• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

Another Sensor Myth I'd like to discuss

Stanton Moore

morose bourgeoisie
Joined
Mar 4, 2009
Messages
3,900
MBTI Type
INFP
I understand that sometimes MBTI is given more importance than it should have. But, if we really think MBTI is a bunch of overblown jibberish, then why do we all keep coming back to this site and reading/learning about it? If we're all the same and N/S differences are just a figment of our imagination, then why do we even bother to spend time on a website dedicated to MBTI?

What I'm saying is, the reason I come here is because I think there is merit in MBTI. I think there really are differences in our tendencies and the way we tend to behave. Tend is a very key word because it implies that it is not absolute or "all the time". But, it also implies that the differences are real - they really do exist. If they didn't, I wouldn't be here trying to learn about other people's personalities and why they are different from me. If we were all the same and MBTI was completely bogus, I'd have no reason to come here.[/QUOTE]

What I'm saying is, the reason I come here is because I think there is merit in Astrology. I think there really are differences in our tendencies and the way we tend to behave. Tend is a very key word because it implies that it is not absolute or "all the time". But, it also implies that the differences are real - they really do exist. If they didn't, I wouldn't be here trying to learn about other people's personalities and why they are different from me. If we were all the same and Astrology was completely bogus, I'd have no reason to come here.
Poor science is similar to pseudo-science.
 

Thalassa

Permabanned
Joined
May 3, 2009
Messages
25,183
MBTI Type
ISFP
Enneagram
6w7
Instinctual Variant
sx
I don't think that personality theory is overblown - I think there's a lot of truth in Jung.

The problem isn't personality theory in and of itself, but the failure of people to understand what the functions are and what they actually do - like the difference between Si and Se, and what Si detail really means for SJs, and how people with Ti (including INFJs and INTPs) can be annoyingly (to me) over-precise and detailed in their own special, abstract way.

The problem is Keirsey stereotypes, people lumping all Sensors or Intuitives together instead of seperating Si and Se/Ni and Ne, and also people simply not understanding what the functions actually entail, and how they manifest themselves in a personality.

I know - it took me almost two years to finally understand it, to really get through all the muck and confusion and misinformation and the mixing up of different theories, to finally study and grasp Jung better.
 

INTPness

New member
Joined
Jan 22, 2009
Messages
2,157
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w4
...............and how people with Ti (including INFJs and INTPs) can be annoyingly (to me) over-precise and detailed ...........

Exactly. The fact that we (INTP's) are this way shows that there is merit to the system. I don't deny that we can be annoying pricks with our heads up our own rear ends on many occasions. That just shows how we tend to be different from other types.

Edit: By the way, that doesn't mean that we can't change or shouldn't try to change our ways. We should! We should not aspire to be royal pains in the neck. I'm just saying, it's true that there is a tendency within the type to be annoyingly over-precise and detailed.
 

Bamboo

New member
Joined
Jan 28, 2009
Messages
2,689
MBTI Type
XXFP
Exactly. The fact that we (INTP's) are this way shows that there is merit to the system.

-> I judge the system as being precise and having merit.

-> The system says I'm good at judging precision.

-> Therefore, I examine the system,
and
-> I judge the system as being precise and having merit.

rinse and repeat.

What are you saying?
 

INTPness

New member
Joined
Jan 22, 2009
Messages
2,157
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w4
-> I judge the system as being precise and having merit.

-> The system says I'm good at judging precision.

-> Therefore, I examine the system,
and
-> I judge the system as being precise and having merit.

rinse and repeat.

What are you saying?

The system having merit has nothing to do with INTP's being precise. If someone had said, "ENFJ's bug me because they are always organizing group functions", then I would have said:

The fact that ENFJ's do that, and the fact that they are different than other types, gives merit to the system. It gives merit to the fact that each of the 16 types tend towards cerain preferences/functions/behaviors.

I wasn't necessarily saying anything specific about INTP's in my post. Marmie Dearest pointed out that INTP's are meticulous and that bugs her, so I just took it a step further by saying that is one of the things that gives merit to the INTP archetype/personality profile and MBTI as a whole.
 
