Prejudice against Sensors?

[Jaguar]

When I think SJ I think of parents who say, "Do it...because I SAID SO."

What about religious dogma. The fanatics.
The type of jackass who would yell, "Burn in hell" and shake the Bible?

 

[Kephalos]

But... they're so... so... ugh. The things they do hurt people. I wish you could see it as clearly as I do. I'm not saying they're bad people intentionally, I'm just saying their way of seeing reality might not allow them to be fair or compassionate in any way that matters to us. That may even be why they don't come here... because they feel the same way about us. We live in one world, they live in another. We don't speak the same language, and our actions result in each of us stepping on the other's toes. We're inherently enemies of SJs, willingly or not.

I woud like to reply to this, that some of my closest relatives are SJs, and that my experience with them is completely the contrary.

To be sure, sometimes they seem unreasonable to me, but this is the exception rather than the rule; although their conversation may seem to me shallow, they are always the ones who tell me to add something substantial to the conversation, and when I do try, they are always considerate, even if seemingly inattentive. For one, I cannot conceive how any other set of people who would not only tolerate but see past my graver flaws; perhaps, let's say for the sake of argument, they do it out of loyalty to me as their relative, but even in this case, one cannot but praise this feeling. Also, they people who are always ready to help, even with matters that I admit I should attend to myself; in very difficult circumstances which would have broken me, my SJs have stepped up. Finally, I would like to say that when I refused to be Confirmed, none of my SJs objected or thought any less of me, the only one making a big deal out of it being my INTP father. So, sorry, but I think ugh is a complete misrepresentation of SJs.

 

[Thalassa]

What about religious dogma. The fanatics.
The type of jackass who would yell, "Burn in hell" and shake the Bible?

Yes, that too. I know they all aren't like that, though. Some care more about Abercrombie than Jesus. But whatever their superficial standard is, you better get with it, soldier.

 

[juggernaut]

I have an ESFJ parent, and my N vs. S is about 50-50, and I had a pretty enjoyable childhood. Both of my parents are great (although they have their annoying quirks). Oddly enough, my mother has more of the traits that many on here associate with SJs, although I don't think I would type her as one.

Maybe it's just ESFJ moms. The manipulation, the lies, and the histrionics were enough to turn this little INTJ into a raging E beast by the time adulthood rolled around. The saddest part is I know she really believed that I was out to get her from the beginning. She still tells stories of my peeling the "new" wallpaper off the walls just to upset her...when I was three! It's a true T-F divide. My curiosity, dislike of smothering displays of affection, and inability to say things "nicely" were all taken as a giant personal affront. She's finally figured out that it had nothing to do with her, but it took cancer and near death for her to realize that neither I nor the rest of world were personally out to get her. She's actually kind of a hoot these days, who said dementia was all bad?

 

[pure_mercury]

Maybe it's just ESFJ moms. The manipulation, the lies, and the histrionics were make enough to turn this little INTJ into a raging E beast by the time adulthood rolled around. The saddest part is I know she really believed that I was out to get her from the beginning. She still tells stories of my peeling the "new" wallpaper off the walls just to upset her...when I was three! It's a true T-F divide. My curiosity, dislike of smothering displays of affection, and inability to say things "nicely" were all taken as a giant personal affront. She's finally figured out that it had nothing to do with her, but it took cancer and near death for her to realize that neither I nor the rest of world were personally out to get her. She's actually kind of a hoot these days, who said dementia was all bad?

I don't know. I'd imagine that I have a lot of SJ relatives, and the worst things about them would be nosy/gossipy behavior and generally provincial attitudes about the world. I never really came across super-irrational "You do it this way because this is the way you do it!" kind of behavior. I found that more in my Catholic schooling.

 

[juggernaut]

Sometimes I don't think they want to "get" you, because in their minds they should "fix" you. I think my grandfather's last wife was an SJ, too, and she wanted to "fix" my grandfather's entire family, and thought that people reading and talking about ideas was "weird", and god help me they deserved each other. I know that's terrible to say, but my mom says the same thing. At least as an SP even when she doesn't understand me, or we get on each others nerves, I know she loves me and all of my other sisters unconditionally and would do anything for us no matter how "weird" we are.

