User Tag List

First 3111213141523 Last

Results 121 to 130 of 373

  1. #121
    Senior Member burymecloser's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    6w5
    Posts
    514

    Default

    I apologise in advance for being long-winded. I'm interested in one aspect of this debate: type descriptions. I don't want to argue about "ethereality" or which side has it rougher, N's or S's. But on the topic of type descriptions, I think Orangey is almost entirely on track here, and I would argue that the occasionally vehement level of disagreement proves the point to some extent.

    That said, the ESTP/ENTP comparison from typelogic is not fair. Those descriptions were written by two different authors, which is fully sufficient to explain the differences. However, there are any number of other sites whose descriptions would illustrate a similar point.

    Quote Originally Posted by Orangey View Post
    It doesn't work if all you do is reverse the values. You can't, for instance, call someone stupid but then come back and say that you actually envy their stupidity because it would give you a break from your own ever-toiling, brilliant mind.
    +
    Quote Originally Posted by Orangey View Post
    When have I slurred S strengths? What are S strengths to you?
    I would suggest that something close to a majority of N's "compliments" about Sensors are extremely back-handed compliments, often though not exclusively at the extreme and ludicrous level we've occasionally seen quoted in this thread. Orangey asked Jennifer what she sees as S strengths, and she never answered the question, which disappoints me, because (1) she has sidestepped all the tough questions in this thread, and (2) I bet she has a good answer. Most descriptions are something to effect of, "They're good at all the everyday stuff N's can't be bothered with because they're busy being brilliant inventors and artists." Realistic, meet gushy.

    Quote Originally Posted by Orangey View Post
    It's not that the stuff in the ISTP description is bad in and of itself. If all descriptions focused on how the type presents in everyday life, that would be fine. But as it is, it's like the ISTP is Mechanical Joe from down the street and the INTP is John Nash mentally gifted, special. The devil's in the comparison, and these two descriptions (as is often the case) are on different scales. And no, it doesn't have anything to do with the reader valuing the N qualities over the S ones, because it's skills that are being attributed to the types. One is skilled with power tools while the other is skilled in precision of thought and language, concentration, argumentation, design, and efficiency. The ISTP one is realistic and the INTP one is gushing.
    Maybe I'm naïve, but it shocked me to see anyone argue with this. It's obviously true. You don't argue against this by disagreeing with Orangey, you do it by pooping on Keirsey*. You say, "Oh, well, you're right about Keirsey. His writing reveals a poorly-concealed disdain for boring SJs and Adderall-snorting SPs, and his biases have surely influenced many of his readers. But most of us on this forum, certainly including myself, have moved past that and reached N/S enlightenment."

    *


    How can you even argue that Keirsey isn't biased against S's? And why do so many more people mistype as N than S? It's because N sounds better, the descriptions are more flattering. N's are rare (unique! special!), creative, gifted, misunderstood. S's are the masses, important to keep the world going, but you wouldn't want to be one yourself. The world needs janitors, right? That's what the S's are for!!!

    I will concede that this is more prevalent in online tests and type descriptions than in PUM. Opened to a random page, and here's what Keirsey (and Marilyn Bates) had to say about ESTPs:
    ESTPs are men and women of action. When someone of this personality is present, things begin to happen. The lights come on, the music plays, the game begins. And a game it is for the ESTP, the outstanding entrepreneur, the international diplomat, the conciliator, the negotiator par excellence ... if only one adjective could be used to describe ESTPs resourceful would be an apt choice.

    Life is never dull around ESTPs. Their attractive, friendly style has a theatrical flourish which makes even the most routine, mundane event seem exciting ... ESTPs are socially sophisticated, suave, and urbane...

    ESTPs are uncanny at observing people's motivations, sometimes hypersensitive to minimal nonverbal cues which other types might miss ... Witty, clever, and fun, ESTPs seem to possess an unusual amount of empathy...
    That is a positive description. Note the explicitly positive adjectives, the praise: outstanding, resourceful, sophisticated, suave, uncanny, witty, clever, fun, unusual. That's what is missing from most S descriptions.

    For better or for worse, David Keirsey is the most influential writer in this field. More than Isabel Myers, more than Lenore, more than Beebe, probably more than Jung. Most of us on this forum discovered Keirsey first, even those who often criticise him. Keirsey writes about N's with undisguised admiration, and that has filtered down to many people who study this topic.

    The positive traits attributed to Sensors are things like steadiness and predictability, maybe a little Hufflepuff loyalty. Intuitives get terms like creative, imaginative, ingenious -- words that are loaded with an association to intelligence and exceptionalism. That's the crux of the issue, as I see it:

    S is described as normal, and N as exceptional.

