The Smartest type.

[ReadingRainbows]

I'm going to say INFJ with INTJ in close second

This made me lol.

I think intelligence cannot be measured effectively because of all the fluid personal definitions.

 

[Oaky]

I think these three types are the smartest (INTJ, INTP, INFP), anyone agree with me?

Oh? You are a confused individual. Are you seriously changing your beginning post to this? Especially after people had mistaken your initial post to mean intelligence instead of academic smarts.
No, I do not agree with you. It's statistically shown that SJ types, perhaps scoped to ISTJs would be highest in the academic level.

 

[PH.]

I also think S types. In the Netherlands about 90% of the questions in a test are sensor-type questions. There are just a few intuitive ones. "And those were the hardest", quote my teacher. For me it was the other way around. I had trouble reproducing mindless facts and data when they weren't put in a context, but on the questions requiring insight I scored. As a result people who were very S but also dumber than me, got higher grades.

I have to admit I'm very opinioned about education as it is now. There is far too much focus on reproducing in stead of seeing connections between things. Data only gets meaning when you connect it with other data, but somehow that doesn't seem to be the point of education how I experience it. They just want you to reproduce.

 

[Jonny]

Oh? You are a confused individual. Are you seriously changing your beginning post to this? Especially after people had mistaken your initial post to mean intelligence instead of academic smarts.
No, I do not agree with you. It's statistically shown that SJ types, perhaps scoped to ISTJs would be highest in the academic level.

What are you talking about oaks? Confused as usual. I agree with the OP.

 

[skylights]

e - open to external information v. i - locked up in one's head
n - focused on possibility v. s - focused on boring stuff
f - adept with humans v. t - robot
p - fun and adaptable v. j - stick-in-the-mud

obviously we have a winner here

 

[Oaky]

What are you talking about oaks? Confused as usual. I agree with the OP.

I'm talking about the academic lookup of the left brain practices and avoidance of the right brain. OP mentioned he was speaking academic terms in which case he is false statistically. The most adhered to of the types to academic standards tend to be ISTJs.

 

[Jonny]

I's just messin oaks. You're correct.

 

[Oaky]

Tis alright. I think it's good for the OP to know. He doesn't seem very understanding of mbti. A clear factor with change in his initial post.

 

[Viridian]

Is this going to turn into the Bride of the Consarned "Stupid ESFPs!" Thread?

 

[entropie]

I am so smart, so god damn smart, I am next level !!

[YOUTUBE="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YjQPeyKkHj4&feature=related"].[/YOUTUBE]

 

[INTPness]

SJ's? I know ISTJ's do well in school, but I'd take an INTJ in the classroom over an ISTJ any day of the week. Especially graduate level stuff - Master's, Ph.D., etc.

If you're talking something like accounting, then yeah, ISTJ's. But, the deeper you go into a subject, the ISTJ's will lose interest. I know 2 ISTJ's who did awesome in high school and college (accounting; engineering), but when you started talking about the Master's type material - the deeper understanding of the subject, they checked out. They didn't want anything to do with it. When you get into more complex subjects like Physics, neuroscience, and medicine, stuff like that, SJ would not be the *best in the classroom*. Also, stuff like languages and humanities would, all things equal, tend to be more fit for some of the NF types. It really just depends on what types of skills are required for each subject.

 

[Oaky]

When we walk into independent ideas to cause effect and scope ourselves to a profession, perhaps. Things become more diverse. I assume the OP is talking about high school though. He seems rather young.

 

[INTPness]

If he's talking about grades K-8, then I'd say INTP.

No, but seriously, I know an INTJ who is very competitive in the classroom and if he were in this thread, he'd say, "I could outperform an ISTJ in any classroom on any day. No question about it." Some of that is maybe arrogance, but I do think some of it is truth. There are many other ways to measure a man than just by his classroom performance, but if we're talking strictly about in-class abilities....................

 

[IZthe411]

You have different kinds of "smart". S's are smart in a way that is measured by grades in school. N's are another type of smart. If you put all the types together, then you'd have the smartest group of people. Kind of what Mace attempted actually

Edit: not any more xD

You have 85 more posts to get it together before you lose credibility around here.

 

[IZthe411]

SJ's? I know ISTJ's do well in school, but I'd take an INTJ in the classroom over an ISTJ any day of the week. Especially graduate level stuff - Master's, Ph.D., etc.

If you're talking something like accounting, then yeah, ISTJ's. But, the deeper you go into a subject, the ISTJ's will lose interest. I know 2 ISTJ's who did awesome in high school and college (accounting; engineering), but when you started talking about the Master's type material - the deeper understanding of the subject, they checked out. They didn't want anything to do with it. When you get into more complex subjects like Physics, neuroscience, and medicine, stuff like that, SJ would not be the *best in the classroom*. Also, stuff like languages and humanities would, all things equal, tend to be more fit for some of the NF types. It really just depends on what types of skills are required for each subject.

Depends on the subject, man. I can't stress that enough. IMO there are some things where it's just not interesting or even necessary to go beyond the surface. Other areas, I don't mind the deep dive and I'd rather go there than stay surface. Depends. I will say that an N type will probably have more input into the "deeper" discussion, though.

 

[Oaky]

I think you'll find, INTPness, that ISTJs are very very consistent in their work, perhaps the most consistent of all types according to the profiles. That INTJ shouldn't lay that down so easily. Whether or not he has a talent of recognising dreams and moving towards them doesn't necessarily make him a harder worker.

 

[IZthe411]

I think you'll find, INTPness, that ISTJs are very very consistent in their work, perhaps the most consistent of all types according to the profiles. That INTJ shouldn't lay that down so easily. Whether or not he has a talent of recognising dreams and moving towards them doesn't necessarily make him a harder worker.

Exactly. Grades are usually handed out for results, (completed papers, assignments, homework, etc). Any smart student will know they need to focus on those for success.

I can tell you, in the work I do, I love the thought process and discussion, hate the administrative nature (documentation and tracking). You can have the best ideas and input, but if you can't translate that into something tangible in an organized, timely manner, you're not likely to succeed.

Most endeavors in life need both S and N type strengths.

 

[INTPness]

Depends on the subject, man. I can't stress that enough. IMO there are some things where it's just not interesting or even necessary to go beyond the surface. Other areas, I don't mind the deep dive and I'd rather go there than stay surface. Depends. I will say that an N type will probably have more input into the "deeper" discussion, though.

Yes, I agree. I even said the same thing at the end of post #31. Performance is subject dependent - not only because of inherent skill set, but because of *interest* in the subject. If one is interested, they'll do well.

 

[INTPness]

I think you'll find, INTPness, that ISTJs are very very consistent in their work, perhaps the most consistent of all types according to the profiles. That INTJ shouldn't lay that down so easily. Whether or not he has a talent of recognising dreams and moving towards them doesn't necessarily make him a harder worker.

I agree with the hard work and consistency for ISTJ's. Defnitely. But, when you start talking about recognizing dreams and moving toward them, that's completely different than simple "classroom performance". Now we're getting into a much more broad discussion.

 

[Oaky]

I agree with the hard work and consistency for ISTJ's. Defnitely. But, when you start talking about recognizing dreams and moving toward them, that's completely different than simple "classroom performance". Now we're getting into a much more broad discussion.

There is academic criteria. The ISTJs may do better in adhering to them in accordance to their consistency. The INTJs will have their vision and try to go ways of their own risking the borders. They may be less consistent in following the particular criteria set to them. Their will be more grounding for the ISTJ while unpredictability for the INTJ.