G

garbage

Guest
Yeah. No matter their type, the practically-minded person would realize that "big picture" thinking is good in some situations and "detail-oriented" thinking is good in others. Many situations require a bit of both. Oh, and the person should be able to handle both to some extent.

Without some sense of a big-picture focus, your boss's boss could be absolutely bleeding efficiency, since energy is wasted on dealing with minutia--death by a thousand papercuts, as it were. However, if some relevant details are missed, decisions will be made with incomplete information, which also has the potential to destroy an organizaiton.

Your more personal example is another good one--discussing irrelevant matters can be a waste of time and energy if your goal is to come to a common understanding of some more important, overarching issue, and it doesn't take a self-proclaimed intuitive to realize that.


In any case, whether or not it's a reliable framework, MBTI is supposed to address preferences rather than capabilities, and it should open us up to a wider range of capabilities and perspectives. The OP serves as a good reminder of that.
 

Such Irony

Honor Thy Inferior
Joined
Jul 23, 2010
Messages
5,059
MBTI Type
INtp
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
...that Sensors are stuck in details.

I've realized lately that I hate, hate, hate when we get stuck in discussing points that really have no effect on the matter at hand.

Oh, I hate this too.

I do think that it could be an ST thing. Alot of STs like getting quickly to the point it seems.

Yeah, this have never made sense to me either. I'm the opposite to you, though; an intuitive who's very detail oriented. You have to get down to details to get to the interesting Ne-connections I claim...

I can be detail oriented when needed for my job or in areas of real interest to me. I relate to using details as a means of making interesting connections.

Yea, many NTJ's are very detail oriented as well. I'm fairly easy to bounce between details and big picture, with a slightly better focus on details. I wouldn't say I ever "get caught up" in them though. That's counter productive.

I also find it easy to jump back and forth between details and big picture and can focus on either one depending on the situation. I do get caught up on details from time to time, this is most often the case when I'm under stress, I'll sometimes fixate on a detail that later I realize was rather insignificant.

Yeah Si is more detail oriented than Se, and I elaborated on Si because of that, and also because I understand it better.

I think Si and Se are equally detail oriented but in a different way. Si is more about selectivity and depth of details while Se is more likely to be indiscriminately observant of details. Se is more about breadth than depth. For example, Si may not notice every little detail in its environment. It doesn't necessarily pick up details like a sponge like Se would. Si is more likely to focus primarily on details in an area of interest or what they deliberately choose to focus on. Se is less likely to say "I'm going to pay attention to X." Se just takes in the environment as it is. I think Se probably captures a greater number of details because they don't have the limited focus that Si does but Si absorbs them more deeply.
 

Orangey

Blah
Joined
Jun 26, 2008
Messages
6,354
MBTI Type
ESTP
Enneagram
6w5
The problem isn't personality theory in and of itself, but the failure of people to understand what the functions are and what they actually do - like the difference between Si and Se, and what Si detail really means for SJs, and how people with Ti (including INFJs and INTPs) can be annoyingly (to me) over-precise and detailed in their own special, abstract way.

The problem is Keirsey stereotypes, people lumping all Sensors or Intuitives together instead of seperating Si and Se/Ni and Ne, and also people simply not understanding what the functions actually entail, and how they manifest themselves in a personality.

Agreed.
 

wolfy

awsm
Joined
Jun 30, 2008
Messages
12,251
It's useful as a system to look at yourself. A language to talk amongst people familiar with the lingo. That's as far as I'd push it.
 

