User Tag List

First 1523242526273575 Last

Results 241 to 250 of 847

  1. #241
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    MBTI
    xNTP
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Posts
    20

    Default

    The theoretical basis for typology is that each type has certain innate characteristics. For ESFPs, these are outgoingness, gregariousness, playfulness, among others. Most of these don't correlate with intelligence, as least to SJs and NTs, hence the "stupid ESFP stereotype". Most ESFP descriptions clearly state that ESFPs strongly dislike dealing with absract concepts, logic, and reasoning so, if one makes a connection between those traits and intelligence, then ESFPs are definately unintelligent, at least, again, because of the absence of those traits. There are exceptions of ESFPs who do have those traits, but there are exceptions for everything else as well. There are ENFP scientists, INTJ psychologists, etc. Pointing them out is sort of a moot point.

    Those ENFP scientists and INTJ psychologists were still ENFPs and INTJs, meaning that they posessed ENFP and INTJ traits. A logical, quiet, reasoning ESFP is not an ESFP at all, it's just not part of the description.

    The problem comes when people like the INTJ above generalize people into groups based on their MBTI type. While MBTI is a valuable way to categorize people, he's treating it as if it is logical and has been proven scientifically, which it hasn't. Accepting or rejecting someone's answer on the basis of their type like you just did is a sign of irrationality, ignorance and of a weak, crippled mind.

    There are a few possibilities towards why you're acting like this:
    -An enflated sense of self-worth.
    -Traumatic experiences with ESFPs.

    Your posts are incredibly arrogant and cringy to read. I'm almost embarassed that people would associate you and me on the basis of the similarity between our types (One letter, I'm INTP, you're INTJ).

  2. #242
    No Cigar Litvyak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,787

    Default

    A logical, quiet, reasoning ESFP is not an ESFP at all, it's just not part of the description.
    You fail to see that these are only preferences. Everybody is able to use any functions they want, they just usually rely on other functions instead. If, for example, Ni is absolutely necessary to solve a problem, a healthy ESFP will use Ni instead of their primary Se. An ESFP is able to get in a "logical, quiet, reasoning" mode just like an INT, it's just not a common sight, since they use other methods to deal with the challenges they face. It has nothing to do with intelligence, it's a matter of different mental constitution and approach to life.

  3. #243
    That's my name biotch! JoSunshine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    MBTI
    eNfj
    Enneagram
    2
    Posts
    660

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lex Talionis View Post
    You're an ENFP, so I'm not inclined to take your word on who is and who isn't intelligent very seriously.
    That's a pretty unintelligent post, Lex.
    "Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind. " - Dr. Seuss
    I can't spell...get over it

    Slightly ENFJ, totally JoSunshine
    Extroverted (E) 52.5%........Introverted (I) 47.5%
    Intuitive (N) 65.63%..........Sensing (S) 34.38%
    Feeling (F) 55.56%............Thinking (T) 44.44%
    Judging (J) 51.43%............Perceiving (P) 48.57%

  4. #244
    RETIRED CzeCze's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    MBTI
    GONE
    Posts
    9,051

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mort Belfry View Post
    I've noticed a trend in television sitcoms for "stupid" characters to be ESFPs.
    Notably, Homer Simpson, Peter Griffin, Joey Tribbiani and Kelly Bundy.

    Obviously this a stereotype unfounded in reality, but what is it about ESFPs that makes Hollywood writers make them stupid characters, or alternatively make stupid characters into ESFPs?
    PS Others might have also pointed this out but Peter Griffin is more likely EXTP than ESFP and other than Kelly Bundy, I'm not sure about the others being ESFP.

    I think NTs, or at last many NTs who have posted in the forum about the 'logic', or *lack* of logic in others have a very specific, very NT modeled idea of intelligence. Namely it is marked and unaccompanied by a lack of emotion - it is dispassionate.

    So the argument isn't about whether someone is intelligent, but rather whether or not you think they conduct themselves "like an intelligent person". In this way, it's kinda a self fulfilling prophecy as you define the terms of "intelligent" so narrowly and based on how you yourself act. The NT idea of "intelligence" is also traditionally masculine in some way and EXFX's are traditionally embody "feminine" traits.

    Somebody could be an accomplished and decorated scientist or valedectorian but I swear if they dared to have Hello Kitty seat protectors in their car or bedazzled their phone or fawned over their twin Shih Tzu's Poco and Moco or spend their weekends at raging keggers I think some people would automatically label them "unintelligent".
    “If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.” ― Oscar Wilde

    "I'm outtie 5000" ― Romulux

    Johari/Nohari

  5. #245
    Senior Member Lex Talionis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    382

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Note View Post
    The theoretical basis for typology is that each type has certain innate characteristics. For ESFPs, these are outgoingness, gregariousness, playfulness, among others. Most of these don't correlate with intelligence, as least to SJs and NTs, hence the "stupid ESFP stereotype". Most ESFP descriptions clearly state that ESFPs strongly dislike dealing with absract concepts, logic, and reasoning so, if one makes a connection between those traits and intelligence, then ESFPs are definately unintelligent, at least, again, because of the absence of those traits. There are exceptions of ESFPs who do have those traits, but there are exceptions for everything else as well. There are ENFP scientists, INTJ psychologists, etc. Pointing them out is sort of a moot point.
    Very good assessment, and closely in line with what I've already stated. Agreed.

