[NT] Would an NT ever admit (s)he's of average intelligence?

[alakazam]

I have yet to meet a person I can objectively say is more intelligent than I am.

lol

I've met a few, but the focus of their intelligence is in different areas. My granddad (ENTJ) and I get along very well because we both learn all kinds of stuff from each other. But mostly, I'm the same way... (I mean, there are people who have skills in areas I don't, but few whose ability to learn and the extent of their knowledge is around or greater than mine, which I believe primarily has to do with the drive for knowledge)

 

[Thalassa]

Emotional intelligence doesn't exist - it's an oxymoron. Before you immediately fling poo at me, read on.

Cognitive Intelligence, loosely defined, refers to one's ability to logically and rationally reason through things. There is some relatively objective standard there: either you can or you can't reason through something. Having high Cognitive Intelligence would say you are good at doing this.

Emotional Intelligence would then refer to one's ability to emotionally (i.e. subjectively) get through something. So, having high Emotional Intelligence would what? Say that you have a superior ability to feel? Sounds like something made up to justify an inability or lack of desire to control emotions.

Having high Emotional Intelligence cannot help with logically reasoning through problems. However, having high Cognitive Intelligence CAN help control, deal with and empathize with emotions.

What you see from NTs is usually that they see emotions as the devil and see dealing with them or acknowledging them as beneath them. These NTs tend to believe that emotions shouldn't exist and rationality is the be-all-end-all. Through maturity, however, NTs should learn not just that other people have emotions (and so do they! GASP), but also the importance of emotions.

So instead of making up a concept with which you can bash people over the head, call it what it is: the inability or unwillingness to acknowledge them.

Emotional intelligence is not an oxymoron. There is a very good reason why computer programmers and engineers aren't social workers and counselors.

 

[Thalassa]

Wait did you really say making up a term? Have you never heard of emotional intelligence? Are you seriously trying to speak with authority based upon something you've never heard of?

 

[alakazam]

Wait did you really say making up a term? Have you never heard of emotional intelligence? Are you seriously trying to speak with authority based upon something you've never heard of?

Obviously, I was saying that YOU were making up a term. There's obviously no way I was saying that somebody made it up...

 

[Thalassa]

Obviously, I was saying that YOU were making up a term. There's obviously no way I was saying that somebody made it up...

Then you're poorly educated, sir.

 

[alakazam]

Then you're poorly educated, sir.

So you're as good at sarcasm as you are nuances in language, eh?

 

[Thalassa]

So you're as good at sarcasm as you are nuances in language, eh?

No, really. You're not well-educated on the topic of which you speak. If you think I made up the term emotional intelligence, something in your education is lacking.

 

[alakazam]

No, really. You're not well-educated on the topic of which you speak. If you think I made up the term emotional intelligence, something in your education is lacking.

I wasn't saying that at all. It is a made up term. I did not say that you made it up. Again with language.

Your predisposition to believe that I am wrong prevented you from seeing what I'm saying.

 

[Thalassa]

I wasn't saying that at all. It is a made up term. I did not say that you made it up. Again with language.

Your predisposition to believe that I am wrong prevented you from seeing what I'm saying.

All words are made up. This is the nature of language. They are symbols of real things to facilitate understanding and communication. A group of people get together and decide that sounds or a collection of symbols represent a thing or a concept.

And apparently, again I say, even if you were being sarcastic in saying that I made up the term "emotional intelligence" you clearly are not educated on what the term means if you think it means nothing more than the ability to feel more deeply.

 

[EJCC]

Emotional intelligence (EI) is an ability, skill or, in the case of the trait EI model, a self-perceived ability to identify, assess, and control the emotions of oneself, of others, and of groups.

Hope this helps.

There are also various online tests out there, including this one. Not that you'll want to take one if you don't think the skill is important. Marm had a point about social work etc, by the way.

And as for the OP: I think I know quite a few NTs who would say that. For example, I know an ENTP who thinks I'm smarter than her; I even had to reassure her, by saying that intelligence is relative and there are many ways that she is incredibly intelligent where I am as stupid as stupid can get.

