Oh really interesting thread! Hope you don't mind my loads of comments that will follow, put in a pretty sarcastic style. ;P My main point is about dissecting irrelevant weak non-causal correlations and about how I don't think the question as put in the thread is even valid.
I wonder of this.
If the sensor to intuit ratio is 3:1, why is that not indicative in online statistics? I think most would theorize sensors are not interested in such a subjective science, instead opting for lolcat videos.
Neat typism about science vs lolcat videos... sorry but that's just that.
I think people prefer to type themselves intuitive because common descriptions boil down to 'you value your thoughts' vs 'you prefer external confirmation of facts'. It is blatant most would choose the former when in reality preferring the latter.
No, I actually prefer the latter and I never had a doubt about that. I suppose this is mostly an Introversion vs Extraversion issue though. No?
If people try to fake it as intuitives, I think that is pretty sad. I can't personally see any self respecting SP pretending to be an N. We are too busy having fun...
Well if some SP likes N things, that has nothing to do with pretending or with self respect. Any type can be busy having fun.
How does one fake seeming N exactly? If you mean they lie about how they live their life so their lives seem more in line with more stereotypically N lives (e.g. "ZOMG I live inside teh head!" "ZOMG I think aboot philosophy liek all the time rofl!" "ZOMG I drew a picture lol i'm a creativ N lolol" etc.) then that doesn't count (not saying the above examples are anything other than caricatures and that any sensors sound like that.) Is there a stereotypical way for N's to live their lives? Lifestyles which individuals N's and S's can vary greatly from the next. IMO N cannot be faked or it would certainly be difficult to do so. Sensor types would not work their way through online in the same way as N's would, e.g. their forum posts would not be engineered towards being connected as one body to the same degree an N's would. They would focus much more on the individual points mentioned in a post than it as one whole. If that makes sense.
I thought drawing was more an S skill, huh...
Also that about focusing on a post as a whole vs focusing on individual points... I can do both. Depends on my mood. Though I do like to see the whole when I feel it's relevant. Not so much type related.
We all know that the common perception of iNtuitives is as intellectual, abstract, uninterested in banalities.
Obviously life does not live up to stereotypes, I am talking about people trying to live up to stereotypes mistakenly.
Praytell why would anyone *want* to look a weird geek? Okay some people might. Sure. I'm going to elaborate on that a few lines below.
I am pretty sure I am iNtuitive, but I don't really try to sound like a genius with each post (though it comes naturally).
But if I DID try to quote Einstein at you in every post, then I would be TRYING to sound like one. Regardless of the fact that a.) that I am one, and b.) that isn't what one really sounds like.
You don't sound like a genius in every each post of yours. Hope that was just meant as a joke.
So far, you just sound like the average poster pretty much. (No, there is no need to connect this observation of mine to what you think about me after reading this.)
On a slightly related note... Seriously all the "philosophy" stuff I see on forums by people self-typing as N's is all the same regurgitated stuff. If you want to make some special theory or other special stuff, get deep into science or real creative arts or something like that, not forgetting about high standards. If you're already doing that as a genius, then great.
Deep down most people do not want to be considered stupid: being "intellectual, abstract, uninterested in banalities" have come to be associated with higher intelligence in society. "Creative and imaginative" too are also admired.
Huh. What does "abstract" even mean? Someone who's truly in their mind a LOT being very abstract can have a bit of trouble handling some physical things and will thus unfortunately be seen as clumsy and weird by some people. (No, I don't really agree with this practice.)
"Intellectual", fine. But see more about that below.
"Uninterested in banalities", fine as long as you don't "mix" with the people who are actually able to enjoy such "banalities". (There is a reason as to why I put the "mix" word in quotes.) Unrelated or not, I've just seen some ENFJ's post about how it's stupid to base a relationship on simple physical things because those things *including* sex are "mundane" (quoting the exact word used). No seriously, do certain people actually look down on basic needs that have a deep evolutionary base?
"Creative", oh, what's the point of purposeless creativity unless it's done with really high standards? Oh yes, it's admired in humour as wittiness. That's about it. Btw, I once did an experiment with people for a research paper to show there is more to the idea of creativity than what the stupid creativity tests attempt to measure.
"Imaginative", the same applies.
Really how about we drop the "N" concept and just goto take IQ tests instead? Sure that's going to be harder to pass with flying colours than an MBTI test.
They want to create an illusion (they do this partially consciously and partially unconsciously) that they are all the above in the hope that it would be realised in reality and become true. I admit I too do this to a degree (make myself seem more intelligent than I am) even though I truly believe myself N (from years of cognitive function theory study.)
The problem is that whilst the N is more associated with these coveted traits than S types they aren't synonymous with being N. Are people trying to seem more N online or just smarter to quell their own insecurities?
Wahahah. N type is really about being theorising all day making weird associations, being clumsy, appearing weird, out of place; how's that so "all above" other people in society? That's how the average N is seen by the average person. Also the average person is often annoyed by someone displaying too much intelligence unless done in a very tactful way. Intelligence on its own isn't very conducive to social appreciation without some basic social skills or without actual big achievements.
So, why would anyone want to be N who isn't actually N? Sounds like to me that it's more the N's that may be having insecurities and being attached to the idea of being N. That's fine, everyone needs to feel they are worth something, and as long as this idea is based on reality it's OK, IMO.
Otoh, how do you convince yourself that your imagination becomes reality without you doing fuck all to put your dreams into reality? You said something like that too. I'd recommend you or anyone avoid deluding yourself about this.
Sometimes I pull off sick sick reads. Like I can hear/read a little bit (as little as 1 sentence) of what someone's saying about their lives/feelings/experiences/beliefs and I know dead-on exactly where they're at and what they need. I feel like I deserve a parade when that happens. I'm INTJ. I'm not supposed to be able to do that
And then I try to do it again. And again. But it's hit and miss
Just curious, do those people thank you later for helping them out in just the right way using your insights?
I can't draw worth a shit, but some people are really good at it, but it's my own fault I don't put the time in to learn and practice.
Well tbh, if you have no goal with it (not even enjoyment as a goal), then don't blame yourself.
yes I do it because I don't want strangers on an internet forum to think I'm intellectually inferior to them. that would be terrible
Hah. Fuck those strangers & Fuck typism!
Feel free to put your actual "type" in your profile if you haven't yet.
And if the dominant belief is that N is more intelligent, then people will try to sound N.
The irony being that the more intelligent ones know better.
Yeah how about starting a thread about how N sucks: inadept at the things of the world, missing simple things, overanalysing simple things, useless generation of random "creative" but irrealistic ideas...... and so on.
Yeah that's not the N of really smart people of course because those actually produce creativity that match high standards. The same may be said of the S of really smart people. My point is that smartness and N/S don't really correlate much.
i believe there are people who are not sure what their type might be. are they trying to pass themselves off as intutive? i don`t know, don`t care. i m not gonig to place too much stock in mbti. i think i enjoy it, mainly because there are many interesting people who like talking about it..
The first intelligent post in this thread. Ha.