My exes mother is an SJ too. She thought I was a terrible person because I didn't make my bed every day or clean the bathroom to her standards.

That's my sis, my dear sweet ex, many dear friends, and my NOW mildly demented mother (the J is melting with the rest of her brain I guess lol!).

EDIT: Merc, I don't doubt there are a lot of great ESFJs, it's just kind of a tough fit for a strong NT.

 

[Thalassa]

I woud like to reply to this, that some of my closest relatives are SJs, and that my experience with them is completely the contrary.

To be sure, sometimes they seem unreasonable to me, but this is the exception rather than the rule; although their conversation may seem to me shallow, they are always the ones who tell me to add something substantial to the conversation, and when I do try, they are always considerate, even if seemingly inattentive. For one, I cannot conceive how any other set of people who would not only tolerate but see past my graver flaws; perhaps, let's say for the sake of argument, they do it out of loyalty to me as their relative, but even in this case, one cannot but praise this feeling. Also, they people who are always ready to help, even with matters that I admit I should attend to myself; in very difficult circumstances which would have broken me, my SJs have stepped up. Finally, I would like to say that when I refused to be Confirmed, none of my SJs objected or thought any less of me, the only one making a big deal out of it being my INTP father. So, sorry, but I think ugh is a complete misrepresentation of SJs.

I do know what you mean though...this could be the difference between, say, an ESTJ and an ISFJ.

I know my exes SJ mother thinks the ground her son walks on is GOLD. I'm sure I have ISFJ family members who love me just because I'm family. I think my uncle is a fine example. He's like a more mellow, lovable version of my grandfather.

I guess family loyalty could definitely be counted as one of their perks. However, sometimes that loyalty is completely irrational in the face of what their family member might be doing to harm others. Or what their country might be doing to harm others...I'm surprised this hasn't been mentioned here. The rabid patriotism. Sorry, I'm getting negative again, but I've been traumatized.

/INFP-ness

 

[Athenian200]

I woud like to reply to this, that some of my closest relatives are SJs, and that my experience with them is completely the contrary.

To be sure, sometimes they seem unreasonable to me, but this is the exception rather than the rule; although their conversation may seem to me shallow, they are always the ones who tell me to add something substantial to the conversation, and when I do try, they are always considerate, even if seemingly inattentive. For one, I cannot conceive how any other set of people who would not only tolerate but see past my graver flaws; perhaps, let's say for the sake of argument, they do it out of loyalty to me as their relative, but even in this case, one cannot but praise this feeling.

I don't understand how one could praise it. It's... arbitrary, impersonal, AND irrational (yes, it provokes both my NT and NF sides). I'm sorry, but merely caring about me isn't good enough. I'd rather be hated than cared about for the wrong reasons. I need to be valued for who I am, not what I am.

I guess I just don't understand that at all.

Also, they people who are always ready to help, even with matters that I admit I should attend to myself; in very difficult circumstances which would have broken me, my SJs have stepped up. Finally, I would like to say that when I refused to be Confirmed, none of my SJs objected or thought any less of me, the only one making a big deal out of it being my INTP father. So, sorry, but I think ugh is a complete misrepresentation of SJs.

Okay, I've admitted that they do good things already. I just don't think that makes them good people.

 

[Kephalos]

I don't understand how one could praise it. It's... arbitrary, impersonal, AND irrational (yes, it provokes both my NT and NF sides). I'm sorry, but merely caring about me isn't good enough. I'd rather be hated than cared about for the wrong reasons. I need to be valued for who I am, not what I am.

At least grant me that it can be selfless, that is, that one be may prompted to act on something else than inclination -- which may be just as arbitrary, fickle and self-serving-- or even good to ourselves. Which, I think, is a good answer to this:

I just don't think that makes them good people.

Unless there is outright malice, I don't think in ordinary situations it's justified to call someone evil. However, that does not make a person good either, but at least neutral.

