It seems like every other person on this website claims to be INTJ. Given it's only 1% of the population this cannot possibly be right, or is it? Maybe it's just overrepresented for some reason, but I have no idea why that is. It seems like everyone wants to be INTJ though, but rarely they are.
Secondary question: why aren't there many S's here? They are found everywhere in real life, but barely anyone here claims to be one.
many mistyped Ns here, probably about 30% to me seem like mistypes. this is including many mistyped intjs. i see some especially bizarre ones, estp, esfp, isfj, enfj, mistyping as intj.
A few other sites don't have this problem, Socionics forums mainly. MBTI is pretty jacked on the S/N dichotomy. That, combined with the fact that this site is a spin-off of
www.intpcentral.com, is why everyone thinks they are an intuitor.
I was astounded to see a professionally accredited admin on a Socionics forum acknowledge Ni-doms as "sloppy thinkers", because that's about what I've gathered as well. They subvert the actuality of systems in preference of "a priori" knowledge; if a duality were presented, sensors would be objectivists (perhaps facile in understanding, to attribute something negative), and surely many intellectual types around here would be in favor of this approach to reality. But I digress.
for Si objectivists, it's the objective reality of the most commonly circulating interpretations and examples from which those are drawn (Se is more about tropes, about embodied stories/myths that organize how one makes sense of time/cause, at least for broad, complex issues. for immediate causal bodies-in-space assessment, they know how forces interact incredibly quickly). that circulating "meaning system" aspect is what allows the "duality" to be presented in the first place, embodied as a scheme of a-perception that exists before the object does, in a sense, because it has emerged through interactions that are not strictly with the current object but has instead been generally predicted from a larger class of similar ones in relationship with social networks that circulate the information through which organization, identity, is possible. we ride the space between perception and the object more only because we triangulate the relationship with another that creates an artificial space, that creates more surface area to feel out and simulate the underlying interactions, the inner geometries, of the deep structure of something. it relies on getting a feel for the sway, rather than the discrete movement, kind of feels like the monkey bars, going back and forth again and again, but spiraling, like a double helix, yet folding over itself again and again. see: origami.
the difference between N is this kind of analog thinking instead of digital, instead of discrete statisticization. the advantage of recombining the lenses that are commonly employed and being reflexive of the essence of them in the process, allows you to become aware of the paradigm you are operating within. it allows scale and perspective from which to observe to be more open-ended, to deal with a different kind of complexity. in terms of discrete, routinized operationality, if that was your primary criteria for assessing it, it does have clear drawbacks. in terms of immediate plug-and-play semantics, it can be inefficient unless it is able to take a very active role in constructing understanding between the languages it already knows and the language it is encountering. this requires much more complex relationships with teaching and translating, which can be costly and difficult to support.
it's like, Si embodies the blueprints, and Ni reverse engineers what came before them. they both are obviously necessary, highly functional cognitive skills. to know discretely what they are, but to also know them thru the contexts in which we can interpret their meaning beyond the paradigm through which they have been programmed into us. to get at what binds all things is to get at their essences in relationship to other essences. which is simply prioritizing the patterns that connect things, the big pieces of them, rather than prioritizing the nodes that get marked statistically, the individual, isolated states that digitally register a yes.