    Maybe that's right: Sensors are a majority, and from a strictly literal standpoint, N's are exceptional. But are they better? Smarter? Able to leap tall buildings in a single bound? Exempt from the necessity of providing proof for their arguments? I'm not interested (at least not right now) in debating whether N's really are smarter, etc. But I don't find it at all plausible to argue that the descriptions of types and temperaments are far more flattering to N's than S's.

    Quote Originally Posted by Orangey View Post
    It doesn't seem gushy; it is gushy. It's not an "abstract generalization" to say, "they are the master designers of all kinds of theoretical systems, including school curricula, corporate strategies, and new technologies," or "in any serious discussion or debate Architects are devastating, their skill in framing arguments giving them an enormous advantage." Are these not fairly specific in their praise?

    That's the key word. Praise. Why does this type get praise while the ISTP gets a detached description?
    I find this difficult to refute.

    Maybe I have iNtuitive guilt. Is this like being Jewish without supporting Israeli military policy? Am I a traitor? Or ... maybe I'm not an N at all. The nature of my arguments reveals the truth! I'm really an... ISFJ, with my awesome Fe? ISTP, with Se and Ni? Something S.

    Quote Originally Posted by Orangey View Post
    Please. The idea that most of the Ns on this forum are actually Ns is nothing but group delusion.
    I'm sure there are a number of mistyped "intuitives" on the boards, though I suspect it's fewer than many of us imagine. But it's annoying that because there are so many mistyped N's, I sometimes feel like I have to prove myself. Show off that Ne, BMC! No, really, I swear I'm not mistyped! Like everyone's looking over their shoulder at which N isn't really an N.


    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    Also, you do realize that, regardless of how smart John Nash is and the movie that was made about it, realistically he was probably a pain in the butt to live with and should not really be glamorized? He had some INTP-like strengths and a LOT of corresponding negatives. If someone called me John Nash, I'd probably be more put off than pleased.
    Jennifer is, of course, right about John Nash. She's wrong, however, that the example is relevant. It's not. It's anecdotal evidence, irrelevant to anything except the specific example. Mr. Nash is hardly representative of any larger iNtuitive experience.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    ...I'm still laughing at how N vs S this entire exchange is. You're quantifying details, I'm talking big picture after stepping back.
    That's not what it looks like to me. I see Orangey raising points and asking questions, and you saying they're wrong because you said so. That's not intuition, it's intellectual laziness.

    And while it would indeed be gratifying to see smart people write up balanced type descriptions, it's unfair, a canard, to say that anyone who doesn't is unjustified in complaining about what is out there. Identifying an injustice or inconsistency does not imply a burden to single-handedly right the wrong, nor that failure to assume such a burden negates the wrong and/or precludes continuing to point out that it's wrong.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    Thanks for proving our case. That's the same kind of bullshit that I had to deal with growing up, or having people look at me as if I had two heads and/or dismiss me when I would say things that I couldn't tangibly "prove" to them.
    Did you really put the word prove in quotation marks?

    Proof is good. Proof is necessary. Proof keeps us honest, to others and to ourselves. Proof is why I can't just say "Jennifer's a witch!" and get you burned at a stake or drowned or whatever**.

    If your case is sound, you should be able to provide some level of evidence that supports or at least suggests your point's validity, and you should be able to disprove or otherwise repudiate evidence to the contrary. Intuition may guide us to appropriate arguments or interesting evidence, but it is not a substitute for those things.

    ** First I have to prove you weigh the same as a duck. Do you?



    Separate issue:
    Quote Originally Posted by Marmie Dearest View Post
    Okay I want to add something to that, though. The problem with many SJ descriptions is that they're too acclimated to *particular mainstream manifestations of Si, especially which were more common in our culture in the past*
    This is a good point.
    i just want to be a sweetheart

  2. #122
    Probably Most Brilliant Craft's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w7 sx/so
    Socionics
    N/A
    Posts
    1,200

    Default

    On a larger scale, I don't think there is a bias against "N." Words like "pioneer" improves what self-esteem I have, even if it is an unreal adjective. In school though...sigh. The more one asks, the more stupid and fake one is. I also deal with Introverted Perception bias. Boohoo.

    Peer pressure destroys potential, imagination and natural curiosity. It destroys happiness. But old age is a different arena so that's where people finally pick up their books again.

  3. #123
    Queen hunter Virtual ghost's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    8,664

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marmie Dearest View Post
    I both agree and disagree. There's definitely truth to what you're saying, though some SPs - ISFPs, especially don't feel like they quite "fit in" either because of being Fi doms. I think there is even a possibility that ESFPs have a greater social advantage, and STPs have an intellectual advantage in terms of practical things like engineering or mechanics, leaving ISFPs to still kind of be misunderstood artists.

