• 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.

Ns are smarter than Ss?!

Siúil a Rúin

when the colors fade
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
14,037
MBTI Type
ISFP
Enneagram
496
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
This beating a dead horse logic (which has also been applied to Feelers) has been going something like this for years...

Sensors are stupid
That person is stupid
Therefore he must be a Sensor which proves...

(repeat ad infinitum)
 
G

garbage

Guest
Bullshit like this has to be stopped because people will buy it and spread it to others. I'm doing my part through a bit of social shaming, because it's fun to do and the guy who wrote that article deserves it.

Remember, being an N doesn't mean that you are not an S and that you are not in touch with the 5 senses. It means that you have moved past it. An N can be an S. An S can't be an N. It's an evolution thing. I know what I'm saying pisses you off, but that's okay. Somebody has to say it.
laffo

Why would a high test score matter if somebody with a low test score can hire these people?
Said in reference to ACT; applies equally to IQ, which he uses to support his conclusion

It's kinda funny really. I could care less if there is data to back something up or not. All I care about is if something makes sense or doesn't. But even when there is data to back something up the people who are supposedly into facts and real-world things choose to refuse to accept them. Sensors choosing not to accept the facts and being unable to present their own facts to the contrary is yet another fact on why they are less intelligent. They're hypocrites. You guys are supposed to be into facts, not me. But you're not. You hide behind calling yourselves pragmatic and realistic but you are neither. Remember what I said about evolution?...
Not touching this one. I don't have to touch this one. Its problems are self-evident.

This beating a dead horse logic (which has also been applied to Feelers) has been going something like this for years...

Sensors are stupid
That person is stupid
Therefore he must be a Sensor which proves...

(repeat ad infinitum)
Exactly this
 

Nicodemus

New member
Joined
Aug 2, 2010
Messages
9,756
Even if Ns were on average smarter than Ss, which may statistically be the case, that would not say anything about you or me or anybody else.
 

FireShield98

Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2011
Messages
455
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sp
Yeah, that is a stupid generalization. My ESFP friend is way smarter than my ENFP friend. I have an ISTJ friend of average intelligence and an ISTJ friend who gets better grades than I do (but that's because he studies - I'm more naturally intelligent than him, as shown by SAT scores). My mom's IQ is borderline genius and she was invited into Yale (she didn't apply, they asked her to go - she went to UConn instead to be with her friends) and she's an ISFJ. My dad is also very smart and he's an ESTJ. My older brother's also really smart and he's an ISTP. Ns aren't always smarter than Ss, not to mention that there are different types of intelligence.
 

Winds of Thor

New member
Joined
Jan 11, 2009
Messages
1,842
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
3w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
No. Rather, another question would be, at what is someone smart? People have different intelligence sets. This type of thing differs from person to person.
 
G

garbage

Guest
Also: the guy who wrote the article doesn't know what "preferring intuition" and "preferring sensing" actually mean in either a Jungian or MBTI context.

He kind of .. you know, skimmed those chapters and skipped over a bunch of facts, drawing some misinformed conclusions with his limited data.

I wouldn't listen to him.

--

Also: if anyone on this forum tells you that intuitives are smarter than sensors and points you to official MBTI/IQ correlation stats to back that up, remind them that that same person also probably doesn't trust the official MBTI and so the correlation would be meaningless to them if they thought about it for more than a second or so.

--

Also: In before the "woe is me, we're smarter and better than S's but we have to conform to their world" bullshit
 

pinkgraffiti

New member
Joined
Mar 20, 2011
Messages
1,482
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
748
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
yes!
ok, i said it, now it's true. you can close the thread.
 

Elfboy

Certified Sausage Smoker
Joined
Nov 26, 2008
Messages
9,625
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Most T types have trust issues.

Most N types just delve into fantasy to rationalize trauma.

Most E types secretly feel that they must build connection with others because if they don't others won't. They wonder subconsciously what this says about them.

Most J types feel like they missed out on fun when they were younger.

Most I types feel like they're not important enoughto be noticed.

Most P types regret not being diligent enough in the past.

Most F types feel emotionally crazy.

So?

the bold points are not true at all

PS:
my own thoughts
- Ns on average are more intelligent
- but intelligence is overrated
- as [MENTION=13646]Haven[/MENTION] pointed out, reality tends to favor Sensors
- also, society favors SJs and the the economy/job market favor TJs
- NF males are by far the most discriminated against typology demographic IRL

in conclusion, I do believe that most ENFPs, including myself, are smarter than the majority of people (I'm not going to sugar coat this, there are plenty of exceptions, ie, extremely intelligent Sensors and dumb Intuitives, but I think the overall trend is obvious), but that comes at a price, a price I'm all too familiar with. the older I get, the more I'm starting to think "who fucking cares about being more intelligent, being more "deep" or being more intellectual" I am naturally inclined toward all of these things, but they haven't gotten me a damn thing in the real world. being an ENFP has probably helped me get to know myself faster than other types, learn to love myself faster than other types and really think about what things mean to me and what I want out of life. this is all great 'n all, but after all that internal stuff is taken care of action is all that matters in this world
 

Rasofy

royal member
Joined
Mar 7, 2011
Messages
5,881
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Fast considerations:
- You can't measure the IQ of a person that lived 500 years ago. That's insanity. Not even their mbti type can be properly known, but that's another story.
- Having a high IQ doesn't make you smart. You can have a big IQ and suck in life big time. Besides, a high IQ is often correlated with some bad stuff (poor grasp of social norms, depression, big ego).
 

Elfboy

Certified Sausage Smoker
Joined
Nov 26, 2008
Messages
9,625
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Fast considerations:
- You can't measure the IQ of a person that lived 500 years ago. That's insanity. Not even their mbti type can be properly known, but that's another story.
- Having a high IQ doesn't make you smart. You can have a big IQ and suck in life big time. Besides, a high IQ is often correlated with some bad stuff (poor grasp of social norms, depression, big ego).

this is my point, Intuitives have more raw intelligence, but raw intelligence has very little actual value past a certain point (being above average intelligence is useful, but being genius level intelligence is not. in fact, there is a point where high intelligence becomes a liability, making it harder to get out of one's head, not over analyze and relate to people who are of average intelligence). genius level intelligence people have brains like hungry stomachs. they are constantly hungry, extremely high maintenance and they need to be constantly solving complex puzzles or they get bored
 

Orangey

Blah
Joined
Jun 26, 2008
Messages
6,354
MBTI Type
ESTP
Enneagram
6w5
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.)
 

RaptorWizard

Permabanned
Joined
Mar 19, 2012
Messages
5,895
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
http://mbtitruths.blogspot.com/2011/03/iq-and-mbti_20.html#!/2011/03/iq-and-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.
 

slayerment

New member
Joined
Jun 3, 2012
Messages
8
MBTI Type
ESFJ
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.
 

Orangey

Blah
Joined
Jun 26, 2008
Messages
6,354
MBTI Type
ESTP
Enneagram
6w5
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.
 
G

garbage

Guest
First stab at this
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:
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..
 

Jaguar

Active member
Joined
May 5, 2007
Messages
20,647
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? ;)
 

Zarathustra

Let Go Of Your Team
Joined
Oct 31, 2009
Messages
8,110
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
 
G

garbage

Guest
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.

/ 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
 

Zarathustra

Let Go Of Your Team
Joined
Oct 31, 2009
Messages
8,110
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.
 

xisnotx

Permabanned
Joined
Sep 24, 2010
Messages
2,144
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.
 
Top