 

[Athenian200]

At least grant me that it can be selfless, that is, that one be may prompted to act on something else than inclination -- which may be just as arbitrary, fickle and self-serving-- or even good to ourselves. Which, I think, is a good answer to this:

There's another assumption there... the idea that being selfless is "higher" than acting on inclination or good to yourself. That's the kind of ideal SJs buy into, but it's not my cup of tea. No one should be compelled to sacrifice themselves to satisfy someone else.

I'll grant you that it can be selfless, but call into question the idea that selfless, self-sacrificing behavior is positive.

Unless there is outright malice, I don't think in ordinary situations it's justified to call someone evil. However, that does not make a person good either, but at least neutral.

In ordinary situations, I'll concede that they're neutral. In certain positions of power over other people, it can veer towards unwitting evil, though.

 

[Kephalos]

There's another assumption there... the idea that being selfless is "higher" than acting on inclination or good to yourself.

Actually, that view, that people act on the basis of their own good, usually necessitates an other-regarding motive, if not to account for moral acts, at least to explain them.

 

[Jeffster]

Well, how am I to be expected to see more potential than that in them, if all I have to go on is horror stories and the majority of the sample here reinforcing said stories?.

Can you be specific as to what the "sample here" has done to reinforce "horror stories?"

You still haven't answered my question.

 

[ladyinspring]

EDIT: Merc, I don't doubt there are a lot of great ESFJs, it's just kind of a tough fit for a strong NT.

Some semblance of honesty at last. This is type related conflict. It says nothing about the nature or character of ESFJs that ENTJs have a hard time getting along with them (and probably vice versa).

The fact is, the internet (outside of social networks) is dominated by people who prefer intuition. Therefore, these people get an arena in which to push their perceptions and point of view. It's natural and normal but that doesn't make it any more than subjective perceptions.

All of this "SJs are this" and "SJs are that", unless it is based on solid type theory, is just projection and the hashing out of personality conflicts. If an ESFJ and an ENTJ have a conflict, when the ENTJ gets the forum of course they're going to blame it on the ESFJ. It's what humans do. Of course, that ESFJ is surely muttering about you just the same. It doesn't make either one of you somehow more objective. You're not, you are human. Humans project their faults onto others, humans shift the blame and responsibility, humans take their own side in a conflict.

I just wish I could scream from the mountaintops:

PERSONALITY CONFLICTS DON'T MAKE ANYONE "RIGHT" OR "WRONG"

If you find yourself constantly having conflicts with someone based on type (and not individual character), then it should be obvious that it's just YOU and maybe people like you that would have the problem, and says nothing at all about the person with whom you are in conflict.

All this whining is just unbecoming, and I don't want to hear "well this is the only place we get to do it because those Sensors run the world wah wah wah", you people have been dominating the internet and especially the type community for years now. It is time to get over this and start getting to reality. Stop working out your mommy and daddy issues (EVERYBODY has them, not just poor "intuitives") in type forums.

 

[ladyinspring]

Maybe if more people studied socionics, at least the intertype relations, there would be less of this "n versus s" nonsense. The fact that an ENTJ and an ESFJ might naturally fall into conflict is not at all surprising to me, nor would it be to anybody who went to wikisocion and read:

If Super-Ego partners cannot find a common interest to discuss and ponder, their interaction can quickly descend into strife. The partners would rather express their own points of view than listen to the other partner's point of view. The latter tries to defend himself by projecting his own confident points in return. This can easily devolve into a vicious cycle. Partners normally show interest and respect to each other if they do not know each other well enough. When partners begin to close their psychological distance, they start to experience many problems understanding each other.

Well there now see maybe neither one of you is crazy or bad.

My beloved brother, an ESFJ, has had a devil of a time with the ENTJ presiding overseer in our congregation. This man has nigh well ruined my brother's life because they don't understand each other and he is in a position of power, and everything my brother says and does makes him react like a vampire before a cross. I am very fond of both of them but it's just sad seeing the type conflict play out. But I know that is mainly what it is, and not some evilness in either one of them caused by personality type.

