WTF I thought MBTI was preference related not intelligence related as I find it to be perfectly plausible that some ESFJs could be smarter than some INTPs even if the INTPs preferences are more predisposed for intellectual endeavors though they may not be as skilled in the area of their interests despite perhaps having more interest in these areas than ESFJs. I am sure they are a million other examples though this one should suffice.
There are likely geniuses in every type, and there are definitely individuals from any type who are more intelligent than individuals from any other type. But that doesn't mean certain types don't tend to be, on average, more intelligent than other types.
How do you personally define intelligence? I know that there are the IQ based definitions of intelligence but it seems to me that everyone seems to have their own variation based on what they deem important.
Frankly, I find the discussions on this topic to be very boring and repetitive. They've been had so many times on this forum, and, while I tend not to get very involved in those discussions, as they are usually of a very low quality, with people making dumb arguments on many sides of the question, I've explained my position a number of times, and, frankly, it's more-or-less correct.
Obviously, there are many different types of intelligence. So, what I was referring to was clearly not "social intelligence", or "emotional intelligence", or any of the other many intelligences one may posit (whether Gardner's eight, or some others). Clearly, ENTJs have their own form of "intelligence" (i.e., what they are good at doing), as do ENFJs, so my comment was by no means an attempt to take that form of intelligence away from them either. I genuinely believe those intelligences are important; frankly, they're probably just as, if not more, important than the type of intelligence I was referring to.
So, that being said (and genuinely believed), I still do think that
g (general intelligence [i.e., what IQ is supposed to measure]) measures
something. And I don't think it's merely "NT intelligence", as some people have inanely tried to argue. If that were the case, then why would INFPs and INFJs tend to have more of it than ENTJs and ENTPs? To an extent, it does tend to be related in some way to N, I think, but I don't think that's a proper excuse to simply write it off. In large part, this is because I don't think someone simply being an N will make them have a higher IQ than someone who is a Sensor (I definitely think there are plenty of Sensors who are more intelligent than plenty of Ns), and I don't think being "more N" makes someone more intelligent.
So, all those things now being said: I think there's a conceptual type of intelligence that has been deemed "intelligence" across many different cultures, for a long amount of time. This is the intelligence of problem-solvers (of whom STs aren't exactly not a part -- and ISTJs, ISTPs, and ESTPs tend to always be at the top of the Sensors, when it comes to intelligence, generally in that order, in the studies I've seen), of people who can think through an issue correctly, follow a line of reasoning properly, make the proper logical deductions (and inductions and abductions), etc.
It's why we can look at a character like Sherlock Holmes, and say that he's intelligent. Or why we think of Leonardo da Vinci, or Plato, or Albert Einstein as being some of the most intelligent human beings who have ever lived.
In our current cultural milieu, people don't like there to be rankings like this, and so saying this stuff, or even believing in some sort of general intelligence, is not politically correct. But I really don't give a shit about that, and, frankly, it's stupid, imo, to think there's
nothing to it.
Yes, this... @<a href="http://www.typologycentral.com/forums/member.php?u=8413" target="_blank">Zarathustra</a> I'm genuinely interested - what is your measure of this?
I think the above should probably answer your question.
If you're saying you were just trolling, I'd definitely considered that.
I barely read that thread, but noticed that part as I skimmed.
The thing is, I've seen you be oblivious about enough other things (I'd have to put you and Riva near the top of the "most oblivious members of the forum" list) that it wouldn't be completely out of the realm of possibility.
I think @<a href="http://www.typologycentral.com/forums/member.php?u=8413" target="_blank">Zarathustra</a>'s probably referring to is
this study, which found positive correlations between intuition, percieving, thinking, and introversion (in that order) and IQ. Making INTPs the most likely to have high IQ's and ENJs the least likely of the intuitives to have high IQs.
That's one I've looked at, but there are others.
This is the one whose data I've spent the most time analyzing:
http://psych.wisc.edu/henriques/papers/Sak.pdf
A quick google search reveals that there's not tons out there on this subject that's like, you know, exactly academically rigorous beyond the study I just mentioned.
mmm...
I've seen a good amount of stuff over the years...
I did find this though from
a blog where a guy conducted his own study on the relationship between type and IQ distribution, and this was one of his conclusions. Thought I'd add it:
It's interesting, but then again, the guy couldn't recall where he'd gotten his statistics on IQ from, which somewhat muddies the waters credibility-wise.
Yeah, I'd be a bit skeptical about that...
Dude can't remember where he got the statistics from??
It also runs contrary to pretty much everything I've seen on the matter.
The types that regularly perform best on IQ tests are the INs (in order: INTP, INTJ, INFP, INFJ).
I've seen some studies that say INTJs do better than INTPs, and some that say INTPs do better than INTJs.
I don't think I've seen any where the INs weren't in the top four, nor any where the ENJs weren't in the bottom two for Ns.
I don´t think there are less ENxJs, just lilkey some ENxJs who are mystiped. Besides, it could still be a matter of pure chance.
I disagree here.
I think there are definitely less ENJs, compared to their % of the population.
Js are less intelligent period, because so many J questions in MBTI tests basically read like "Do you prefer dumb, boring shit or interesting, novel and complex stuff?" where the first choice will favor a J result, the second a P one, irrespective of one´s real preference.
Many E-I questions can equally be understood as "Do you prefer dumb-jocking around with your flatmates or read Wittgenstein in your single-bedroom apartment?".
No wonder someone scoring high in both E and J can be quickly classified as terribly non-intellectually inclined.
I agree here, though.
I think this is one of the factors that leads to skewed results wrt intelligence.
It's the same argument that smart people tend to test as iNtuitives, even if they're Sensors.
I think both are true, but I also don't think they explain the entirety of the differences observed.
This thread contains too many post hoc ergo propter hoc explanations.
