Communication Difficulties Between Sensors and Intuitives

[Metis]

I've had that same problem. Missing the point, telling you what you already know because it's obvious, scolding you because they misunderstood.

Hmm. What makes it even harder is that I feel like I'm 20 steps ahead of them, and they're trying to lecture me on the prerequisites that they think would be needed just to get to Step 1. And they're not stupid. It's not about that.

It's like they think that if they see the tree, then I must only be seeing the branch or the twig, and they want to open my eyes to what they seem to view as the next step, the bigger branch. Meanwhile, I'm seeing the forest and trying to see it in greater detail, and they have no idea that I'm even aware that there is a forest.

 

[Luigi]

Hmm. What makes it even harder is that I feel like I'm 20 steps ahead of them, and they're trying to lecture me on the prerequisites that they think would be needed just to get to Step 1. And they're not stupid. It's not about that.

It's like they think that if they see the tree, then I must only be seeing the branch or the twig, and they want to open my eyes to what they seem to view as the next step, the bigger branch. Meanwhile, I'm seeing the forest and trying to see it in greater detail, and they have no idea that I'm even aware that there is a forest.

Yeah, it's like they assume other people need to be told everything because they're too stupid to understand anything.

I try hard to not make that assumption with anybody. Anybody that does need to be told everything, is honestly a waste of time.

I often feel that way with INTJs and ENTJs, they need everything spelled out for them when they disagree. Nope.
In my experience, ISTJs and ESTJs are honestly better at understanding what you're talking about without all the details.

Well I say "you" but maybe it's just me. I haven't asked for a consensus.

 

[Metis]

Yeah, it's like they assume other people need to be told everything because they're too stupid to understand anything.

I try hard to not make that assumption with anybody. Anybody that does need to be told everything, is honestly a waste of time.

I often feel that way with INTJs and ENTJs, they need everything spelled out for them when they disagree. Nope.
In my experience, ISTJs and ESTJs are honestly better at understanding what you're talking about without all the details.

Well I say "you" but maybe it's just me. I haven't asked for a consensus.

Nah, the people I'm thinking of aren't dumb. These two people, totally different areas of expertise, but they seem to approach them similarly. It's just like they consider it logical to start from zero and then zoom out, whereas I'm better at starting with the birds'-eye view and then zooming in from there. One of these, the professor, liked to make the point that "the more specific a story is, the more universal it is," or something to that effect. That outlook can result in some outstanding work.

 

[Luigi]

Nah, the people I'm thinking of aren't dumb. These two people, totally different areas of expertise, but they seem to approach them similarly. It's just like they consider it logical to start from zero and then zoom out, whereas I'm better at starting with the birds'-eye view and then zooming in from there. One of these, the professor, liked to make the point that "the more specific a story is, the more universal it is," or something to that effect. That outlook can result in some outstanding work.

Maybe I wasn't clear. I meant it's like the STJs you met explain everything because they assume the other person is too dumb to understand anything.

I agree with the only way to cover everything is by being extremely thorough and detailed. That's why I'm more interested in getting the job done, and objectivity can be compromised because I don't have the patience for that.

 

[Metis]

Maybe I wasn't clear. I meant it's like the STJs you met explain everything because they assume the other person is too dumb to understand anything.

I agree with the only way to cover everything is by being extremely thorough and detailed. That's why I'm more interested in getting the job done, and objectivity can be compromised because I don't have the patience for that.

Oh, I see. Yeah, I sometimes feel like they're talking to me like I'm dumb. I'm not sure what they make of it.

 

[Luigi]

Oh, I see. Yeah, I sometimes feel like they're talking to me like I'm dumb. I'm not sure what they make of it.

I don't know either. The few that I've met in person are very difficult to talk with. Maybe they feel compelled to point out the truth as they see it.

 

[Metis]

I don't know either. The few that I've met in person are very difficult to talk with. Maybe they feel compelled to point out the truth as they see it.

Could be. The two in particular I'm thinking of--I just remembered something else weird about interacting with them. This was the case more with the ESTJ professor than with the ISTJ training instructor.

I would be about to do something, and the professor would interrupt--not just interrupt, but at just the wrong moment before I did something, catching me off guard. It was like you were winding up to pitch or whatever, and just as you had your momentum and were about to release the ball, a referee or coach pops up and exclaims, "And when you throw the ball, make sure you're aiming for (fill in blank)!" And you're thinking, "What the hell, I was doing that already, and I was right in the middle of doing it!"

