User Tag List

First 123412 Last

Results 11 to 20 of 138

  1. #11
    i love skylights's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 so/sx
    Socionics
    EII Ne
    Posts
    7,835

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mace
    For instance, a sensor is said to *live in the moment* whereas the intuitive tends to be *future oriented*. But I really can't buy into this contrast because it takes effort to be able to think about the future, and focus on future oriented goals.
    i think that Ne/Se and Ni/Si both use different versions of future orientation too. my idle thoughts tend to hover in the far future / the "when pigs fly" realm but my behaviors and responses are very much influenced by the moment. i am no J future planner. whereas my mom - ESFJ - is very much a future planner. even though supposedly she is not future oriented.

  2. #12
    Tier 1 Member LunaLuminosity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w6 so/sp
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    2,484

    Default

    1.) How do we know that you are not an intuitive who thought you were intuitive but decided to be a Sensor because being a rare type made you think you were narcissistic?

    2.) I agree that it is better to decide by descriptions rather than tests. If I find that the INTP description fits me better than the ISTP one, why should I be ISTP?

    3.) So by your estimates, about 90% of the world has a Sensing preference? Why should we? What definition of sensing are you working with?

    4.) I understand the other functions in theory, and I think my weaknesses in understanding how to use them are indicative that my type is correct

  3. #13
    S Saiyan God Mace's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Enneagram
    8 sx
    Socionics
    --- Te
    Posts
    2,141

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Metaphor View Post
    Not everyone wants to be an intuitive. Life would be hella' lot easier if I was a sensor.
    I don't think it's a question of difficulty as far as being either sensor, or intuitive is concerned. A sensor could live a particular way that is 'easier' for him/her - should it aid him/her in dealing with whatever anxiety. Similarly, an intuitive won't exactly be bothered by another set of tasks, seeing the ones (s)he's already doing is liable enough. Personally, I just think being a sensor is more likely than it is being an intuitive. The fact is - intuitives have the cognitives that function in the way nature deems fit. Conventionally, I'd think life would be a whole lot easier if we just knew there was a God, and He'd sort all our problems for us.

    *I really don't understand the nature of what you said, tbh.*

    Quote Originally Posted by skylights View Post
    i think that Ne/Se and Ni/Si both use different versions of future orientation too. my idle thoughts tend to hover in the far future / the "when pigs fly" realm but my behaviors and responses are very much influenced by the moment. i am no J future planner. whereas my mom - ESFJ - is very much a future planner. even though supposedly she is not future oriented.
    There's a difference between being a future planner, and being future oriented.

  4. #14
    S Saiyan God Mace's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Enneagram
    8 sx
    Socionics
    --- Te
    Posts
    2,141

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LunaLuminosity View Post
    1.) How do we know that you are not an intuitive who thought you were intuitive but decided to be a Sensor because being a rare type made you think you were narcissistic?
    Good question. I've been ENTJ (possibly ENTP) since around the first time I'd discovered personality type. What's interesting is anybody could feel narcissistic about something. It's what they say - in our natures. However, you have to be pretty rash to give in to any kind of narcissism that it'll make you question your identity, which I find rather naive. If I were showing narcisstic qualities, but at the same time know what I'm doing, I really don't think I'd give in to naivety to reconsider my type. What's even more of a question is - how do you even know you're an intuitive, any way? The point of this thread is to shed light as to whether an intuitive is really an intuitive in the first place. I also did say a lot of intuitives may not really be intuitives, after all.

    2.) I agree that it is better to decide by descriptions rather than tests. If I find that the INTP description fits me better than the ISTP one, why should I be ISTP?
    Well, an ISTP could do all the things an INTP would be doing (by default) - and ISTP's do go to university, and get degrees. That could be done by hard work, and practise. Thus, an ISTP could mimic the descriptions of an INTP, so long as it's going like that.

