[NT] Stupid NTs

[poppy]

If they can not perform any of these tasks then what are they proficient in? I'd almost suggest they these NTs you know have some sort of classifiable disorder and their inability to conform to the norm isn't really stupidity.

Maybe my experience is skewed because many of the NTs I meet are my age (just graduated high school) or going to UC Berkeley (where you can meet plenty of talented engineering students who you can't have an intelligent conversation with). Also at the school I went to, tests and making the school look good were of primary importance, learning valuable skills came second.

I guess it isn't stupidity that comes from a lack of ability, but from a lack of experience or a lack of ever trying to do basic things because they've excused themselves from learning to do them. I think limiting yourself choosing only the intellectual over the practical is "stupid". It also ties in to what has been mentioned before, not considering other viewpoints (as opposed to being clinically unable to learn these things).

Of course people like that are still rare amongst NTs in my experience, but they're out there. Anyway that's just my take.

 

[BlueScreen]

This is all very true. But here we go with the NT stigmas and mindful equality again. Of course there are other types that can be more intellectual than an NT, but that does not make the NT less intelligent.

yeh, I haven't met many stupid INTPs, even in friendship groups which aren't as academic. Like you see a group where you expect little intellectual discussion and next minute an INTP pops out of it and starts doing someone's homework for them.

The other possibility is that I might not be able to identify an INTP without that intelligence aspect because most INTPs I know are known through university. Just as I couldn't identify an ENTP or ENFP without seeing the Ne rip apart problems, and question everything. These become our cornerstones for identifying the type. Therefore no one who we see as the type can be stupid. We just type them as something else.

 

[colourscientist]

Define stupid.

Functional perspective:

Te: not having a clear line of thought
Ti: not being accurate
Fe: not considering the group
Fi: not knowing what really matters
Ne: not seeing the forest
Se: not seeing the trees
Ni: not considering implications
Si: not considering what is already known

i think that's an extremely useful approach. unfortunately also a reminder of how much hate there is in the world.

 

[A-J]

I don't think it's necessarily an oxymoron. Normal distribution virtually guarantees the existence of some below average NT's. I do find it rather hard to fathom what a truly stupid NT would be like though. Anyone care to write a description of below average IQ (or even average IQ) NT here?

Note: We're talking about intelligence, not person's worth here. Inane complaints about multiple intelligences or IQ being meaningless are best directed at /dev/null.

 

[Lauren Ashley]

^I know plenty of NTs because of my area of work and stupid ones certainly exist. Most of the NTs I know are average/somewhat intelligent, but above all else "learned," which I don't equate with inherent intelligence. Stupid NTs look like any other stupid person would. When they open their mouth it makes you go .

(In other news, you might want to check this forum for other examples of NTs that don't quite cut it...)

At first I was surprised too, that there was an iNtuitive of any type that wasn't bright. But there is something not right about thinking that if a person is inclined to a certain way of processing, that they will always be smart by society's standards. One can prefer intuition and "thinking," yet not have a good grasp on how to use them in a manner that will produce the best results.

 

[ajblaise]

I think the NT = smart correlation can be explained by looking at the MBTI test itself:

You often think about humankind and its destiny?
You easily understand new theoretical principles?
You often contemplate about the complexity of life?
etc.

^ Stupid people don't do any of this.

Some of the questions that indicate N and T (especially N) can be related to intelligence. For instance, being able to "understand new theoretical principles" is definitely a sign of intelligence, and is also a sign of N.

 

[Lauren Ashley]

Some of the questions that indicate N and T (especially N) can be related to intelligence. For instance, being able to "understand new theoretical principles" is definitely a sign of intelligence, and is also a sign of N.

But how long does it take the person to understand these new theoretical principles? It could take 5 minutes or 5 years.

Also, you must allow for lower preferences. If a person has N and T preferences of 60% each (yes we all know percentages don't have a clear meaning, but work with me here), they are still NT yet do not have strong preferences. And that will certainly effect the way in which information is processed.

 

[A-J]

^I know plenty of NTs because of my area of work and stupid ones certainly exist.

I didn't mean to imply that a stupid NT would be an extreme rarity. I was merely saying that I have a hard time figuring out how such NT would appear and act in real life (and how they would differ from the "great unwashed masses"). My friends tend to be above or well above average intelligence and the more average ones are SP or SJ as far as I can tell. I'm interested in the real life case more than online since forums have different dynamics and more opportunities for misconception (not to mention that stupid people of all types are much harder to avoid online ).

Ps. Definitely agree about the "makes you go "

Edit: I should have added that I know several SJs and SPs that are well above average intelligence, so that is by no means restricted to NTs.

 

[PeaceBaby]

I don't think anyone is hearing heart's posts here.

"Smart" and preferences are not necessarily tied. The hard-wiring of your brain can be affected throughout your life by any external or developmental factors, but your preference order would still be the same, even if you were not capable cognitively to utilize them.

I do know many NT's who think they are the smartest cookies in the jar, and their preference order makes them especially prone to this delusion (even though they generically as a type are very effective in certain areas and I love them dearly for it). Being NT simply doesn't make an individual most intelligent by default. And it sure doesn't matter how brilliant you are if you can't communicate with the outside world in a meaningful, capable way. If everyone around you thinks you are a pompous, arrogant ass, you won't be able to effect much progress or change!

We would surely all agree that getting around in the world take a combination plate of skills, and capabilities as defined by MBTI, IQ or other parameters are only slices of the life skill pie. Tasty ones, but only slices nonetheless.

One must be so careful not to assign some elitist view to MBTI and preference order.

 

[Fluffywolf]

Intelligence, knowlegde, wisdom. Is not definable by a zero to hero scale.

Although I would agree that per definition, NT's are more prone to have a higher IQ intelligence than other types. In truth the scale is two sided. We each develop ourselves in our own unique way. Some may excel in ways we see as intelligent, while others excel in many different ways, not seen as intelligent per se, but still a development.

How a person develops is a subjective choice different to each person. The person that speaks of stupidity by choosing a path far from his/her own chosen path, does not truely understand the path he/she took herself. Or the so-called stupidity would never have been an issue for that person.

Blah blah blahdi blah. Yada yada, el caramba.

 

[ajblaise]

But how long does it take the person to understand these new theoretical principles? It could take 5 minutes or 5 years.

Well the test asks if you "easily" understand new theoretical principals, which should indicate a short span of time.

Also, you must allow for lower preferences. If a person has N and T preferences of 60% each, they are still NT yet do not have strong preferences. And that will certainly effect the way in which information is processed.

Yeah that's true.

 

[entropie]

<------- I'm wit stubid !

 

[Lauren Ashley]

Well the test asks if you "easily" understand new theoretical principals, which should indicate a short span of time.

"Easily" is subjective. If it took you several months to learn all of the principles of physical chemistry, I would say you learned it pretty easily. Yet someone else could learn it in a few weeks. That's the thing about the MBTI: it is asking you to give your opinion on yourself. Now if you consider yourself intelligent (which may or may not be true), you will answer these questions in a certain manner.

 

[ajblaise]

Easily is subjective. If it took you several months to learn all of the principles of physical chemistry, I would say you learned it pretty easily. Yet someone else could learn it in a few weeks. That's the thing about the MBTI: it is asking you to give your opinion on yourself. Now if you consider yourself intelligent (which may or may not be true), you will answer these questions in a certain manner.

Yeah that's one of the potential biases I see in the test. Someone just looking for positive feedback might be more likely to test N on some questions, just like a male F might be more inclined to test T because of gender norms. I know a couple obvious NF guys who claim to test as NTs, but I'm fairly certain they're mistyped.

But if a bias gets in the way of one question, there are 60 other questions on the test that will hopefully make up for it.

 

[LostInNerSpace]

You approach a new problem and are told to use a principle X and that you should just accept that X is the way it is.

You might say I can't just accept that. I need to know the why behind X. Ok, so X is a result of Y. So why is Y is that way? Y is because of A, B, and C. Now you might want to know the why behind A, B, and C, but at least you have a better chance of understanding the original problem without necessarily completely understanding A, B and C.
If going into the problem you understand A, B, C and maybe Y, you will understand the problem much faster than if you had no context to work with.

Some people might be able to solve problems quickly by just looking at the surface and accepting principles at face value without fully understanding why they are that way. I need the big picture. I will be initially slower learning new things than people who can take things at face value, but I will have much deeper insight when I know enough to understand the problem. Probably much more than I need for that problem but the additional information adds to my overall big picture understanding.

I have become faster at solving problems with age because I have had more time to build up my big picture. I have a lot of context to work with. I had a hard time learning new things in high school. On reflection, I see it was because I did not have the big picture understanding I needed. I could not accept things at face value, which is the way I was being taught. It was an inadequate learning style for me.

 

[Siúil a Rúin]

Well the test asks if you "easily" understand new theoretical principals, which should indicate a short span of time.

So the test basically asks if you are smart, and if you answer "yes" then you are an NT? If that is the case, then the MBTI tests should be skill based and not a self-reporting view of oneself.

This seems to come down to the question of whether or not MBTI is measuring cognitive functions as skills or preferences.

Edit: The self-reporting test is an effective way to measure someone's preferences if they answer honestly, but it is not designed to measure skill. An individual might value using empathy to solve problems, but they aren't accurate when trying to identify someone else's feelings or viewpoint. Another person might value using an external, impersonal measure, but their ability with logic is quite poor.

 

[ajblaise]

So the test basically asks if you are smart, and if you answer "yes" then you are an NT? If that is the case, then the MBTI tests should be skill based and not a self-reporting view of oneself.

This seems to come down to the question of whether or not MBTI is measuring cognitive functions as skills or preferences.

Some kind of skill based MBTI tests sounds interesting actually. But I don't know how you would test E/I or T/F as skills on a simple test.

I think self-reporting can suffice in many instances though. If someone doesn't have a totally skewed view of themselves, and if they are answering the questions honestly and understand the questions, self-reporting the answers will be more accurate than not.

 

[Athenian200]

Yeah, there are stupid NTs. You know how I know?

Because I've outsmarted them! If I can outsmart them, they must be stupid, because I'm not all that smart.

 

[Kalach]

Are there stupid NTs?

I wouldn't know.


And generally it's nicer to see people being intelligent rather than merely laying claim to it.



EDIT: how does an NT go about saying, sure, yeah, there are slow-witted NTs out there? Does he include a disclaimer? Does he go over-drive being objective to show how slow-witted he isn't? Does he say, pffft, and go view some other thread? Does he expect the OP to substantiate her claim or does he jump up and down on the springboard of his own insecurities?

Today's theater: "Lets see who can take being nominated not necessarily not dumb!"

 

[Fluffywolf]

There are those who think I'm smart and intelligent, and there are those who think I am stupid as well.

It all depends on how much I care.