Many of the type stereotypes on this board and other places online seem to exist within their own, tidy little vacuums, and one important aspect is rarely factored in: viz. the effect of socio-economic background on shaping someone's personality.
Most of the type stereotypes and type descriptions work best if the frame of reference is your typical all-white, middle-class, white-picket fence suburban western culture. Sheltered people who only read newspapers about "those lazy poors" who seemingly live in an entirely different galaxy.
What if someone grew up in an urban ghetto? How stereotypically INFP can one be in a poor, industrial town? Perhaps a lot of the disdain people show against sensors come about as a result of this kind of socio-economic misunderstanding?
If you live in a rat-infested apartment, mulling over the ills of the world in your blog while sipping your latte macchiato won't help you pay the rent. The only language your landlord understands his "give me the %$%%*& money or your ass is out!!" You have to be more grounded and sensor-like to survive in such socio-economic circumstances.
In certain environments, you need to develop both Se and Te (aka "street smarts") if you don't want to get mugged. In my highschool, one of my classmates got stabbed by a gang member over his game boy advance (he didn't die thankfully). I also know that the stereotypical jocks, nerds, and hippies division did not develop in my high-school. So the culture of the socio-economic environment seems to have an effect on the personalities and roles that people take on, then why not on type? or perhaps it only affects what functions you choose to manifest?
Even so the type descriptions seem awfully sterile and narrow to me because there are other factors that come into play in shaping someone's personality, and the socio-economic one is important, imo.