OrangeAppled

Sugar Hiccup
Joined
Mar 20, 2009
Messages
7,626
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
4w5
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
I think the problem is when people use MBTI to do too much. A few things it is not are skill sets or even preferences for activities. Look at the title of Jung's book: Psychological Types. It's about different mindsets, which we recognize as a significant part of "personality". It's basically the way a person prefers to think about stuff. That means Ss & Ns may notice & think about the same stuff, but they prefer to do it in different ways. It's not about noticing or not noticing details, its about how they are noticed (in the mind I mean). Examples: The focus of the iNtuitive is usually not the literal detail in its own context. The detail is harped on as an extension of something else (an idea, a concept, etc), which can certainly seem pedantic, nitpicky, stuck on semantics, etc. The focus of the sensor can be big picture when placing ideas in the context of reality. The details are just unimportant crap getting in the way then, as they have no significant impact on what is real. And of course this is not about ability - it's about automatic preference for the way you think about stuff.

MBTI is just identifying & categorizing intangible differences in the way people think. It's hard to do because its not concrete - agreeing on exactly how to define these differences is rough when you're groping in the dark & possibly touching on entirely different facets of personality. Jung presented a framework that rings true to many. We "see" these types all around us, we see ourselves in them, but we also recognize they are vague sketches, not complete pictures by a long shot. At best it helps us understand that others think differently, and one way is not more valid than another.

Of course, there are patterns among people who are the same type. If a person prefers a certain thought process, then they are likely to seek contexts which allow them to use it the most, and they may become good at things which require it. This is basically what Gifts Differing & MBTI sought to do - make correlations between type & strengths to guide people in choosing careers based on what social roles they require. It's misleading when people take it to mean that X type is good at Y. Many different types can be good or drawn to the same thing because there's not one way to approach most things. However, sometimes social roles dictate that you have to have a certain mindset (or personality) to make that thing your job, and MBTI was sort of bridging that gap to help individuals find their niche in society, not to box them in or limit them.

An example of this might be the idea that INFPs don't make good leaders. I'd disagree - we may not make good leaders according to the cultural idea of what is "good" or what it means to lead. Most culture/society/whatever say INFPs are better suited to occupations in the arts, spirituality, etc, and in pursuing these, they are more likely to find their mindset accepted & rewarded. It's a matter of their social niche, not their strengths or abilities or even desires. The problem is not everyone finds their personality & social role matching up, which is not problem outside of typing people. It's only when typing people that social role can be blinding to what mindset a person has, and that's when you have the Keirsian philosophy of typing all artists as ISFP (or whatever).

I'm on a tangent now....but I think I made a few points :cheese: .
 

strychnine

All Natural! All Good!
Joined
Jun 23, 2010
Messages
895
What I'm saying is, the reason I come here is because I think there is merit in MBTI. I think there really are differences in our tendencies and the way we tend to behave. Tend is a very key word because it implies that it is not absolute or "all the time". But, it also implies that the differences are real - they really do exist. If they didn't, I wouldn't be here trying to learn about other people's personalities and why they are different from me. If we were all the same and MBTI was completely bogus, I'd have no reason to come here.

Agreed. Overlapping bell curves. The differences exist "on average" or "in general". It's an overall pattern -- doesn't apply to every case.
 

Oaky

Travelling mind
Joined
Jan 15, 2009
Messages
6,180
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
I would think many people generally have a misunderstanding of MBTI and assume it to be boxlike. MBTI is more like: You like tomato, I don't like tomato. You may learn to not eat tomato and be fine without it and I may learn to eat tomato and be fine eating it. MBTI works similarly. Not 'boxlike'. It is a position on a scale where you stand ultimately depending on your most natural preference. Saying you neither like nor dislike the tomato puts you in the center, which is still a postion on the scale.
 

Randomnity

insert random title here
Joined
May 8, 2007
Messages
9,485
MBTI Type
ISTP
Enneagram
6w5
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
I would think many people generally have a misunderstanding of MBTI and assume it to be boxlike. MBTI is more like: You like tomato, I don't like tomato. You may learn to not eat tomato and be fine without it and I may learn to eat tomato and be fine eating it. MBTI works similarly. Not 'boxlike'. It is a position on a scale where you stand ultimately depending on your most natural preference. Saying you neither like nor dislike the tomato puts you in the center, which is still a postion on the scale.

Exactly. And it has nothing to do with how good you are at cooking, growing, or eating tomatoes.
 
Top