User Tag List

First 2345614 Last

Results 31 to 40 of 251

  1. #31
    Blah Orangey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    ESTP
    Enneagram
    6w5
    Socionics
    SLE
    Posts
    6,364

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IceBlock View Post
    God, what an awful article. Really, I even feel sad with people like him being a fellow N.
    That guy is ISFJ! ISFJ I say!

    And not because he's stupid (which he is, but that's not the point.)
    Artes, Scientia, Veritasiness

  2. #32
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sx/so
    Socionics
    Will
    Posts
    5,927

    Default

    http://mbtitruths.blogspot.com/2011/...d-mbti_20.html

    A commonly held misconception within the MBTI community is that iNtuitives are smarter than Sensors. They are thought to have higher intelligence, but this belief is misguided. In an assessment of famous people with high IQs, the vast majority of them are iNtuitive. However, IQ tests measure only two types of intelligences: linguistic and logical-mathematical. In addition to these, there are six other types of intelligence: spatial, bodily-kinesthetic, musical, interpersonal, intrapersonal, and naturalistic. Sensors would probably outscore iNtuitives in several of these areas. Perhaps MBTI users should come to see iNtuitives, who make up 25 percent of the population, as having a unique type of intelligence instead of superior intelligence.

    That's what that website thinks.

  3. #33

    Default

    Is it wrong to say Introverts are going to be more into reading than Extroverts?

    Is it wrong to say Judgers are going to be more organized than Perceivers?

    Is it wrong to say Thinkers are going to be less into people than Feelers?

    The whole purpose of MBTI is to see the pros and cons of different types. All different types have different things that make them tick.

    ESFP's are going to be more inclined to party than an INTJ. That's just the way it is. People who party more are usually going to be less intelligent than people who stay home and study. That's also just the way it is.

    I would love for somebody to show me where I am wrong. Obviously some sensors are smarter than intuitives and some intuitives are dumber than some sensors, but as a whole intuitives are smarter than sensors. Please show me how this is incorrect. Please be as sensorific as you can with your facts, details and "real-world" logic and prove me wrong.

  4. #34
    Blah Orangey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    ESTP
    Enneagram
    6w5
    Socionics
    SLE
    Posts
    6,364

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by slayerment View Post
    Is it wrong to say Introverts are going to be more into reading than Extroverts?

    Is it wrong to say Judgers are going to be more organized than Perceivers?

    Is it wrong to say Thinkers are going to be less into people than Feelers?

    The whole purpose of MBTI is to see the pros and cons of different types. All different types have different things that make them tick.

    ESFP's are going to be more inclined to party than an INTJ. That's just the way it is. People who party more are usually going to be less intelligent than people who stay home and study. That's also just the way it is.

    I would love for somebody to show me where I am wrong. Obviously some sensors are smarter than intuitives and some intuitives are dumber than some sensors, but as a whole intuitives are smarter than sensors. Please show me how this is incorrect. Please be as sensorific as you can with your facts, details and "real-world" logic and prove me wrong.
    Wait, are you the ISFJ-in-denial that made the post that the OP linked to? BAHAHAHA.
    Artes, Scientia, Veritasiness

  5. #35
    garbage
    Guest

    Default

    First stab at this
    Quote Originally Posted by slayerment View Post
    ESFP's are going to be more inclined to party than an INTJ. That's just the way it is. People who party more are usually going to be less intelligent than people who stay home and study. That's also just the way it is.
    Real-world logic: many people don't study their asses off because they're so intelligent that they don't need to study.

    Sensoriffic data, as in, supportive studies:
    Positive correlation between drinking and intelligence
    Conscientiousness is negatively correlated with intelligence, and Judging is positively correlated with Conscientiousness, and INTJ is a judging type--you can do the math.

    I could go on.

    edit:
    Quote Originally Posted by Orangey View Post
    Wait, are you the ISFJ-in-denial that made the post that the OP linked to? BAHAHAHA.
    Holy shit, I just noticed that. How.. lack.. of sensorism of me..

  6. #36
    Senior Member Jaguar's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    12,426

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by slayerment View Post
    Is it wrong to say Introverts are going to be more into reading than Extroverts?

    Is it wrong to say Judgers are going to be more organized than Perceivers?

    Is it wrong to say Thinkers are going to be less into people than Feelers?

    The whole purpose of MBTI is to see the pros and cons of different types. All different types have different things that make them tick.

    ESFP's are going to be more inclined to party than an INTJ. That's just the way it is. People who party more are usually going to be less intelligent than people who stay home and study. That's also just the way it is.

