and real life communication and I think more energy should go to creating and sustaining real life relationships than internet ones.
    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

  7. #57
    Senior Member Clonester's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Posts
    480

    Default

    ENFP's (others too, not just me) are super intuitive about people. They pick up EVERYTHING. Especially with Ne they can analyze different possibilities as to why people act as they do. INFJ's are really good at judging people's character I find. I know an INTJ who can read me like an open book. It's scary really, since she's the only one I know that can do this. But she's not like this with everybody. I don't know about INFP's, but I'd imagine they are good too.
    ENFP Male: E-74% N-95% F-58% P-84% 3w2
    "I feel there are two people inside me - me and my intuition. If I go against her, she'll screw me every time, and if I follow her, we get along quite nicely." -Kim Basinger

  8. #58
    The Memes Justify the End EcK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    738
    Socionics
    ILE None
    Posts
    7,265

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Clonester View Post
    ENFP's (others too, not just me) are super intuitive about people. They pick up EVERYTHING. Especially with Ne they can analyze different possibilities as to why people act as they do. INFJ's are really good at judging people's character I find. I know an INTJ who can read me like an open book. It's scary really, since she's the only one I know that can do this. But she's not like this with everybody. I don't know about INFP's, but I'd imagine they are good too.
    Yeah but u'd have to admit that they are basically always wrong when it comes to entps for example, they're just convinced they're right for some reason. Doesn't strike me as pure homemade wisedom
    Expression of the post modern paradox : "For the love of god, religions are so full of shit"

    Theory is always superseded by Fact...
    ... In theory.

    “I’d hate to die twice. It’s so boring.”
    Richard Feynman's last recorded words

    "Great is the human who has not lost his childlike heart."
    Mencius (Meng-Tse), 4th century BCE

  9. #59
    The High Priestess Amargith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    Enfp
    Enneagram
    497 sx/so
    Socionics
    IEE Fi
    Posts
    14,660

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by proteanmix View Post
    I find the voting on this poll highly inconsistent with the majority of what NFs say on this forum.

    INFJ is in the lead followed by ENFP, INFP, ENFJ. I don't understand why NFs are in the lead. Based on the type of threads most NFs start on this forum ranging from "I'm so deep into my head that relating/communicating with others is a problem" to "Durrr...I didn't even see that brick wall right in front of me!" I'm not understanding why the people who most frequently by their own admission have always felt like outsiders and different from other people can be so "intuitive" about them.

    If you have a map (which I'm guessing this means...the ability to read people well) why are people here not using it? Or is this purely theoretical which types are intuitive about others but not in reality? Why is there such a disconnect, but yet people think these types are such great people readers? In my mind, the fruits and outcomes of 'getting people' is that you'd have improved relationships with them. You know how to say things in their language. You know ways to communicate to them, to make yourself understood by them, be more understanding of their POV, make bridges, and emphasize similarities over differences but I don't see that playing out in what people are actually saying.

    If really think this thread is NF hubris talking. And, yall are sleeping on thinkers and SFs.
    Coz you have a mix of all kinds of people here, in different stages of their life. It's not because you *can* in fact read people that you know what to do with that information. Or how to react to it responsibly. Use it efficiently. Not overreact to it because of emotional bagage you yourself carry. In fact, other people's emotional bagage makes it even harder to see your way clear of your own and dealing with it properly. It takes time, practice and skill to get there, just as with anything else.

    Quote Originally Posted by EcK View Post
    Yeah but u'd have to admit that they are basically always wrong when it comes to entps for example, they're just convinced they're right for some reason. Doesn't strike me as pure homemade wisedom
    That's just coz enfp and entp tend to be too similar so they mistakenly assume the other will quite literally be able to fill in the gaps Ne leaves. Little do we realize it's filled in by Ti and Fi in a completely different way, causing all kinds of misunderstandings. ENFP is indeed not the best mindreader for ENTP. It would appear INFJ is best at that.
    ★ڿڰۣ✿ℒoѵℯ✿ڿڰۣ★





    "Harm none, do as ye will”

  10. #60
    Glowy Goopy Goodness The_Liquid_Laser's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    3,377

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by proteanmix View Post
    INFJ is in the lead followed by ENFP, INFP, ENFJ. I don't understand why NFs are in the lead. Based on the type of threads most NFs start on this forum ranging from "I'm so deep into my head that relating/communicating with others is a problem" to "Durrr...I didn't even see that brick wall right in front of me!" I'm not understanding why the people who most frequently by their own admission have always felt like outsiders and different from other people can be so "intuitive" about them.
    I voted ENFP, not based on people I've met online, but people I've known in RL. Now I might be biased because several of the ENFP's I've known have been actors, and actors tend to study people in general regardless of what type they are. However my INFJ wife is an excellent actor, but I don't think she understands people in general the same way that ENFP's do. She has an amazing ability to pick up even the slightest emotion that a person has, but she is kind of clueless as to why most people behave the way they do. She also has amazing insight into anyone who is close to her, but doesn't understand people at large.

    On the other hand I'm excellent at understand people's behavior and their underlying motivations, but I totally suck at reading a person's emotional state. ENFP's seem to be pretty good at both. They can read a person's behavior and are also keyed into their emotions. That has been my experience anyway.
    My wife and I made a game to teach kids about nutrition. Please try our game and vote for us to win. (Voting period: July 14 - August 14)
    http://www.revoltingvegetables.com

Similar Threads

  1. Which Type is the Most Likely to be a Troll?
    By Ginkgo in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 136
    Last Post: 12-19-2015, 05:24 PM
  2. Which Type is the Most Likely to Have a God Complex
    By Ginkgo in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: 06-23-2015, 05:37 PM
  3. Which type is the most passive-aggressive?
    By Triglav in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: 05-07-2015, 12:55 PM
  4. Which type is the most sexually liberal?
    By Delta223 in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 113
    Last Post: 03-22-2012, 04:19 AM
  5. Which type is the most manipulative and dishonest?
    By Infidel in forum General Psychology
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 11-26-2009, 01:03 AM

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