    Those ENFP scientists and INTJ psychologists were still ENFPs and INTJs, meaning that they posessed ENFP and INTJ traits. A logical, quiet, reasoning ESFP is not an ESFP at all, it's just not part of the description.
    Agreed.

    The problem comes when people like the INTJ above generalize people into groups based on their MBTI type. While MBTI is a valuable way to categorize people, he's treating it as if it is logical and has been proven scientifically, which it hasn't. Accepting or rejecting someone's answer on the basis of their type like you just did is a sign of irrationality, ignorance and of a weak, crippled mind.
    I am not "generalizing" anymore than what the test naturally demands. That is what personality tests do: they classify.

    Is it wrong to state that, on average, different personality types will exhibit certain tendencies and have characteristics that are found in fewer frequency amongst other types? I would like to think that this is common sense.

    Myers-Briggs is based after the work of Carl Jung, and was further refined by David Keirsey. Isabel Myers Briggs herself was a psychological theorist. The test definitely has scientific basis.

    There are a few possibilities towards why you're acting like this:
    -An enflated sense of self-worth.
    -Traumatic experiences with ESFPs.
    Assumptions, assumptions.

    Your posts are incredibly arrogant and cringy to read. I'm almost embarassed that people would associate you and me on the basis of the similarity between our types (One letter, I'm INTP, you're INTJ).
    Truth can be painful.

    Quote Originally Posted by Litvyak View Post
    You fail to see that these are only preferences. Everybody is able to use any functions they want, they just usually rely on other functions instead. If, for example, Ni is absolutely necessary to solve a problem, a healthy ESFP will use Ni instead of their primary Se. An ESFP is able to get in a "logical, quiet, reasoning" mode just like an INT, it's just not a common sight, since they use other methods to deal with the challenges they face. It has nothing to do with intelligence, it's a matter of different mental constitution and approach to life.
    People "prefer" what they are naturally predisposed to preferring. An ESFP can no more force himself to think like an NT than you can force yourself to think like Stephen Hawking.

    "Preference" is a misleading term which may be misconstrued to mean that people have a choice in the matter. They don't.

    Quote Originally Posted by JoSunshine View Post
    That's a pretty unintelligent post, Lex.
    Thank you.

    Quote Originally Posted by CzeCze View Post

    I think NTs, or at last many NTs who have posted in the forum about the 'logic', or *lack* of logic in others have a very specific, very NT modeled idea of intelligence. Namely it is marked and unaccompanied by a lack of emotion - it is dispassionate.
    Logic doesn't require emotion; emotion only hinders it. Understanding emotion is different than applying emotion to logic, as understanding emotion itself can be stripped down using pure logic.

    So the argument isn't about whether someone is intelligent, but rather whether or not you think they conduct themselves "like an intelligent person". In this way, it's kinda a self fulfilling prophecy as you define the terms of "intelligent" so narrowly and based on how you yourself act. The NT idea of "intelligence" is also traditionally masculine in some way and EXFX's are traditionally embody "feminine" traits.

    Somebody could be an accomplished and decorated scientist or valedectorian but I swear if they dared to have Hello Kitty seat protectors in their car or bedazzled their phone or fawned over their twin Shih Tzu's Poco and Moco or spend their weekends at raging keggers I think some people would automatically label them "unintelligent".
    I partially agree with the definition of intelligence varying by personality type, but what isn't defined according to our perceptions?

    Intelligence is not only about solving problems and understanding concepts, but being able to decide appropriately and apply your knowledge. This is where personality plays a crucial role. If somebody expresses characteristics that obstruct their ability to utilize their intelligence, then they are severely limited, and one could justifiably call them unintelligent. ESFPs do this.
    "Death is nothing, but to live defeated and inglorious is to die daily."
    —Bonaparte

  6. #246
    No Cigar Litvyak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,787

    Default

    People "prefer" what they are naturally predisposed to preferring. An ESFP can no more force himself to think like an NT than you can force yourself to think like Stephen Hawking.
    "Preference" is a misleading term which may be misconstrued to mean that people have a choice in the matter. They don't.
    Well, no. Why do I even bother?

    The IQ of Hawking = the "quality" of cognitive processes, it is therefore measurable.
    The preference of an ESFP to use Se over Ni = a matter of attitude, it is not measurable. Se may or may not be as efficient as Ni in problem solving, it depends on the problem.

    Functions are "open" to everybody, while people use some functions more often than others, which is explained by MBTI. I can never think as fast as Stephen Hawking, but an ESFP can "force" himself to think the way I do, if it is absolutely necessary to solve a problem. He'll most likely prefer other ways of thinking though. Conclusions can be reached in more than one way, more often than not.

    You think of MBTI as a caste system, where types are ranked according to a certain "quality", where you can only use those functions you're more familiar with. This is a wrong premise, no wonder your theory is flawed. Less time spent with introspection doesn't mean a lesser (slower) mind, this is not logical at all.

