This is too much of a topic for me to try talking about at this time of night, but I can't sleep, and yet, I'm tired. So it will probably be a rather poor quality of writing.
I have wanted to talk about this for a while. I believe that almost all of the people calling themselves intuitives are actually sensors. I estimate that 80% to 90% of them are sensors.
The MBTI test needs to be drastically rewritten. Since we don't have the power to change the official MBTI test, I would want a group of people to create an open-source test, with a different name (not MBTI).
Let me tell you how I interpret some of the questions. I don't have the test here in front of me so I am recalling them from memory, which means I can't recall many of them.
Are you more focused on:
what is possible
what is actual
How did I answer that question? I liked 'what is possible' because there are so many things that I just don't like about the real world. I am dissatisfied with many things and I wish things were different than they actually are. So ANYBODY who feels disgruntled and dissatisfied with the world as it is will say they like the idea of 'what is possible' instead of 'what is actual,' and they will be labeled an intuitive. I always have a list of 'possibilities,' or options, or different ways something could be done, but that doesn't make me an intuitive.
In fact, I might argue that intuitives like to think about things that are IMpossible! They like logical contradictions and putting together ideas to create things that don't really exist. 'What is possible' doesn't describe that - it would be described as 'what is impossible.'
Much of the conflict between sensors and intuitives happens when an intuitive suggests an idea that is too abstract and general to work in reality, and the sensors tell them it's impossible and they need to work out the details.
Meanwhile, the intuitives think that they themselves are suggesting other 'possible' ways of doing things or seeing things, and that everyone else is seeing only what is already there. So the test question says 'what is possible/actual.' And the sensors would respond by saying that the intuitives' ideas are impossible, and listing a whole bunch of details to show why some idea can't be done in reality.
The word 'possible' might mean something different to intuitives than it does to sensors.
I could go on and on about this for a long time. It would help if I were looking at the test itself so that I could give more examples.
I'd like to see a test where a question described a real situation that you might experience and then it asks you what you would do. Instead of choosing from ONLY TWO answers (why should there be only two answers to choose from?) you could choose ALL THAT APPLY from a long list of answers. Each question could be thoroughly ripped apart and mined for information.
I don't like the 'You go to a party, what do you do?' question, but that's the only example I can think of. And then they would list a bunch of things that REAL intuitives do when they walk into a room full of people - and it could test for Ne and Ni both - and things that real sensors do when they walk into a room full of people. It would talk about every function that you might use in that situation and you can check off more than one answer. Again, there's no reason to make every question have only two answers to choose from.
The MBTI test isn't working. I am SURE there are thousands of 'intuitives' who are actually sensors. There is a stigma saying sensors are bad and intuitives are good and special and wonderful. I used to test as INTP, INTJ, and INFP. It was hard for me to change it to ISFP. I wanted to feel that I was special and better than the 'ordinary' people around me.
But how can you ever learn how to use the intuitive functions and the other functions if you haven't even admitted that you're actually a sensor? I have tried to understand the other functions, based on their descriptions, and based on watching how other people talk and act. Usually, if they say something unthinkable that I never could have come up with myself, it's intuition. If I skim over it quickly and feel as though the words don't mean anything to me, then it's intuition.
I have found that if I try to use the other functions besides my dominant and supportive, I almost always slip back into the habitual way of thinking. It's so hard to understand them or see them or grasp what they are. It works better if I make sure to use two at once - use one of the perceiving functions with one of the judging functions - don't try to just use only one by itself. It helps if I read books that I know have been written by intuitives, the very abstract books that are almost impossible to understand. So I can slightly use the other functions.
But I am saying, if this is so hard for me to do, it's probably hard for everyone else to do it too. Everyone else probably has just as much difficulty understanding the functions that aren't their own. So how would you know if you were totally mistaken about your type? If you can't recognize or understand the real thing?
The test needs to be totally redesigned and it will have little resemblance to the original test. I don't want to bother trying to convince the 'owners' of the official MBTI test to change it. An open source test would be fine.
I guess that's enough for now. Sometimes I go on writing a book-length monologue and I will try not to do that.