[MBTI General] Intuitards: Do all Sensors suck?

[Wolf]

In defense of sensors, once you train them, all things being equal (intelligence, physical strength, etc), they'll do things faster and more reliably than an intuitive.

Example: I'd rather have a bright SP designing my user interfaces and packaging... That's one thing we're considered weak with at my employer (which is NTville) - our stuff isn't finished looking, and I often point out glaringly-obvious stuff we could do to make our products look better/finished. Most flat do not realize this stuff and they are usually cheap changes that result in a much better looking product (also, had they not been after-thoughts they would have been really cheap to implement).

 

[BlackMita]

Working at my part-time job has shown me where sensors excel. I spend a lot of time addressing customer looking for specific things, and wanting to specific answers. Even if I’m told what they’re called, or what I look like, etc… I am rarely of much help on my own.

So I use the walky-talky (how all the employees communicate with one another) and just as ask for assistance. Nearly all the time, one of the managers or cashiers (strong S types) has the answer. It’s like they are walking information boxes programmed with competence in all things associated to the job. I couldn’t do that, and wouldn’t want to try.

 

[Totenkindly]

In defense of sensors, once you train them, all things being equal (intelligence, physical strength, etc), they'll do things faster and more reliably than an intuitive.

That little bit might have been worded better , but in general I agree. An iNtuitive might grasp things more quickly (depending on the task at hand) and need less oversight, but for many tasks, once a Sensor learns the ropes, I would trust them more with the quality of product/service.

(An N is always at least a little bit "somewhere else" mentally, and not entirely locked into the task.)

And yes, an SP with an artistic eye is capable of beautiful things. Some NTs are the worst artists I've seen in my life.

 

[Natrushka]

. Some NTs are the worst artists I've seen in my life.

*raises hand* That would be me.

 

[raincrow007]

*raises hand* That would be me.

*raises hand* That would NOT be me.

 

[Varelse]

And yes, an SP with an artistic eye is capable of beautiful things. Some NTs are the worst artists I've seen in my life.

I hope that's not me.

I know a couple STs-one is studying to be an engineer, and figured his life out by about age 15. The other one is one of my good friends, probably a P as well, and she's much better at math than I'll ever be. (I space out too much).

As I've said before, I'd think that the main cause of my problems with Sensors would be that because they are the majority group, and thus many of them haven't had the motivation to work on their weaker functions as much. An N that refuses to work on their weaker areas bugs me as well-I knew a kid several years ago who had absolutely no idea how to function in the real world.

One of my jobs is very ISTJ in nature-sitting in a lonely room filing. I can do it, and I wouldn't consider such work demeaning for me right now-plus I do a good job with it-but I much prefer doing computer installations and such, and I do well with that as well.

My mom (ISFP), has always wanted me to be more of the "ideal" female. Wants me to be a housewife, of all things. My grandma (ISTP?) is a helpful, supportive, and understanding person, who's always encouraged me to develop my intellect.

And then my ESTP grandpa drives me nuts.

But, overall, I'd prefer a well-rounded Sensor to an Intuitive with no sense of reality-or one that thinks all Sensors suck.

 

[Wolf]

That little bit might have been worded better , but in general I agree. An iNtuitive might grasp things more quickly (depending on the task at hand) and need less oversight, but for many tasks, once a Sensor learns the ropes, I would trust them more with the quality of product/service.

It was the simplest way to say it, and the "you" in there is anyone that trains the person.

I wouldn't say that an intuitive grasps things more quickly, I'd say that we think we grasp something more quickly, whether we do or not, and we could be way off.

(An N is always at least a little bit "somewhere else" mentally, and not entirely locked into the task.)

Very true.

And yes, an SP with an artistic eye is capable of beautiful things. Some NTs are the worst artists I've seen in my life.

That would be me...

 

[Ghost of the dead horse]

Feature of the instrument

The boldface is one of the key reasons why everyone flocks to being labeled as N. There is no reason to assume Sensors are not intelligent. Of course defining and understanding intelligence is worth an entire discussion of its own. When Sensing is reduced to: unintelligent, cannot grasp humor, no imagination, blindly doing as told, tyrants, martyrs, etc. etc. Well of course no one is going to think they are a Sensor. The result is this convulated confusion about what iNtuition is as well. That kind of thing is frustrating because it makes the entire MBTI system a waste of time in terms of gaining understanding.

Openness to experience, one of the parameters of the big-five model, is moderately correlated to intelligence. It is a feature of the MBTI instrument too, or a fault, one might say.