Seems like more of an ego issue, than a type issue. Or if it's a type issue, it's a type issue that can be, and often is, overcome.

 

[alakazam]

And apparently, again I say, even if you were being sarcastic in saying that I made up the term "emotional intelligence"

I quote myself:

I wasn't saying that at all. It is a made up term. I did not say that you made it up.

 

[Thalassa]

I quote myself:

Why? We already clarified that issue, bro. You didn't even read the content of my post. I said even if you were being sarcastic when you said I made it up, clearly you don't understand the DEFINITION of the term if you think it's about feeling more deeply.

Here you go ladies and gentlemen: an NT with average intelligence.

 

[alakazam]

EI is "a constellation of emotional self-perceptions located at the lower levels of personality." In lay terms, trait EI refers to an individual's self-perceptions of their emotional abilities

This is a subclass within the scope of cognitive intelligence. It is not a separate thing: it is a term used to define a very narrow field of intelligence, focusing exclusively on emotions and self-perception.

Back to what I said originally, this particular area is all-too-often ignored by NTs; but, to beat them on the head with a term created because you (note: "you" is used in a generally plural sense) wanted to have your own special term instead of calling things what they are.

 

[Tallulah]

I wouldn't admit to having average intelligence, because I've seen what average intelligence looks like in the real world. I know I'm quicker to catch onto things than a lot of people around me. I know I've had my intelligence tested several times throughout my education. However, I also know there are a LOT of folks who are smarter than I am, and a lot of folks who have aptitude in areas that I will never have aptitude in.

I think part of the reason NTs wouldn't admit they have average intelligence is that their intelligence is pretty much what they're noticed for. Many of us are not the popular kids or the social kids or the artistic kids...we're the smart kids. Which is not to say people of other types are not intelligent--I guess the "rational vibe" just calls people's attention to the brainy stuff. There's no smokescreen of social brilliance to dazzle and distract the eye.

Also, by saying, "yes, I think I have above average intelligence," it's not meant to be seen as a brag or an ego thing (and others might disagree...no big deal). It's kind of one of those things I felt confident in, growing up. It's the stuff I have had to work on that brings me more pleasure to be complimented on.

 

[Thalassa]

This is a subclass within the scope of cognitive intelligence. It is not a separate thing: it is a term used to define a very narrow field of intelligence, focusing exclusively on emotions and self-perception.

Back to what I said originally, this particular area is all-too-often ignored by NTs; but, to beat them on the head with a term created because you (note: "you" is used in a generally plural sense) wanted to have your own special term instead of calling things what they are.

Yes people want to have their own special term and beat you over the head with it. That's right. Everyone is out to get you. It's not just that you don't know everything and don't like admitting you have weaknesses in certain types of intelligence, such as social skills, ability to read other people, and the ability to comprehend the underlying reasons why other people do what they do.

That's it.

P.S. There's no such thing as an INTx and I think you're probably an INTP.

 

[alakazam]

don't like admitting you have weaknesses in certain types of intelligence, such as social skills, ability to read other people, and the ability to comprehend the underlying reasons why other people do what they do.

For goodness sake, it's not a type of intelligence. It's a field within. One which some people people have worked more at than others, but it is not its own type of intelligence.

P.S. There's no such thing as an INTx and I think you're probably an INTP.

*gasp* THANK YOU. I've been wondering about that for so long! It always seemed odd to me that these tests never gave me an X and none of the MBTI stuff talked about an X. They just kept talking about Ps and Js. If it weren't for you and your apparently vastly superior [emotional] intellect, I'd be at such a loss right now.

But perhaps if you weren't so caught up in the details and clear distinctions of words/things, you'd realize that things are not black and white: they are variable. You are not P or J - just some varying degree between two extremes. I am on the border, exhibiting strong traits from both J and P characteristics. Therefore, which should I select? P or J? Or should I put something that represents that I am not only one or the other? Like, for example, an "x"?

