Yeah usually they are smelly and unwashed.
true. but we're talking about psychology, not physiology.
We are....but I don't see why we should trump reason with unproven speculation, especially when it comes to such a widespread series of traits.
Basically I find it unsatisfying to palm off such skills as being part of something as intangible as cognitive function theory. Especially when better and more empirically provable answers already exist.
For example i'll admit i'm not much of a one for details that don't interest me, in fact only my job keeps me in check with regards to paying attention to more immediate matters, this is a learned series of traits, as a consequence my ability at memorising certain things has risen by conscious application in an appropriate arena that demands it.
I could be Si dominant, but that has less impact on memory than people realise, in fact Si is by definition about a very specific individual reality, (individual to the extreme in fact based on which Si dom it is), that often masquerades as a series of objective observations and requirements.
What Si dominants could be speculated to memorise are details that are important to THAT reality they hold in their heads from their subjective interpretations of their own sensory impressions, not details in general.
So a particular ISJ could be very good at rote memory of general details given the experience in their life, but a different ISJ may not be.
Essentially specific memory of general details isn't how it works based on it's description. Although this is perhaps just arguing semantics.