    NPs can also access their "inner SJ" at more mature stages of their lives, NFPs having STJ shadow qualities, and NTP having SFJ shadow qualities...but YES in youth it leaves you open to all measure of suggestions of being weird, crazy, lazy, or silly. In my case being raised by an unhealthy ESTJ was pretty bad, as that when I was a teenager she was completely mystified by my strengths, absolutely enraged by my weaknesses, and couldn't understand why such a "smart" child grew up to be THIS....however, the thing is, like I said NPs have more balance later in life, so by the time I was about 25 I think I started managing a whole lot better.

    It may have helped me to be raised by SJs and to have a five year relationship with an SJ, that is to say, in developing my tertiary and inferior functions to an extent. However, as I mentioned, it also harmed me because my grandfather's ESTJ wife was so unhealthy and overbearing about rejecting her own Ne/Fi, I guess, and took it out on me. I don't know. She was not well, and my entire family agrees, so I don't want to suggest that *all* ESTJs are quite that awful toward their NP children or grandchildren or whatever.

    I think INJs may be even more misunderstood than NPs in some ways, as they do not have an inner SJ (which is what society is half-made of) and Ni is such a personal and misunderstood function by like 97% of the world.

    However, it helps ENJs greatly to either have Fe or Te as a dom function, I will agree with that much, yes indeed.

    I actually agree. I have dicovered MBTI not so long ago but I can say/confirm that I agree with the idea that NPs often have much easier time with society then I do. (especially the extroverted ones) My country is not that well organized and in alot of elements is actually fairly random. So being a Ps can have quite a number advantages over Js.


    I mean I have/had a very long history of not fiting in and by that I trully mean NOT FITTING IN. For most people I am too uninterested in socializing.
    SJs usually think I am a heretic of some sort, especially since I can strike back in a very Jish fashion and yet it is obvious that I am not one of them.
    NPs often paint me as control-freak because I am a strong J and I am not at all random and playful as they are (at least I don't give that vibe) .
    SPs simply don't get me at all while many Fs tent to think that I am cold.


    What pushed me even further away from people then I naturally am since I am basically misunderstood from the moment I got out of diapers.
    Actually for years I was trying to figure out why I am not like people around me. (classic weirdos and geeks included)

    But the time has shown that I am just a expressed INTJ and that is it.

  4. #124
    Senior Member KDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    8,263

    Default

    The Bonfire
    An area for socializing and lighthearted general discussions.

  5. #125
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KDude View Post
    The Bonfire
    An area for socializing and lighthearted general discussions.
    lol. Yeah... what happened? Usually it goes the other way.

    @burymecloser: Thanks for the comments and for your opinion. I already answered the one question in the thread split; and as far as "proof" goes, there's a difference between proof and cynicism. If you want to better understand my rationale, you should look at the context of this specific thread rather than expanding it back out to general rational principles that we already notably agree on.
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  6. #126
    resonance entropie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    MBTI
    entp
    Enneagram
    783
    Posts
    16,761

    Default

    I found unfair that they said estp are the better womanizer than entps in that description. How we say estp's are all great idea people and could become possible great inventors, and entps are all womanizer ?
    [URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tEBvftJUwDw&t=0s[/URL]

  7. #127
    insert random title here Randomnity's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Enneagram
    6w5 sp/sx
    Posts
    9,489

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by penny89 View Post
    IT'S NOT ANY DIFFERENT. At least, the principle is the same.
    You seem to be arguing with me when this is actually my point, so I think we agree.
    Do you think that these other comparisons you're drawing are easy hands to be dealt? When you're comparing something to the way LGBTetc people are treated in a heteronormative society, don't you think there is a problem?!
    I don't think they are all equal situations. I was attempting to put the situation into a larger context. There is also overlap, which could cause misattribution of the source of the feelings of not fitting in.

    Personally, I would not even stretch the comparison that far. There are no anti-N hate crimes, etc. I would compare it to the T woman or F male. [Not that I want to suggest the gender people are perceived as is their actual gender in all cases. Not true. I hate this post now.] So I wonder, why are you acknowledging that living in our society as a T woman or an F male can be hard - I assume this is in fact what you're doing, since this is also compared to to the LGBT thing (quite frankly I think that's too strong too, but not being a T woman or F male I should STFU on that!) - but denying that the same is true for living as an N?
    I think you're misunderstanding me. I'm not saying that being an N can't have any social disadvantages, particularly as a child if your interests are unappreciated. I'm saying that it's not any 'worse' (from my perspective) than being a T female/F male, or introverted, or P, but there's always a big fuss over this particular dichotomy and a lot of people tend to assume that the feelings of alienation etc are 100% due to being an N when there are very likely to be other factors also involved in creating that feeling. I know that most of the people who mention this feeling are Ps, for example, and P is certainly not encouraged growing up whether it's SP or NP, but the P aspect of it is never acknowledged, although I suspect it's a very large part of the problem.
    I suspect that's because you're a T woman (right? I'm going to feel like an ass if I'm wrong lolz) but not an N. I am neither of course, being an SF. It is hard to see biases in your favour - they're invisible until pointed out.