Too bad there are inherent problems with self-evaluating positive traits - a bias, to say the least. Many people happily denounce "intelligence", or try to explain "good common sense" and practical skills as the "real" intelligence tho, which might counter the effect somewhat.

S people use their lovely and wonderful skills more readily and more often, which I really love as an E type and consider as use of social intelligence. Dance, singing, playing an instrument, I love to see people perform those, and I dont categorize people doing those in the "dumb-box".

I am a strong N, but I think that a person's intelligence can be well used by doing mostly regular types of practical things, as opposed to theorizing all the time. Bricks can be laid for one building contractor or another, with the choice being made intelligently and the job consisting mostly of S-type skills.

I have recently began to accept S more in myself and in others. It has been for my benefit as an N, too.

To me its natural that practically adept S's are underrepresented in venues where theories and world views are being discussed, and with underrepresentation, their views and their lifestyle isn't being promoted and accepted to the full extent possible.

It's also a way to get back at those S who interrupt us in the dinner table and blurt, "paleonthology, who cares! Check this new phone I bought!"
We can at least go back on our favourite forums and write disparing comments about them

 

[ptgatsby]

Openness to experience, one of the parameters of the big-five model, is moderately correlated to intelligence. It is a feature of the MBTI instrument too, or a fault, one might say.

To one sub-factor in the FFM Openness, anyway... namely openness to new ideas. Ironically, the N/S divide is actually correlated strongly to raw IQ (gF and gC for that amtter). That's what you get when you split the population into 1/3 self-identified "smart traits" and 2/3 "down to earth".

Interestingly enough, unlike raw IQ, there seems to be little practical advantage in being an N. Most of it seems given up by the concentration of overly abstract/etc thinking traits, which while associated with high IQ, aren't particularly correlated to making sense or reflecting reality. A rather strange mixture of traits, really.

Really though, I think the concept of "S" laying bricks is utter bullshit and that is what I'd like to draw attention to. Se is not about playing sports or being adrenaline monkeys. Si is not about being rigid religious/cultural ethnocentric.

ISTPs in management positions, for example, use their S preference towards planning and acting... and tend to be pretty good at it. Even with a heavy emphasis towards lower IQs and more mundane levels of jobs, Ss are not pushed out by Ns at all... just as the STJs are the ones creating and running most companies on this planet, corporate, military or otherwise. The underlying point being that Ns use intelligence as their differentiating point and the way to self-identify themselves as special and unique. The rest of the world doesn't really care, so it ends up just being a circle of people patting themselves on the back.

My trip through INTPdom taught me all I needed to know about that, heh.

 

[FDG]

To one sub-factor in the FFM Openness, anyway... namely openness to new ideas. Ironically, the N/S divide is actually correlated strongly to raw IQ (gF and gC for that amtter). That's what you get when you split the population into 1/3 self-identified "smart traits" and 2/3 "down to earth".

Interestingly enough, unlike raw IQ, there seems to be little practical advantage in being an N. Most of it seems given up by the concentration of overly abstract/etc thinking traits, which while associated with high IQ, aren't particularly correlated to making sense or reflecting reality. A rather strange mixture of traits, really.

Sorry but the argument seems to have a hole to me? When you say - unlike raw IQ, there seems to be little practical advantage in being an N - actually the practical advantage in being an N can be identified as high IQ, given its general strong tie to earnings, academic performance, etc

My theory - which I think I've already exposed, and you've already replied to - is simply that smart people tend to score as N in MBTI tests given their differential higher capability for abstract thinking. You might object that given that this is what happens, we have no other way of actually finding out who's N, or who's S.

ISTPs in management positions, for example, use their S preference towards planning and acting... and tend to be pretty good at it.

Why do you think that those ISTPs in management have low IQ? I talk all the time with an ESTP friend of mine that dropped out of school when he was 11 (!!!) and now he's the vice-president of an electronic components factory (with loads of EE older than him that work for him). He understands everything that happens in the "real-world" so fast that it bewilders most people that know him. Yet school just bored him, because he couldn't see why it was important to learn how to solve equations without any real-world application. I'm sure if we were to administer him an IQ test he'd score in the 120-130 range no doubt.

Even with a heavy emphasis towards lower IQs and more mundane levels of jobs, Ss are not pushed out by Ns at all... just as the STJs are the ones creating and running most companies on this planet, corporate, military or otherwise.

Being that my father is in the military, and being that in the place where I live the neighborhood is formed mostly by people from the army - I can assure you that the higher ranks of the military are really, really much smarter than the lower. Right now to be an Official you have to know several languages, know how to operate machinery, know how to use technology, know how to write detailed reports. This is highly skilled labor, imho.

