I think most people would agree the world is full of people who can loosely be called 'idiots' ironically an idiot might be the one saying this.
The point of mentioning this is that there is always a larger population of idiots than those who can be considered intelligent. Many type statistics, (snort), are adamant that the largest percentage of the population is made up of sensing types. This, (combined with biased online descriptions which is where a lot of people find out about and get into the theory with), means that while some consideration is given towards the difficulty in defining different potential types of intelligence and that sensing types clearly do have intelligent people within their ranks, for the most part if a person heavily into MBTI encountered a moron they will often assume, perhaps even without knowing they have already decided, that this person is most likely a sensor.
However I would like to put forth a different perspective based on the information we are given by type and function descriptions. Firstly most of the people I have known who are stupid tend to take one piece of information and build an entire framework around it, in other words they jump to the general overall view without considering the details along the way. Many times I have met people who almost refuse to check their facts and confirm that what they believe is backed up by evidence. Truely no one is innocent of this pitfall of course, especially myself, but there are different degrees to which a person engages in this.
In any case, to me this sounds like intuition, not sensing. Sensing is factually based, the facts as the senses tell us building up brick by brick to an overall. But I have heard the argument that what I described above could be called an example of inferior or at least weaker intuition in an unhealthy individual.
There is an issue with this line of reasoning however, which exposes the flimsy basis for MBTI in general, for example it is easy for me to flip that around and point out that it could be a sign of inferior sensing since the person is excusing factual evidence in front of them to make an intuitive leap.
Now I understand the tricky problem here, I am not giving people much to go off in terms of context or prior knowledge, this is after all on my premise. However the main point I'm trying to raise is that the argument I presented above is essentially the mirror image of how the theory is often understood by it's general followers and to me this exposes the lack of clear understanding and evidence to confirm MBTI and it's assumptions.
What if Sensing were glorified in a similar way to Intuition? Many seem to assume that the glorification comes from evidence that suggests the benefit of intuition, but the reality is more akin to a self fulfilling prophecy. However I'm getting sidetracked by S vs N which is not mean to be my point here.
I don't really care about notions of intelligence or the superiority of any type or dichotomy. What I do care about is why do we believe what we believe in terms of this theory?
I think it is worth challenging the general perspective to see what might arise from that inspection. Can anyone provide a decent argument as to why any typing cannot just be reversed using the same reasoning?