    The whole idea of a social hierarchy implies exactly these things. I didn't think I would have to SPELL IT OUT in the OP by saying, oh right S/N P/J both of which I talked about, are not the only variables in the hierarchy. OBVIOUSLY there are lots of majorities that oppress minorities and much more severely. I made a hierarchy with two variables. If you count all possible variables there are MILLIONS (and I don't even pretend to be even remotely educated about these things...I am totally, completely blind and just barely aware of the world around me...to be honest)
    I agree with you. I'm talking more at the Ns who are saying that N is the biggest difference and by itself is enough to ensure "alienation" or whatever feelings. I do not think that all Ns feel this way.
    -end of thread-

  8. #128
    Senior Member KDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    8,263

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by entropie View Post
    I found unfair that they said estp are the better womanizer than entps in that description. How we say estp's are all great idea people and could become possible great inventors, and entps are all womanizer ?
    I don't think it's the case either, but allow me to borrow socionics for a second, and say that a big difference there in how NPs try to engage the interests of others is Ne - in socionics, they're called infantile (not infantile, in an immature sense.. just that they would come at people indirectly, with fun or novel approaches). They would not be natural fits for the aggressive approach of ESP's more sensual, singleminded nature. It doesn't mean that Ne wouldn't be womanizers though. Nor would it mean that an ENFP or ENTP wouldn't try to fake the ESP approach. My own little theory is that lot ENPs (especially men) are insecure by their own ideas, shaped by images of popular culture, where they start believing that the Se way is better. That or they just sit back, feel alien to all of it, and don't do anything. The introverted extroverts.

    Ne

    interest is sparked in partner with positive aesthetic attributes divorced from active, "aggressive" sexuality
    tend to try to attract partner's interest with joking, goofy or even "strange" behavior
    try to help partner see the unexpected and fun side of things
    interest is maintained or cools off according to partner's response to this behavior
    appreciation for partner who actively cares about the individual's comfort and daily needs
    neutral with regard to externally admitting who took the initiative in ending a relationship, "power" is seen as unimportant in such matters


    Se

    no doubts about own interest in another person
    not prone to hesitation about whether or not to reveal that interest
    focus is more on own interest than whether or not the other person might reciprocate
    romantic interaction is more about "toughness" than "tenderness"
    needs to feel some sense of "superiority" over the partner, but worthwhile only if the partner is seen as able to largely "keep up"
    this takes the form of power games, which others might regard as cruel or bitchy
    in the case of female Aggressors with male partners, the above tends to assume the characteristic of a woman expecting total devotion from the partner, rather than her being "bossy"
    little inclination to externally admit not having been the one to end a relationship, unless if adopting a "who cares" front simultaneously

  9. #129
    Minister of Propagandhi ajblaise's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    7,917

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Antisocial one View Post
    I actually agree. I have dicovered MBTI not so long ago but I can say/confirm that I agree with the idea that NPs often have much easier time with society then I do. (especially the extroverted ones) My country is not that well organized and in alot of elements is actually fairly random. So being a Ps can have quite a number advantages over Js.
    Definitely disagree with this. Js are more likely to get married, have a higher education, and make more money than Ps. And what better markers are there for how you fit into society than looking at marriage, educational attainment, and income?

    I'm basing this off that MBTI Demographics study that's always getting passed around the type forums, people generally give credence to it. Probably not a Harvard level long-term large-sample size study, but the stats seem pretty accurate and reflective of reality to quite a few.

  10. #130
    Senior Member prplchknz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    MBTI
    yupp
    Posts
    29,771

    Default

    I'm an N and I grew up just fine, I don't feel like the world is against me, maybe I'm ignorant but I don't feel like being an N holds me back, what holds me back is my own laziness not my MBTI type.
    In no likes experiment.

    that is all

    i dunno what else to say so

Similar Threads

  1. [Enne] Why I Am No Longer An Enneagrammist
    By Mal12345 in forum Enneagram
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 09-07-2014, 10:10 AM
  2. [Enne] Even Though I Am No Longer An Enneagrammist...
    By Mal12345 in forum Enneagram
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 09-01-2014, 09:42 AM
  3. [INTP] INTP men, how do you behave when you are no longer attracted to a girl?
    By Almari in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 04-14-2012, 10:29 PM
  4. I forgot what I was going to talk about...
    By Cloudblue in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 01-09-2010, 03:02 PM

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