    I would love for somebody to show me where I am wrong. Obviously some sensors are smarter than intuitives and some intuitives are dumber than some sensors, but as a whole intuitives are smarter than sensors. Please show me how this is incorrect. Please be as sensorific as you can with your facts, details and "real-world" logic and prove me wrong.
    This was your post before you deleted it:

    I love how rather than refuting the actual argument presented you all choose to simply throw ad hominem attacks on the author...
    Do tell, who is the author?
    Could it be the person who just joined the forum and came straight to this thread to make their first post?

  7. #37
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bologna View Post
    First stab at this

    Real-world logic: many people don't study their asses off because they're so intelligent that they don't need to study.

    Sensoriffic data, as in, supportive studies:
    Positive correlation between drinking and intelligence
    Conscientiousness is negatively correlated with intelligence, and Judging is positively correlated with Conscientiousness, and INTJ is a judging type--you can do the math.

    I could go on.
    As could I.

    About IN being correlated with intelligence, and INT being even more highly correlated.

    As you said, though, P is indeed positively correlated with intelligence, while J is negatively correlated.

    It's just, the other three letters do too, and the correlation is actually stronger with those other three letters than the fourth.

    (Interesting side note: from the study I've spent the most time looking at, the two types where the correlation didn't hold true were the ISTs.)

    And then I could add that INTJs are actually among the 3 most likely types to either have a substance abuse problem, or to seek help for one (can't remember which), but I know I sure as hell love a good beer.

    / hasn't read thread, but if you're going to make an argument like that, at least do so honestly

    / saw that article a while ago and didn't bother reading it

    / doesn't think ESFPs are inherently stupid

    / is by no means a Democrat, but recognizes that Bill Clinton is fucking smart

    / doesn't think all INTJs are smart

    / has no idea whether that author of that article is an INTJ

    / would assume the author of that article is less smart than Bill Clinton

    / laughs at the fact that Bill Clinton very well may be an ESFP

    / does think N is correlated with intelligence

    / is not afraid to say that correlations and tendencies exist

    / fuck the pc police

  8. #38
    garbage
    Guest

    Default

    OP: if you want to read up on some discussion of the subject of type (specifically ESFP) and intelligence, here's a terrible 80 page thread about it. You can draw your own conclusions (I won't stand in the way of them), but there's some arguments to sift through--probably on both sides--if you want. It'll probably keep you busy for about a million years or so

    Damn it, I don't have it in me to not be at least a bit helpful.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    / is not afraid to say that correlations and tendencies exist

    / fuck the pc police
    Oh no! Not not being PC!

    Look, I thought it was pretty obvious that most of us are making halfassed posts against sentiments like this guy's because it's trite and has been repeated ad nauseam in about a billion threads on this forum. If you want to open another can of worms, be my guest.

    So, you caught me. I wasn't making an honest argument.


    edit: whoops, missed the part where you said you didn't read the thread. you would've had no way of knowing. carry on, then

  9. #39
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bologna View Post
    edit: whoops, missed the part where you said you didn't read the thread. you would've had no way of knowing. carry on, then
    Well, I've read it now, and if it brings the truth any closer to the light, while I didn't read that guy's article in full, the reason I didn't is because it seemed retarded, and the little bit I did read made me strongly question whether the author really has any place discussing peoples' relative levels of intelligence. His understanding of Jungian typology seemed weak at best, and he sounded like an overcompensating (really, really badly) pseudointellectual (and I don't throw that term around often) who's really not that intelligent and would have his ass handed to him in a debate with someone who really knew what's up. It's rather funny to me if he actually came in here to defend himself, cuz I'd chosen to just ignore him when I first saw that piece, but since he's made the effort to come to our neck of the woods, handing him his ass won't really take much work.

  10. #40
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    2,152

    Default

    Define intelligence.

    I reject the notion that IQ is the sole indicator of intelligence.

    Most confirmed N's in my life haven't given off the impression that they are particularly bright. Te seems to be the intelligence function in my mind, probably because I suck at it.

Similar Threads

  1. How Animals are Smarter than Some Humans
    By Mal12345 in forum Home, Garden and Nature
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 12-06-2013, 02:37 PM
  2. [NT] People who are smarter than you
    By animenagai in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 73
    Last Post: 08-25-2012, 11:03 PM
  3. Replies: 91
    Last Post: 01-23-2011, 07:49 PM
  4. How many Ns are in general population ?
    By Chloe in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 64
    Last Post: 09-14-2009, 01:54 PM
  5. [MBTItm] Why Fs are smarter than Ts
    By Martian Manifesto in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 73
    Last Post: 10-12-2008, 11:49 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