...[W]hat I've found is that [Se dominants] have an unparalleled ability to engage with life in a way that makes it well lived as well as generating useful experiential information along the way.
Some of them are also fucking idiots by my understanding...
Interestingly, that is about everything that need be said on the matter of Se intelligence.
The Justice Fighter
XXXX - XwX Xdw XwX sx/so - Neutral Good
"I trust what you are doing though…I just see it a little differently.
I don’t see it as you stepping away from the fire. I see it as the fire directing your course.
No matter how airy or earthy or watery you become... to many of us you will always be...a super nova."
"Behind these gates of seeming warmth sits, loosely chained, a fierce attack dog. Perhaps not crazy, but dangerous"
Van der Hoop does a pretty good job of outlining a Se-dom's abilities, and type of intelligence:
Malcolm Gladwell once wrote about the "physical genius". Classical musicians, athletes, surgeons, all have physical intelligence. These are people who have a knack for translating thought into physical action. These are people who are so in tune with their bodies, and with their sensory environment, that they can accomplish tasks that require an obscene amount of finesse. Gladwell also talks a lot about the ability to visualize their environment.
I think it's important to remember that intuitive types often have the kinkiest and grossest relationship with the physical world. ESFP's experience their Se in a very positive, differentiated way.
This is very much my sister. She can just flow into stuff...the excerpt is spot on. It always looked like magic to me and I used to be insanely jealous of her abilities. She would learn to play musical instruments by simply picking them up and "doing it". She was also a straight-A student and a National Merit Scholar. When I think of her the song, "Killer Queen" by Queen pops up into my head. I can't see the "stupid" thing...she practically glitters with intelligence. Or is that just her shiny charm? Naw... She's the only person I know that can have a party with me by telephone! I love her to pieces.
I have a pretty textbook ESTP friend, we were out with a group talking about literature and he said "I don't read into what authors say. Someone will tell me, 'Well, the author meant this' and I'm like, 'well he should have said that then!"
I do think they're pretty forthcoming, they don't really beat around the bush, but their ability to intellectualize is in no way diminished simply because of their personality. I can't recall how many times he has subverted my explanation in fewer than ten words. At work, even regarding mental tasks, he was always two steps ahead me in finding an applicable solution.
And he isn't even dry! He has an insane amount of charisma and character.
So idk. I really envy Se types, it's just a shame hedonistic mindlessness is so simply correlated with them.
I would agree with that.
The way I think of ESFPs... I think they are the type most associated with "doing" and most likely to prefer "doing" over "thinking."
I think INTPs are the type most likely to prefer "thinking" over "doing".
This is where conflicts can arise, I think. Intelligence or morality doesn't really enter into it. My ex wasn't the annoying overly bubbly woman who wanted to go clubbing ever night that I would have thought.
ESFP's are just as bad as ENFP's when it comes to Ti. The whole Ti world and concept of independent minded logic is something they ultimately do not, and will not ever completely understand. This in essence is what makes the come off or feel "stupid" whereas NTJ's, while Te dominant, still are very good at Ti albeit unconscious Ti. So they still generate theories in their own time.
So yes, one can argue that ESFP's are "stupid" much the same way ENFP's are. Though their intelligence shines in other areas. Their ability to read people is unmatched, their kinesthetic abilities are also second to none, and they can make very protective and strong willed allies, and their enthusiasm almost never dies. Compare them to INTJ's and INTP's, who are more weak willed with enthusiasm that is often toxic. ESFP's can take a typical pessimistic INTJ, put him on their shoulders, and take them for a ride through nyan-cat land.
ENFPs are better at articulating their thought process as it happens (even when they're all over the place) than most ESFPs, which gives off the illusion of being smarter. They have a knack for summing their ideas up into a neat package and moving on to to the next topic with ease. With ESFPs you see a lot of pausing (or 'gathering'), repetition and non-sequiturs when they try to verbalize their thoughts on theoretical concepts. Even INP's are more articulate in these types of discussions.
Exhibit A (xSFP 6w7)
You have to really listen carefully to get the gist of what he's saying. A third of it is either nonsensical, or clumsy in terms of relating itself back to a larger, consistent idea. Just random spurts of inferior or tertiary Ni.
So I went to LA last summer and I noticed all these people doing these things, and I thought what if they did this...nd in a way this sort of ties to the sociological concept of Confirmation bias. People spend most of their time conforming to these labels instead of trying to transcend them, and actually creating their own identity independent of them. And this is important when you think about all the times in history when people were sort of constrained by that bias. For example, Nero; he had this regime where he actually divided people up into specific hierarchies based on their socioeconomic status, blah, blah, blah.
So I went to LA last summer and I saw these interesting people. In a way this sort of connects to the sociological perspective, sort of, in like............this sort of connects to the sociological idea of confirmation bias because people.............people, okay, they always think in terms of labels, and these labels are sort of....these labels are sort of....they're sort of meaningless and keep you in a box.............they keep you in a box, and I think you should find a way to sort of set your own path in life in order to become a better person..and that's just how it is...blah, blah, blah, blah.
They often will have a blank expression where nothing really is going on upstairs.
Two issues arise from this observation, though:
1. It's not necessarily the case with all of them.
2. Even if it were, what's necessarily problematic about it? Maybe there really isn't a need to have a bunch of shit going on up in our/their minds at all moments. Maybe many of the goals of much of Eastern philosophy and meditation (mindfulness, emptying your mind, living in the now, etc) come rather naturally to them, and you , the one with all those self-important thoughts constantly going on upstairs, are the one with the actual problem.
I believe those were the same two points I mentioned in my previous post.
Just to check...
I was being sarcastic...
I think Jon's whole "say only positive things about Se/Sensing and only negative things about Ni/Intuition" is simple-minded, stupid, and the wrong way to go about doing things (particularly discovering/spreading the truth). I understand why he's doing it, but, if he's going to be intentionally unbalanced about it (even if for understandable - even noble - reasons), well, I can't help but be the Libra I am and be compelled to balance that shit out.
Mmm, I missed the sarcasm, but I also missed this. I haven't read the thread beyond the last few posts, 85 pages was a little much for me. I don't think shitting on Ni is a good idea, either. But at the same time, online in general, I think there's a lot more respect, if not understanding, of Ni, whereas Se - especially in ESFPs - tends to be constantly underestimated.
I'm just sort of floored by how much "N is smarter", "N is deeper", "N is better for everyone" thinking there is. The point of the structure of the MBTI is to be a balanced theoretical system of equal dichotomies. It's not supposed to be like the Big 5 where there's a better answer.