  5. #15
    resonance entropie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    MBTI
    entp
    Enneagram
    783
    Posts
    16,761

    Default

    It's like the story of Pandora. Pandora opened the box and out came all plagues, misery and hardship, hate and envy, hunger and all illnesses. When Pandora noticed what she had done, she closed the box in time and kept hope inside.
    [URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tEBvftJUwDw&t=0s[/URL]

  6. #16
    insert random title here Randomnity's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Enneagram
    6w5 sp/sx
    Posts
    9,489

    Default

    Some probably are. Probably not most, let alone such a huge fraction.

    I think it's most likely that most people are close to the middle on most traits (normal rather than bimodal-looking curve) since that just makes more sense. So with all the people who run around screaming how extreme they are, it makes me suspect most might be exaggerating a wee bit. We are all human beings, and we're more similar than we are different. Particularly if you're comparing within a single culture.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mace View Post
    Incidentally, I've been thinking about this today. Funny someone raised a thread for it. It's true, as far as I see it. A lot of people who'd typed as intuitives may really not be - and are actually sensors. I also believe there's a huge distinction between an Intuitive, and a Sensor that we're miles off explaining it coherently. For instance, a sensor is said to *live in the moment* whereas the intuitive tends to be *future oriented*. But I really can't buy into this contrast because it takes effort to be able to think about the future, and focus on future oriented goals. The fact that an intuitive does this, just really means a sensor doesn't *not* - but *can't* do it. Both obviously *live* in the present moment, but it seems to me, it needs a sensor to be more forcibly aware of it, whereas it is natural for the intuitive. It's like me playing a videogame, and understanding the mode of play just by 'knowing' what to do. If I were a sensor, or if it were a sensor (in any case), (s)he'd struggle on what to do as a whole, and instead rely on sensory methods to *do this, do that, go this way, go that way, shoot like this, oh perhaps I could try this move* (and then theorise). Theorising is a SENSOR's need - NOT an intuitive's! Sensors need a manual, where it's all pretty much clear for the intuitive. I also don't think philosophers (per se) were exactly intuitives. I actually think sensors looked at intuitives, which gave them a rush of any thing that'd crossed the *mind* that's to jargon. But again, there is a huge distinction between an S, and an N. This would only really indicate, at least on a biological level, that intuitives have well-developed cognitives where the sensors do not. Sensors live like this because they react to, and rely on their stimuli to aid their path ahead. I think this is why they rely on memory, and the ability to recall - to help the senses get results. They need *clues*. Another thing is looking at how the mbti types are based. They're on a continuum. You can't be totally N on the continuum, nor could you absolutely be S - but rather somewhere in between, or smack on in the middle. However, I've also thought that this may be a misrepresentation, and it's only the N that is on the continuum, and S was put there as "zero intuition", which overall shows "you can be so much of an intuitive, but if you're not an intuitive, it must mean you're a sensor - and that's it".
    ummmmmmm. no.....
    -end of thread-

  7. #17
    Carerra Lu IZthe411's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    2,591

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Randomnity View Post
    Some probably are. Probably not most, let alone such a huge fraction.

    I think it's most likely that most people are close to the middle on most traits (normal rather than bimodal-looking curve) since that just makes more sense. So with all the people who run around screaming how extreme they are, it makes me suspect most might be exaggerating a wee bit. We are all human beings, and we're more similar than we are different. Particularly if you're comparing within a single culture.

    ummmmmmm. no.....
    Yeah that's what I thought when I read the OP but have said it a million times. On this forum, there are those, who I say definitely approach discussion and though process way different than I do, and by evidence lends itself to them being more Intuitive than I am. Then I interact with others who I feel that, while they self-identify as an intuitive, there's not much difference in their approach to discussion or thought process over mines. I don't consider them as fakes- I don't know them to make that call.

    Zarathustra made a good point in a thread how you can't type people by what they do. He's right. It's what happened in the background that determines which function is influencing the action. That's harder to put into words, IMO.

    And I agree- that explanation was horrible.

