User Tag List

First 34567 Last

Results 41 to 50 of 113

  1. #41
    Writing... Tamske's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    1,764

    Default

    Three remarks...

    1) Most of the stereotypes listed here are amended by putting "most" or "rather" in it. If Sensors aren't more practical and concrete than iNtuitors, why would you make the S-N distinction? People are different. It's the differences that make life interesting. If we go for an "everybody is the same" route in order to not offend anybody, we take all meaning out of typology. And if you're offended, please read #3.

    2) Feeling is not about emotion - what is it about, then?
    There are people who would rather decide on emotions, values and people and other, different people who would rather decide on logic, efficiency and goals. If this is NOT the F-T distinction, I'm throwing F-T out of my favorite typology and use this one as replacement. I want to type my fiction characters as emotional or cold or something in between.

    3) The main issue is, according to me, that some of the stereotypes or characteristics are seen as intrinsically better. Is objectivity intrinsically better? I don't think so. But as long as the nuance of "better" is attached to it, people will be offended if you say they are not "objective", and rightly so.
    Got questions? Ask an ENTP!
    I'm female. I just can't draw women

  2. #42
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    MBTI
    me
    Posts
    234

    Default

    Ni is the holy grail of cognition.

    Feeling is routed in emotions (this is laudable to a neuroscience major, i'm sorry).

    There are such things as "thinkers", "feelers" addressing types etc. When thinking or feeling, for example isn't even their dom. function.

    Separating people into their first and second cognitive functions, and ignoring the others = dumb and leads to 'stereotypes' that don't have any basis in reality. Because people are wholes.

    sjs = stupidest, judgmental people on the planet.

  3. #43
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    MBTI
    ISFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 sx
    Socionics
    SEE Fi
    Posts
    25,301

    Default

    ISFJs are prim and proper and no fun and are totally different from me.

    All SPs are good at sports.

    If you like literature or philosophy, you must be an N.

    SJs can't have really cool taste in music and film.

    SJs only believe in defined relationship roles.

    All NTs are smart.

  4. #44
    i love skylights's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 so/sx
    Socionics
    EII Ne
    Posts
    7,835

    Default

    • a Feeler with Fi > Fe will always go against the crowd
    • a Feeler with Fe > Fi will always go along with the crowd


    Quote Originally Posted by Tamske
    Feeling is not about emotion - what is it about, then?
    i also think what's got some Feelers frustrated is that emotion doesn't always play a leading role in our Feeling decisions. for example, what i wear in the morning - usually decided by a few T parameters (it's cold out, need to wear something warm; i have a meeting, need to wear something relatively nice), coupled with Fi preferences (what do i feel like this morning? well, i've been thinking about the ocean a lot lately. i feel... ocean-y. maybe i'll wear a blue shirt.) the decision didn't really have anything to do with emotion... just a feeling...

  5. #45
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    2,390

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tamske View Post
    2) Feeling is not about emotion - what is it about, then?
    Feeling = Favouring Choice via Instinctual Gauge
    Thinking = Favouring Choice via Critical Analysis

  6. #46
    Senior Member Noon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    806

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tamske View Post
    If Sensors aren't more practical and concrete than iNtuitors, why would you make the S-N distinction? People are different. It's the differences that make life interesting. If we go for an "everybody is the same" route in order to not offend anybody, we take all meaning out of typology. And if you're offended, please read #3.
    Maybe I should clarify, then. My issue is probably almost entirely semantic, and it's a personal annoyance rather than misplaced PCness or an attempt at holding hands and running through flowery fields with the iNtuitives. I am not bothered at all by sensors being called concrete because that's a pretty static word, and one that is pretty much always congruent with the definition of Sensing. "Practical" seems much more context dependent, but most profiles seem to restrict it to meaning "immediately apt for physical use", which is not bad but kind of simultaneously disregards this definition:

    mindful of the results, usefulness, advantages or disadvantages, etc., of action or procedure.
    I take it to mean that sensors also tend to think more about the fruits of an action they may take, whether or not those fruits are physical or concrete, and it's something that I see NJs do very often as well, hence the eye-rolling at the notion that Ns need Ss to show them how to be more "practical". There's also the weird implication of N being only whimsical and thus less capable of successfully functioning in the real world. That is just...not true.