  7. #247
    Senior Member Lex Talionis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    382

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Litvyak View Post
    Well, no. Why do I even bother?

    The IQ of Hawking = the "quality" of cognitive processes, it is therefore measurable.
    The preference of an ESFP to use Se over Ni = a matter of attitude, it is not measurable. Se may or may not be as efficient as Ni in problem solving, it depends on the problem.

    Functions are "open" to everybody, while people use some functions more often than others, which is explained by MBTI. I can never think as fast as Stephen Hawking, but an ESFP can "force" himself to think the way I do, if it is absolutely necessary to solve a problem. He'll most likely prefer other ways of thinking though. Conclusions can be reached in more than one way, more often than not.

    You think of MBTI as a caste system, where types are ranked according to a certain "quality", where you can only use those functions you're more familiar with. This is a wrong premise, no wonder your theory is flawed. Less time spent with introspection doesn't mean a lesser (slower) mind, this is not logical at all.
    My "theory" is in accordance with the test and its theoretical basis.

    Somebody who doesn't think like an INTJ, for example, will never be an INTJ, unless he is genetically predisposed to that thought pattern. How can somebody measure their own personality "change" and conclude that it was an actual change, and not just accessing another facet of their own innate personality? Preferences are driven by underlying factors (genetics) that result in that particular preference. In other words, there is a reason why people "prefer" what they do. I believe in the genetic theory of personality, and believe genes play a greater role than environment when it comes to personality. This doesn't just apply to Myers-Briggs, but to individual personality regardless of which test one uses to measure it.

    Real world observation doesn't show the changes in personality you claim exist. People's core personality generally stays the same throughout their lives, unless they experience significant neurological changes, such as brain trauma or prolonged drug use.

    I have never denied that ESFPs can be intelligent, nor have I claimed that other types can't borrow traits from other personalities and utilize them to whatever extent they need. My only claim is that on average, and due to innate psychological differences, certain types will perform better in certain areas than others.
    "Death is nothing, but to live defeated and inglorious is to die daily."
    —Bonaparte

  8. #248
    Shaman BlackCat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    ESFP
    Enneagram
    9w8 sx/sp
    Socionics
    SEE Fi
    Posts
    7,003

    Default

    Do you honestly post here to only bash ESFPs? Do you really hate them that much?
    () 9w8-3w4-7w6 tritype.

    sCueI (primary Inquisition)

  9. #249
    Senior Member KDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    8,263

    Default

    As a (probably) ESFP, i fully admit to stupidity. I surprise even my self sometimes.

    But admitting it makes me clever actually, y'see...

  10. #250
    Ginkgo
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lex Talionis View Post
    Somebody who doesn't think like an INTJ, for example, will never be an INTJ, unless he is genetically predisposed to that thought pattern. How can somebody measure their own personality "change" and conclude that it was an actual change, and not just accessing another facet of their own innate personality? Preferences are driven by underlying factors (genetics) that result in that particular preference. In other words, there is a reason why people "prefer" what they do. I believe in the genetic theory of personality, and believe genes play a greater role than environment when it comes to personality. This doesn't just apply to Myers-Briggs, but to individual personality regardless of which test one uses to measure it.
    Now, this is a separate argument, Nature vs. Nurture, which isn't dissimilar from asking "What made the palm tree what it is today, the seed or the soil?"

    You will find that environmental conditions affect the expression of genes, thus the expression of personality. You will also find that individuals of certain genetic dispositions can be found in particular environments. These two elements are synergistic, and I personally don't understand why they are still pitted against each other.

    EDIT: I mean, why should we just think about the direct relationship between the seed and the environment? Certainly, certain (genetically disposed) species of plants congregate in environments for which they are best suited, and the environment is affected thereafter. There are also studies that have been done with twins and adoptive children that were largely inconclusive (that is, they produced data, but because we have yet to directly link cause to effect, they are inconclusive of anything substantive).

    I know you mentioned childhood trauma, but why are we prying pure trauma apart from other atmospheric conditions? Because they are stressful enough to be under a separate paradigm? There are reasons as to why they are stressful, and those reasons should be considered on their own individual terms in the same way we examine why a suspect is guilty/non-guilty so that they can be applied to the overall essence of the atmosphere. Too many variables are bouncing around in my mind for me to enunciate them.

Similar Threads

  1. [ESFP] The ESFP haters thread
    By King sns in forum The SP Arthouse (ESFP, ISFP, ESTP, ISTP)
    Replies: 126
    Last Post: 08-05-2016, 02:35 PM
  2. [ESFP] ESFP Quote Of The Day
    By Mal12345 in forum The SP Arthouse (ESFP, ISFP, ESTP, ISTP)
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 08-31-2012, 12:30 PM
  3. Replies: 96
    Last Post: 07-13-2011, 12:25 PM
  4. Replies: 7
    Last Post: 02-17-2011, 02:12 PM
  5. [MBTItm] ESFP/ENFP - how to get the ESFP off the ENFP?
    By Twixt in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 35
    Last Post: 08-04-2009, 06:37 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO