[NT] Stupid NTs

[Jaguar]

Actually that is not true.

Google: MBTI measures preferences.

You seem to be the only person in this forum who doesn't even know the basics.
Don't waste my time.

 

[ajblaise]

No one gets pissed off when people say SJs are helpful, SPs are spontaneous, or NF are dreamers. But say NTs are intelligent, and you're in a world of trouble. Fact of the matter is each of these is a description of the type. These are Types not constants. There will always be variation, but there is a pattern within the type that was apparent enough to be put into the general description.

Yeah, there is such an obvious correlation between NTs and intelligence, it seems silly that people want to disregard it or call it a wash.

Maybe the NFs feel left out... You guys are smart too, intelligence relates more to N/S than it does T/F.

 

[ThatGirl]

If you wish to see stupidity, one only needs to read the original post in this thread.

Actually, that is not true.


Please reread again. Without bias. Naturally if understanding is a waste of your time, the stance you have taken in this thread seems justified.

 

[Quinlan]

I don't think people are asking for political correctness, they're asking for plain old correctness.

Saying that NTs can't be stupid, isn't morally or politically wrong, it's just false.

As is saying SJs can't be unhelpful, SPs can't be planned, or NFs can't be realistic, all just as false according to the theory.

The theory itself makes no assertions in regards to ability, so there are no real assertions you can draw from the theory.

 

[ajblaise]

Saying that NTs can't be stupid, isn't morally or politically wrong, it's just false.

But I don't think anyone is saying it's 100% black or white, we're just noting the clear correlations.

 

[Quinlan]

But I don't think anyone is saying it's 100% black or white, we're just noting the clear correlations.

when people say there are stupid NTs, I just don't understand how that is possible.

Was the whole basis of the thread wasn't it? Which seems black and white. Otherwise if it's just stating there is a correlation, it's very much stating the obvious, a pointless thread.

It was the definitive point that NTs couldn't be stupid that made the thread interesting and contentious.

 

[ajblaise]

Was the whole basis of the thread wasn't it? Which seems black and white. Otherwise if it's just stating there is a correlation, it's very much stating the obvious, a pointless thread.

It was the definitive point that NTs couldn't be stupid that made the thread interesting and contentious.

Well there are a few N/S questions on the MBTI test that do totally depend on intelligence.

It could be said that virtually no stupid people "easily understand new theoretical principals", so if a stupid person answers that way on the test, they are almost certainly mistyping themselves.

But other N/S and T/F questions aren't directly related to intelligence, so it's conceivable than a stupid NT could get away with a low NT score and not be mistyped.

 

[BlackCat]

I don't think people are asking for political correctness, they're asking for plain old correctness.

Saying that NTs can't be stupid, isn't morally or politically wrong, it's just false.

As is saying SJs can't be unhelpful, SPs can't be planned, or NFs can't be realistic, all just as false according to the theory.

The theory itself makes no assertions in regards to ability, so there are no real assertions you can draw from the theory.

Could have said this myself. Bravo.

Pointless thread is pointless.

 

[Quinlan]

Well there are a few N/S questions on the MBTI test that do totally depend on intelligence.

It could be said that virtually no stupid people "easily understand new theoretical principals", so if a stupid person answers that way on the test, they are almost certainly mistyping themselves.

But other N/S and T/F questions aren't directly related to intelligence, so it's conceivable than a stupid NT could get away with a low NT score and not be mistyped.

That just highlights the subjectivity of the term (stupid) as most sensors will tell you that that theory without application is stupid. A sensor could easily point to the sensotard thread as a sign of stupidity, but we are more forgiving than that.

stu·pid (stpd, sty-)
adj. stu·pid·er, stu·pid·est
1. Slow to learn or understand; obtuse.
2. Tending to make poor decisions or careless mistakes.
3. Marked by a lack of intelligence or care; foolish or careless: a stupid mistake.
4. Dazed, stunned, or stupefied.
5. Pointless; worthless: a stupid job.

1. Note it doesn't define what isn't being learnt or understood. If an intuitive cannot understand or learn the importance of details, or learn how to interact with the environment physically then they're stupid by definition.
2. See sensotard thread (oops not so forgiving afterall )
3. Sensors and intuitives tend to care about different things so they might both look careless to each other
4. Intuitives can be like this when overloaded with sensory detail
5. The worth of something is subjective, Sensors and Intuitives place value on different things, so they will see each other as "pointless".

Also there is a reason that the test isn't depended on it's own and usually what is considered to be someone's "true" type is found through self-analysis. So a stupid NT may not test as NT but could very much fit the "whole" type.

 

[Jaguar]

Please reread again. Without bias.

The fact that an ENTJ like myself questions your post, clearly shows I am unbiased.
A biased NT would agree with any bullshit that flew out of your mouth.
Frankly, I think your OP comments are irrational.

 

[Jae Rae]

How about screwing up marriage with a decent woman because he (NT physicist) hits midlife and thinks he's met his dream woman? He tells wife he wants to explore the new relationship. She says sure, go ahead and move out. A month later, things haven't worked out with new gf, he wants to move back in. Wife waits to hear words to the effect of "I made a big mistake." She hears no such words. Divorce is pending.

That is intelligent?

 

[ajblaise]

That just highlights the subjectivity of the term (stupid) as most sensors will tell you that that theory without application is stupid. A sensor could easily point to the sensotard thread as a sign of stupidity, but we are more forgiving than that.



1. Note it doesn't define what isn't being learnt or understood. If an intuitive cannot understand or learn the importance of details, or learn how to interact with the environment physically then they're stupid by definition.
2. See sensotard thread (oops not so forgiving afterall )
3. Sensors and intuitives tend to care about different things so they might both look careless to each other
4. Intuitives can be like this when overloaded with sensory detail
5. The worth of something is subjective, Sensors and Intuitives place value on different things, so they will see each other as "pointless".

Also there is a reason that the test isn't depended on it's own and usually what is considered to be someone's "true" type is found through self-analysis. So a stupid NT may not test as NT but could very much fit the "whole" type.

We are basically talking about intelligence in this thread, not senso-capability. And an intelligent person can a complete sensotard. But sure, smart/stupid can sometimes refer to sensotardation... but it's usually referring to mentaltardation.

 

[Jaguar]

How about screwing up marriage with a decent woman because he (NT physicist) hits midlife and thinks he's met his dream woman? He tells wife he wants to explore the new relationship. She says sure, go ahead and move out. A month later, things haven't worked out with new gf, he wants to move back in. Wife waits to hear words to the effect of "I made a big mistake." She hears no such words. Divorce is pending.

That is intelligent?

Neither party displayed intelligence.

 

[Quinlan]

We are basically talking about intelligence in this thread, not senso-capability. And an intelligent person can a complete sensotard. But sure, smart/stupid can sometimes refer to sensotardation... but it's usually referring to mentaltardation.

Well the OP used the word "stupid", and by the dictionary definition of the word it is perfectly possible for NTs to fit that description. If you want me to use your own definition of stupid I can but then you need to realise that it's probably going to have a bias towards your perspective for no good reason.

The opposite of sensing (in the mbti sense) isn't "mental". All of the processes are mental processes. Perhaps what you mean to say is intuitives are usually good at using the mental processes that you favour yourself?

 

[PeaceBaby]

Wow, this thread is still going?

"Stupid" and NT is not an oxymoron folks ... stupid is as stupid does, and no one has claim on being the best / smartest at everything!

I love ya all anyways ... so I shall just send a nice big !

 

[Jaguar]

It's the stupidest thread I've ever seen in this forum.
And in some ways the funniest, since it is so stupid.

 

[ThatGirl]

Jager ....you're [ ... ] . Seriously.


Everyone else: My personal understanding is that there are no stupid people, only stupid acts. Which you could have seen demonstrated in the OP, as well as the fact that at no point did I try to base my premise in relation to other personality types. For instance I never said that NTs were smarter than other types. This is a bias that you came up with, and is also the bias I was attempting to bring attention to.

Now without comparing NT intelligence to those of other types, I would still conclude that NT mentality or temperment is going to lead to at least some specialized knowledge in some area. The point of the OP was to show that NTs shouldn't attempt to be more politically correct in reference to their knowledge as any other type. After all this is the assumption of the public, not the NT.

 

[Quinlan]

NTs should feel free to be proud and open about whatever abilities they have as individuals, it's not politically incorrect to do so.

 

[Nonsensical]

Stupid NTs? Ok, so there must be no evil NFs, or no cautious SPs, and no wreckless SJs.

Don't think that all NTs are at the top of the intellectual food chain. You're going out on a limb making a ludicrous presumption.

 

[ThatGirl]

Again, at no point did I attempt to make this assumption.