    In that vein, I don't see how things like philosophy or cosmology can automatically take on the full-blown label of impractical without knowing the context. I think they can be more practical than football and partying, which some profiles seem to limit sensors to (though not directly), especially depending on the goals of the person studying them. Sure, we can certainly deduce that sensors are less likely to partake in them because they are abstract, but it's the stereotype of all sensors shaking their heads or sticking their noses up at them because they're not "practical", or even chiding Ns for some of their interests for the same reason, that I think is strange.

    Quote Originally Posted by Tamske View Post
    1) Most of the stereotypes listed here are amended by putting "most" or "rather" in it.
    As well as "tend" and "more likely". But then they become something more along the lines of generalizations instead of stereotypes.

    Quote Originally Posted by Tamske View Post
    2) Feeling is not about emotion - what is it about, then?
    There are people who would rather decide on emotions, values and people and other, different people who would rather decide on logic, efficiency and goals. If this is NOT the F-T distinction, I'm throwing F-T out of my favorite typology and use this one as replacement. I want to type my fiction characters as emotional or cold or something in between.
    Interpersonal or intrapersonal needs and results, ethics, moral frameworks, belief systems that may or may not be validated through logic. Feeling judgments can be supported by logic, but the distinction is that they don't need to be, unlike Thinking judgments. But that still does not mean that they are always supported by emotion.

    Quote Originally Posted by Tamske View Post
    3) The main issue is, according to me, that some of the stereotypes or characteristics are seen as intrinsically better. Is objectivity intrinsically better? I don't think so. But as long as the nuance of "better" is attached to it, people will be offended if you say they are not "objective", and rightly so.
    I feel the same way. But there are times when Feelers are bothered more by Thinkers acting as if it is better, despite knowing themselves that it isn't.

  7. #47
    not to be trusted miss fortune's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Enneagram
    827 sp/so
    Posts
    20,122

    Default

    well... according to stereotypes I should be...

    * LOUD
    * stupid
    *unable to grasp the abstract
    * enjoy watching football (ok... I DID enjoy watching Jackass 3D, but that's not football!!! )
    * inept at dealing with emotional situations
    * I should easily offend others
    * I should always be late
    * I should be good at art


    of course, according to stereotypes I should also be a dude
    “Oh, we're always alright. You remember that. We happen to other people.” -Terry Pratchett

  8. #48
    ReflecTcelfeR
    Guest

    Default

    NT's need a computer chip too feel.

  9. #49
    Feline Member kelric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    MBTI
    INtP
    Posts
    2,169

    Default

    Not so much a stereotype of a particular type, but of type itself...

    "People of all types are either caricatures of their type... or lying/too ignorant to know themselves."
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

  10. #50
    Listening Oaky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/so
    Socionics
    SLI None
    Posts
    6,168

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by INTP View Post
    too bad these lower life forms(people who are not you) are incapable of understanding the intj jokes since they are simply that brilliant
    Precisely!

Similar Threads

  1. Post your typological Profile, EVERYONE!
    By SolitaryWalker in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 130
    Last Post: 09-17-2017, 11:29 AM
  2. Difference Between Stereotypes and Typology
    By Smilephantomhive in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 06-15-2016, 03:03 PM
  3. MBTI stereotypes
    By erm in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 134
    Last Post: 06-15-2015, 07:07 AM
  4. Notes on typology
    By SolitaryWalker in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 08-04-2012, 09:04 AM
  5. [MBTItm] Sensors, how do you react to stereotypes?
    By labyrinthine in forum The SP Arthouse (ESFP, ISFP, ESTP, ISTP)
    Replies: 54
    Last Post: 02-01-2010, 08:34 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