  8. #18
    Tier 1 Member LunaLuminosity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w6 so/sp
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    2,484

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mace View Post
    What's even more of a question is - how do you even know you're an intuitive, any way? The point of this thread is to shed light as to whether an intuitive is really an intuitive in the first place. I also did say a lot of intuitives may not really be intuitives, after all.
    Well the point of the OP was basically "It was so hard for me to admit I'm a sensor, so maybe it is hard for the current intuitives as well." And my proposition is maybe it was actually hard to become S because you actually are N. If the new type doesn't seem right, then it probably isn't.

    I'm pretty sure I'm intuitive because that's what I show preference for. It isn't much more difficult than that =P

  9. #19
    Intriguing.... Quinlan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    MBTI
    ISFP
    Enneagram
    9w1
    Socionics
    Booo
    Posts
    3,005

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mace View Post
    Incidentally, I've been thinking about this today. Funny someone raised a thread for it. It's true, as far as I see it. A lot of people who'd typed as intuitives may really not be - and are actually sensors. I also believe there's a huge distinction between an Intuitive, and a Sensor that we're miles off explaining it coherently. For instance, a sensor is said to *live in the moment* whereas the intuitive tends to be *future oriented*. But I really can't buy into this contrast because it takes effort to be able to think about the future, and focus on future oriented goals. The fact that an intuitive does this, just really means a sensor doesn't *not* - but *can't* do it. Both obviously *live* in the present moment, but it seems to me, it needs a sensor to be more forcibly aware of it, whereas it is natural for the intuitive. It's like me playing a videogame, and understanding the mode of play just by 'knowing' what to do. If I were a sensor, or if it were a sensor (in any case), (s)he'd struggle on what to do as a whole, and instead rely on sensory methods to *do this, do that, go this way, go that way, shoot like this, oh perhaps I could try this move* (and then theorise). Theorising is a SENSOR's need - NOT an intuitive's! Sensors need a manual, where it's all pretty much clear for the intuitive. I also don't think philosophers (per se) were exactly intuitives. I actually think sensors looked at intuitives, which gave them a rush of any thing that'd crossed the *mind* that's to jargon. But again, there is a huge distinction between an S, and an N. This would only really indicate, at least on a biological level, that intuitives have well-developed cognitives where the sensors do not. Sensors live like this because they react to, and rely on their stimuli to aid their path ahead. I think this is why they rely on memory, and the ability to recall - to help the senses get results. They need *clues*. Another thing is looking at how the mbti types are based. They're on a continuum. You can't be totally N on the continuum, nor could you absolutely be S - but rather somewhere in between, or smack on in the middle. However, I've also thought that this may be a misrepresentation, and it's only the N that is on the continuum, and S was put there as "zero intuition", which overall shows "you can be so much of an intuitive, but if you're not an intuitive, it must mean you're a sensor - and that's it".
    Wow, what a biased post. This ^ is what I hate about how people use mbti.
    Act your age not your enneagram number.

    Quinlan's Creations

  10. #20
    Senior Member IndyGhost's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    MBTI
    ISFP
    Enneagram
    4w5 sx/sp
    Socionics
    SEI
    Posts
    2,399

    Default

    I've actually met a number of ISFP's that believe they are an INFP, INFJ, or ENFP. It's typically because they have a strong Ni and a strong idealism, and so they believe themselves INFP or INFJ... when they're so obviously stereotypical ISFP with a definite showing Se. But this is typically something I've noticed of real life friends that don't really have a deep interest in mbti... merely took it for a class or because a psych major friend had them do it. So, I guess it shouldn't bother me... but for some reason it does.... because I think, "You're an absolutely ah-mazing ISFP and you need to embrace it!"
    "I don't know a perfect person.
    I only know flawed people who are still worth loving."
    -John Green

Similar Threads

  1. Can this be the reason why Ns think that sensors are "stupid" ?
    By Virtual ghost in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 120
    Last Post: 03-10-2015, 05:02 PM
  2. How is it that some people are Sensors and others Intuitives?
    By trickyleg in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 02-23-2011, 04:03 PM
  3. What are the most sought after personality types? and the ones you detest...
    By curiousel in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 98
    Last Post: 08-11-2010, 10:06 AM
  4. Why do you think that you are misunderstood ?
    By Virtual ghost in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 03-08-2009, 01:41 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