 

[Thalassa]

For goodness sake, it's not a type of intelligence. It's a field within. One which some people people have worked more at than others, but it is not its own type of intelligence.




*gasp* THANK YOU. I've been wondering about that for so long! It always seemed odd to me that these tests never gave me an X and none of the MBTI stuff talked about an X. They just kept talking about Ps and Js. If it weren't for you and your apparently vastly superior [emotional] intellect, I'd be at such a loss right now.

But perhaps if you weren't so caught up in the details and clear distinctions of words/things, you'd realize that things are not black and white: they are variable. You are not P or J - just some varying degree between two extremes. I am on the border, exhibiting strong traits from both J and P characteristics. Therefore, which should I select? P or J? Or should I put something that represents that I am not only one or the either? Like, for example, an "x"?

The vacilliation on your part indicates that you, sir, are most definitely a P. Especially if you've been vacilliating since 2010.

Not only that, but the four dichotomies aren't real. It's all Jungian function theory, in my opinion.

J and P are the MOST important letters in Jungian typing, because it's the result of dom function. Your dom function is your primary lens through which you see the world.

I'm glad you've decided independently that emotional intelligence isn't a type of intelligence. Some people also believe that aliens have probed them anally, to each their own.

 

[alakazam]

The vacilliation on your part indicates that you, sir, are most definitely a P. Especially if you've been vacilliating since 2010.

Ooooo you can use (and misspell) a big word. You must feel pretty proud of yourself.

J and P are the MOST important letters in Jungian typing, because it's the result of dom function. Your dom function is your primary lens through which you see the world.

So, I can interact with the world primarily through direct, rational/logical control, or I can observe by intuitively taking in what I see, but I cannot do both? Sure, both at the same time is unlikely, but we have a fourth dimension. I can perform either function depending on what the situation calls for or whichever I want to do. Again, if you'll get your mind out of black-and-white-ville, you might see this.

Also, which letters form the most important distinction depends entirely on for what you're hoping to use such a distinction. For example, if you're looking for someone to come up with something new or see subtle nuances, then N/S is your primary distinction.

I'm glad you've decided independently that emotional intelligence isn't a type of intelligence. Some people also believe that aliens have probed them anally, to each their own.

Yep. I'm glad too. Good to know we've both taken the advice "Don't get mad; get GLAD!" to heart.

 

[Thalassa]

Ooooo you can use (and misspell) a big word. You must feel pretty proud of yourself.





So, I can interact with the world primarily through direct, rational/logical control, or I can observe by intuitively taking in what I see, but I cannot do both? Sure, both at the same time is unlikely, but we have a fourth dimension. I can perform either function depending on what the situation calls for or whichever I want to do. Again, if you'll get your mind out of black-and-white-ville, you might see this.

Also, which letters form the most important distinction depends entirely on for what you're hoping to use such a distinction. For example, if you're looking for someone to come up with something new or see subtle nuances, then N/S is your primary distinction.





Yep. I'm glad too. Good to know we've both taken the advice "Don't get mad; get GLAD!" to heart.

So tonight I have encountered a self-described INTx who has never read Jung, and apparently neither Beebe nor Lenore Thomson either. But he's talking to me about things not being black and white.

If you understood personality theory, you'd know it actually makes more sense to say you're IxTP or xNTP than INTx.

You'd also understand that an INTJ most certainly wouldn't be comfortable running around with such uncertainty for years at a time, even if you go with MBTI or Keirsey instead.

You don't know the definition of emotional intelligence, and you accuse me of black and white thinking, but then point out a minor misspelling in a word instead of reacting to content.

This indicates to me INTP as well, terrible Ti/Si loop nit-picky thing that's common for you guys.

I majored in English Lit, btw, and had a 3.9 GPA in college. The fact that you're talking down to me like I'm an idiot while you sit there and attempt to speak with authority about things you haven't even studied lets me know just how brilliant you are. Yes, you're so SMRT.

You're exactly the kind of NT I was talking about in my original post. It's absolutely hilarious. Thank you sir for the marvelous example.

 

[01011010]

I do. All the time.