He didn't seem to have a feel for where people where in their thought processes or even in their action processes. It wasn't that he had any trouble paying attention; it was more like he just didn't have much awareness of other people's--I don't know what the word is. He lacked some kind of empathy, but it wasn't about emotional empathy. It was about having a feel for other people's mental processes and physical actions, in real time.

The current guy, the ISTJ, interrupts at odd times too, but it's not as jarring when he does it as it was when the first guy would do it.

 

[Luigi]

Could be. The two in particular I'm thinking of--I just remembered something else weird about interacting with them. This was the case more with the ESTJ professor than with the ISTJ training instructor.

I would be about to do something, and the professor would interrupt--not just interrupt, but at just the wrong moment before I did something, catching me off guard. It was like you were winding up to pitch or whatever, and just as you had your momentum and were about to release the ball, a referee or coach pops up and exclaims, "And when you throw the ball, make sure you're aiming for (fill in blank)!" And you're thinking, "What the hell, I was doing that already, and I was right in the middle of doing it!"

He didn't seem to have a feel for where people where in their thought processes or even in their action processes. It wasn't that he had any trouble paying attention; it was more like he just didn't have much awareness of other people's--I don't know what the word is. He lacked some kind of empathy, but it wasn't about emotional empathy. It was about having a feel for other people's mental processes and physical actions, in real time.

The current guy, the ISTJ, interrupts at odd times too, but it's not as jarring when he does it as it was when the first guy would do it.

Wow. I don't remember ever meeting anybody like that. I can't relate from personal experience. However, I can imagine what that would be like. I could say that was rude, but that's just pointing out the obvious. At least that professor is not in your life anymore. That's the good news. It's always frustrating to be interrupted. I try to avoid doing that. I almost never do. Who would like to be around anyone that does that?

 

[Metis]

Wow. I don't remember ever meeting anybody like that. I can't relate from personal experience. However, I can imagine what that would be like. I could say that was rude, but that's just pointing out the obvious. At least that professor is not in your life anymore. That's the good news. It's always frustrating to be interrupted. I try to avoid doing that. I almost never do. Who would like to be around anyone that does that?

I know, it was crazy and frustrating. He wasn't trying to be rude. But it's the kind of thing a middle-school student in the mood to be obnoxious would do to someone. *LOL*

 

[Luigi]

I know, it was crazy and frustrating. He wasn't trying to be rude. But it's the kind of thing a middle-school student in the mood to be obnoxious would do to someone. *LOL*

How often were you in obnoxious moods while you were a middle school student?

 

[miss fortune]

I don't really have any trouble communicating with either sensors or intuitives

I'm pretty bi-functional... I mean, I'm bi everything else, so why not?

 

[Agent Washington]

I don't think this is strictly an intuitive/sensor thing, actually it's probably just a Dreamer vs the world sort of struggle, but after seeing my INTJ interest over the weekend, I came to an epiphany while we were chatting. She was talking about her use of Ni and learning to try and communicate that to others growing up, and finding a language to make it as clear as possible. Further, she mentioned how she tends to take things in, mull over them, then spit them out, only once she's made some conclusions on those thoughts. This instantly gave me my epiphany. When I make statements or talk to people generally, I'm not making statements that have been mulled over, or even half-baked most the time. When I say something, it is usually just a passing idea. Even if the way I expressed it sounds like an opinion or fact, there is still some wavering there, some room for me to retract. The truth is, and I've only just recently realized this, is that I think out loud, through my words, externally. It really allows me to "see" the problem almost physically, in front of me, where I can then manipulate the mentioned thought or idea, and play with it, as I'm talking. This is usually how a personal brainstorming session goes with me.

So what does this little epiphany mean as it relates to the topic of this thread? Well, naturally, how one makes sense of their world, is by default, how one perceives it. Therefore, what people tell me, in my mind, is also said with hesitation and is given room for interpretation. This has gotten me into trouble with me and my INTJ dad growing up, particularly around money. I was really never much of a spender, but I talked about spending, a lot. Mostly, it was just me fantasizing about buying all these things, talking about them, seeing my options in front of me. To my dad though, these statements were ideas I was going to act on. He would then caution me about spending all my money and ensuring that what I buy is something I truly needed or wanted. I didn't buy most the things I talked about, but this particular example parallels many other instances between me and my dad, and some other people of times my words have been mistaken for things that I've given much thought and consideration on, when in reality, I haven't at all.