 

[The Ü™]

The way I see it, Intuitives are isolated from reality but don't see it as an unhealthy way of life.

Sensors live and show concern for actual reality and current events (such as global warming), Intuitives invent their own reality and are more accepting of pseudo-science.

 

[Recluse]

Experimental science, sure, but pseudoscience? I do like some peas with my carrots.

I'll concede, though, that whether a particular subject should be labeled as a pseudoscience may be open for debate.

 

[htb]

I work closely with an ISFP, an ESFP and an ESFx. Straightforward, deft, capable. One of them is a sworn policeman while all three are licensed airplane pilots, and I would trust each with my life.

 

[Helfeather]

You can just a S w/ your life.

And N on the other hand would probably sacrifice you for the greater good.

 

[Varelse]

And N on the other hand would probably sacrifice you for the greater good.

NT, probably. NF, I'm not so sure about.

 

[anii]

Based on what I know of type theory, dissing specific types/functions is an unethical misuse of type.

That said, I'm aware I've already dissed my own type and ENTPs/ENTJs.

I grew up among Sensors, my oldest friend is a Sensor.

The one consistent element I find lacking is the ability to look beyond the surface. Surprise surprise. I don't seek out Sensors when I want to explore nuances, seek patterns, or discuss trends.

My biggest frustration is when they take me literally. Especially when I'm trying to be humorous.

 

[xNFJiminy]

I'd be proud to be an S if I were one. I'm just not.

I think if there's any animosity against Ss from Ns it's probably from those who feel insecure or victimised in some way by specific sensors or what they perceive as a sensing society.

I know when I read the INFJ (what I scored before I knew anything about typology) description, it felt good to suddenly have an 'excuse' for all the short-comings that my sensing family and some sensing peers had brought to my attention. That's not the author's or MBTI's intention, I'm sure, but it's how I took it!

Often iNtuitors are intimidated by the sensing world with its expectations, some types more than others; I see it all the time. Ns probably get cliquey and superior in reaction to this, as many minorities do. Ever seen how nasty homosexuals can be about heterosexuals on forums? It's all harmless venting, I'm sure. They don't mean it.

 

[Ivy]

I know when I read the INFJ (what I scored before I knew anything about typology) description, it felt good to suddenly have an 'excuse' for all the short-comings that my sensing family and some sensing peers had brought to my attention. That's not the author's or MBTI's intention, I'm sure, but it's how I took it!

This is interesting-- we bring so much to the table when we analyze ourselves. I think that I come from a family that tends toward the N and the P, and I wonder if this is why I thought I was an SJ at first (maybe I am, it's hard to know, given these biases and preconceptions- this stuff is all pretty subjective). My mother and older brother are SO N, I guess I thought I couldn't possibly be what they are. Same with my dad-- I thought he was ISFJ but now I think he's INFJ. Our N just isn't quite as strong as theirs.

 

[xNFJiminy]

This is interesting-- we bring so much to the table when we analyze ourselves. I think that I come from a family that tends toward the N and the P, and I wonder if this is why I thought I was an SJ at first (maybe I am, it's hard to know, given these biases and preconceptions- this stuff is all pretty subjective). My mother and older brother are SO N, I guess I thought I couldn't possibly be what they are. Same with my dad-- I thought he was ISFJ but now I think he's INFJ. Our N just isn't quite as strong as theirs.

Maybe having parents with an unusually strong preference makes us over-compensate in our own lives, to fill the void. My family were all fairly strong sensors and it was so rare for me to play outside or interact with other children until I went to school that if I hadn't become a full-time dreamer, I'd have gone quite mad.

I don't think everyone has a default perceiving function. The best functioning people will be able to judge when something is best processed through N or S and in what proportion. Most people probably have a slight bias towards using one or the other when they can get away with it, but I agree with proteinmix, usually it's not very discernable. Having a more considerable degree of preference is not necessarily bad, as long as the individual is not unwilling or unable to use the other when it would benefit themselves. E.g. due to some research I read about today, I suspect that having a strong N preference and a weak sensing capacity underlies psychotic illness, while those same N abilities, when combined with also exceptional sensing abilities, are what constitute genius. This research was about the link between genius and insanity and looked at several N characteristics and working memory, which I attribute to sensing. One without the other does more harm than good.

 

[Splittet]

Sensors live and show concern for actual reality and current events (such as global warming)

You might be right, but global warming is a very bad example, perhaps because it's more of a future than present challenge? I think intuitives are probably more likely to care about and acknowledge it … That being said, you would probably have seen a larger difference between intuitives and sensors a few years ago, as global warming is being more and more accepted as a fact.