Read first! Disclaimer: This thread is not about ranking the various types against each other. Don't post which types you feel are superior or inferior for whatever reason you may have, this is not the Fluff section. :P
Also note I'm not a psychologist, but merely a layman, I'd love to hear peoples thoughts on what I'm about to say.
I have been having some thoughts about type strengths correlating to brain effeciency, which might bleed towards even explaining some mental deffeciencies or on the other side of the spectrum, genius.
We all know MBTI is merely a tool for categorization. It's not like INTP's have different brains than ESFJ's, but INTP's use their brains differently than ESFJ's. Possibly by supercharging different areas of the brain, but that's another topic.
Now if we know that is true, then it could also very well be true that the skill at which a certain type uses his brain can directly correlate to the ability and cpacity of that person in his or her area of expertise.
I don't think it would be far fetched to think there may be inferior and superior type people (in terms of usage of cognatve processes) walking around.
Should not be seen as an unhealthy type by mbti standards as explained below.
A person who is not fully capable of using his or her brain in order to fully use the sets of cognative functions of their preference. Like type XXXX with dom A, aux B might not be able to fully tap into both cognative functions, and either have a weak dom, or a nearly non existing aux. Possibly resulting in a state where that person is forced in their inferior completely as a result of not being able to keep up with their environment.
A person who ignores or misuses his or her cognative functions, often resulting stress and depression.
A type that is adept and effecient in their use of cognative functions. Especially when matured, not only will they boast a very strong dominant and auxillery, they are much less likely to be bothered much by their inferior. These are the general masses.
A type that is so effecient and adept at their brain, they can even transcend the functions set for any of the types. Not only will they achieve perfect control of their own functions, they can tap into the full spectrum of their auxilliries naturally. No doubt still preferencing their inherited auxillery, but to be able to use the opposite of their aux as skillfully as their inherited aux as a means to supply their dominate function.
To understand my reasoning, compare it against peoples ability to multitask. Some people can do one thing at a time, some two, others even more. How much a person can do at once says something about how good and effecient that person is in controlling the part of the brain that allows for that. Why could the same not be true for cognative functions?
These thoughts came to mind when thinking about some of the world's greatest. How much I reveled at their capacity of their cognative functions, I realized in some cases, it almost doesn't make sense that they have achieved what they did through their MBTI functions alone. As if they have an advantage over the limitations of their own type.
Einstein is seen as an INTP, yet I marvel at his intellect and how he could possibly reach his levels of understanding in unknown subjects to man through the use of Ti-Ne-Si, but if I add Ni into the picture, it seems to make much more sense. If he had a firm grip of the introspetive nature of Ni added to his auxillery Ne, I can totally see how someone of his intellect could explore and reach the unknown in the way that he did.
Like he was not Ti-Ne-Si, but Ti-N-Si. (Or Ti-Ne+Ni-Si).
Am I on to something or am I going to be shot down.