I apologize I can be so confusing everyone!

It isn't an intuitive/sensor thing, it is a Pe/Pi thing, both of which are definitively subjective perceiving functions. Ni/Ne and Si/Se by definition area already different so further dividing it up into intuitive/sensing isn't going to yield potential benefits in terms of analysing communication difficulties.

The patronizing step by step stuff sound a lot like when people are specifically utilizing their Te function, (i.e. if u don't understand maybe can start from ground zero to control/level the odds), with the difference is that Si will probably try to help you see it from basic blocks (and thus come off as patronising which is the cost) while Ni will be like 'fuck it, u're probably not going to get it so why bother, maybe i can use other methods to ... persuade... you' (and thus come off as less patronizing, at the cost of something else).

Pi is inherently subjective and personal, and Ni/Si definitions in particular aren't linguistic in nature as Jung describes it.

 

[Siúil a Rúin]

I agree with those who point to emotional involvement confusing communication, which easily happens between men and women. It happens in various contexts regardless of gender, but to the extent that people have an emotional, subjective desire for a particular response from another person is the same extent that miscommunication can occur. People often hear what they want to hear. If you have the distance to be ready to hear anything as truth, then it helps communication be accurate.

 

[Siúil a Rúin]

^Ha, I thought this was the thread about men and women. Oh well, I guess it applies to anything.

 

[Yara the Corpse]

Sensors can be boring, mundane, and overwhelmingly direct and detailed in their speech.. and intuitives can be downright delusional, annoying, and irrelevant. Now that I think about it I really don't know many people who I do enjoy communicating with. I wish I knew what I wanted out of people.

I myself am simple in language but still try to keep things meaningful and relevant.

 

[deathwarmedup]

I feel though, that similar threads could easily be started around the same approach, between different dichotomies such as Feelers and Thinkers, Introverts and Extroverts

I can count the intuitive acquaintances over my life on both hands and I've briefly known two in the past ten years, but from memory, I think that the N/S dichotomy was the bedrock. I disagreed and fought with my XNFX friends and partners, often intensely, but something drew us back together. Association with the NTs I've known (all ENTPs) were more superficial but more steady. Something about N protects the bond even when it's an F putting up with an asshole T like me. E/I is of relatively little importance. That's been my experience.

 

[tinker683]

Strictly speaking in regards to my own communications with Ns, I feel like the largest gulf between us and that I've found they always focus on what ought to be rather than what actually is. The best example that I have is one I run into everyday, the renter or the homeowner who thinks the other ought or should do XYZ thing rather than focus on what they will do.

Yes, renters ought to honor their lease contracts and pay the rent on time but they don't always do so, that's why you ask for a security deposit or have me put a 3 day notice on their door if they're late.
Yes, owners ought to honor the verbal promise they made about fixing [insert item here] that they made some months ago but they don't always do so, so you should get it in writing and take time stamped pictures of it
Yes, renters ought to mow their grass every week or two to keep the yard up, as their contract states, but sometimes life happens and they have to go an extra week before they do so (the horror!)
Yes, owners ought to replace the heat pump that just broke rather than install window units but a) the state of Florida says they only have to providing heating and cooling and window units are legally valid. B) Heat pump systems are really expensive and C) sometimes owners just don't have the money they wish they could have. You can't spend money you don't have.

….and so forth.

But I have also found this happening less and less as I get older. I don't know if it's an age thing, maybe it's because my own inferior Ne is starting to actualize, or if it's just because I keep a small circle of people, but I've found as I get older it's easier for me to understand Ns nowadays than it was 10 years or so ago. I still run into the above mentioned people but even then I can usually get them to understand the reality of the situation 9/10 times.

Every now and then though I find someone who just wants to stick fingers in their years and think they can just WILL their reality into existence. These people I give a wide berth too.

 

[Coriolis]

Strictly speaking in regards to my own communications with Ns, I feel like the largest gulf between us and that I've found they always focus on what ought to be rather than what actually is. The best example that I have is one I run into everyday, the renter or the homeowner who thinks the other ought or should do XYZ thing rather than focus on what they will do.

Yes, renters ought to honor their lease contracts and pay the rent on time but they don't always do so, that's why you ask for a security deposit or have me put a 3 day notice on their door if they're late.
Yes, owners ought to honor the verbal promise they made about fixing [insert item here] that they made some months ago but they don't always do so, so you should get it in writing and take time stamped pictures of it
Yes, renters ought to mow their grass every week or two to keep the yard up, as their contract states, but sometimes life happens and they have to go an extra week before they do so (the horror!)
Yes, owners ought to replace the heat pump that just broke rather than install window units but a) the state of Florida says they only have to providing heating and cooling and window units are legally valid. B) Heat pump systems are really expensive and C) sometimes owners just don't have the money they wish they could have. You can't spend money you don't have.

I think some of this may be the difference between Ni and Ne. Ni usually understands very well that it is a real possibility that the tenant won't pay the rent on time, or the landlord won't fix X, and will take precautions to handle such a situation. This opens us to criticism for being pessimistic, not trusting, even paranoid, but it is well worth it when our suspicions prove correct, and our precautions save us a great deal of trouble.

My INTP, in contrast, will point to the landlord's promise to fix something as all that needs to be said. "But what if he doesn't fix it? How long are we going to wait while it stays broken?" He won't have an answer. He won't feel the need to remind the landlord because he did say he would fix it, after all. I will want to document everything, to find out my legal rights, e.g. to fix it myself and send the bill to the landlord, etc. I have always viewed it as the difference between being focused on the end goal vs. on the process.

 

[Dreamer]

I think some of this may be the difference between Ni and Ne. Ni usually understands very well that it is a real possibility that the tenant won't pay the rent on time, or the landlord won't fix X, and will take precautions to handle such a situation. This opens us to criticism for being pessimistic, not trusting, even paranoid, but it is well worth it when our suspicions prove correct, and our precautions save us a great deal of trouble.

My INTP, in contrast, will point to the landlord's promise to fix something as all that needs to be said. "But what if he doesn't fix it? How long are we going to wait while it stays broken?" He won't have an answer. He won't feel the need to remind the landlord because he did say he would fix it, after all. I will want to document everything, to find out my legal rights, e.g. to fix it myself and send the bill to the landlord, etc. I have always viewed it as the difference between being focused on the end goal vs. on the process.

Hmm, I wonder if we can analyze this further. I would say for the most part I do hold people to their word as your INTP does, but I would weigh the value I place on the person’s words against past personal experience with other people, based on the impression that person gave me i.e. do I sense they are genuine or do I sense there are some motives behind their words? Of course, perceptions of people go way beyond that and aren’t as simplistic. I would say though, the similarity I have with you, and where I differ from your husband, is that my fail safe isn’t so defined and easily put into place should I need to, but I would give myself an “allowance” or time frame of when I think it would be acceptable for that person to act on their words. I understand people get busy or may even forget, so I will send a friendly reminder, and once the date passes that person has the rough allotment of time to fulfill their promises. If the person never holds true to their word or doesn’t even apologize, even then, I don’t typically hold it against them in how I see them. It takes a few times until I say I’ve had enough.

Maybe this is a difference between a Pe and a Ji within Ne? I tend to leave the door open (reserving judgements much later down the road) and act and process in the moment as the situation unfolds, but I don’t like to make absolute plans or fail safe solutions until the moment presents itself and the need is there. Your husband on the other hand, seems to have concluded his judgements earlier, by accepting the landlord’s promises, but then leaves the aftermath up in the air. In general, does that sounds familiar for him?

 

[Coriolis]

Maybe this is a difference between a Pe and a Ji within Ne? I tend to leave the door open (reserving judgements much later down the road) and act and process in the moment as the situation unfolds, but I don’t like to make absolute plans or fail safe solutions until the moment presents itself and the need is there. Your husband on the other hand, seems to have concluded his judgements earlier, by accepting the landlord’s promises, but then leaves the aftermath up in the air. In general, does that sounds familiar for him?

Yes. In such a situation, he would complain about the landlord not keeping his word, but not follow up with action to correct the situation. We often have exchanges like this:

INTJ: Did Bob do X yet?
INTP: I told him to.
INTJ: But did he actually do it?
INTP: I don't know. He said he would.

This makes me want to tear my hair out. See, to my INTP, it was enough to tell Bob what to do, and to hear (or assume) his agreement. If he acknowledges the possibility that Bob might forget, or deliberately choose not to do it, he sees no need to make provisions for that possibility. Situations sometimes drag on for weeks this way. I am left with the choice of leaving it undone, following up myself (when it was something INTP had agreed to do, so I thought was off my plate), or taking INTP to task about it and getting into an argument. Honestly, most of our arguments are over things like this, but then we are both N's, so this doesn't say anything about the S/N divide.