 

[juggernaut]

Maybe if more people studied socionics, at least the intertype relations, there would be less of this "n versus s" nonsense. The fact that an ENTJ and an ESFJ might naturally fall into conflict is not at all surprising to me, nor would it be to anybody who went to wikisocion and read:

If Super-Ego partners cannot find a common interest to discuss and ponder, their interaction can quickly descend into strife. The partners would rather express their own points of view than listen to the other partner's point of view. The latter tries to defend himself by projecting his own confident points in return. This can easily devolve into a vicious cycle. Partners normally show interest and respect to each other if they do not know each other well enough. When partners begin to close their psychological distance, they start to experience many problems understanding each other.

Well there now see maybe neither one of you is crazy or bad.

My beloved brother, an ESFJ, has had a devil of a time with the ENTJ presiding overseer in our congregation. This man has nigh well ruined my brother's life because they don't understand each other and he is in a position of power, and everything my brother says and does makes him react like a vampire before a cross. I am very fond of both of them but it's just sad seeing the type conflict play out. But I know that is mainly what it is, and not some evilness in either one of them caused by personality type.

Interesting claim. Oddly, it's mostly INs that have been expressing that they have difficulty with SJ types. Even I, your one "E", have typed as an INT on about 80% of the tests (socionics is one that I've never typed as anything but an INTJ with) so I don't know that what you're saying has much merit. As far as the rest of what you said, there may be something to it, it just doesn't seem to apply to any of the dynamics that have been discussed here. It might be a little bit much to expect people who have shared relationships with the type being discussed (see title thread) that have spanned many decades to not invoke those relationships as examples that support their positions, however. Mommy issues, daddy issues, brother issues...whatever...when we talk about personality types we generally find ourselves relying on what we've personally experienced. If you don't like people talking about their issues with the types they've encountered it may be easier to avoid threads where certain groups are singled out.

I'm really surprised your overseer let you type him btw. That's fascinating. I generally won't even discuss MBTI with anyone I'm not fairly close with irl. It's just too easy for folks to use the information as a weapon.

 

[ladyinspring]

Interesting claim. Oddly, it's mostly INs that have been expressing that they have difficulty with SJ types. Even I, your one "E", have typed as an INT on about 80% of the tests (socionics is one that I've never typed as anything but an INTJ with) so I don't know that what you're saying has much merit.

I don't know what I said that contradicts any of this. And if someone types as an ILI (Ni-Te) in Socionics they are going to have, at best, a conflict relationship with ESFJs in particular, and no really good relationships with Guardians. All that just backs up what I'm saying, that many of these are type conflicts, and a lot of the rest of it is just personal relationship issues that have little to do with type and more to do with individual character.

It might be a little bit much to expect people who have shared relationships with the type being discussed (see title thread) that have spanned many decades to not invoke those relationships as examples that support their positions, however. Mommy issues, daddy issues, brother issues...whatever...when we talk about personality types we generally find ourselves relying on what we've personally experienced.

If people recognized it for what it is, mommy issues, daddy issues, brother issues whatever, that would be one thing. But they ascribe it to some "Sensor" thing, and it's particularly in vogue to say it is some "SJ" thing. And as long as people are going to keep passing off their personal issues as having to do with type, then I can certainly keep challenging that. I'm not trying to get up in anybody's business, but people keep wanting to talk about their personal stuff, and then act like its off-limits.

If you don't like people talking about their issues with the types they've encountered it may be easier to avoid threads where certain groups are singled out.

I really have learned not to trust what people say about the types of others, especially others whom they don't like. Nobody but nobody wants to talk about any of this as it relates to theory. And a lot of the times, they are clearly wrong. Many times I see the bad behavior of obvious non-SJs ascribed to SJs, because people don't know enough about type and temperament theory to tell the difference. That obnoxious attention-seeking roommate who threw up on the couch? Probably not an ESFJ. That ex-boyfriend who flaunted his affairs in your face? Yeah, not an ISTJ. That power-mad grandpa who crushed the family with his iron fist? Wow, may not actually be an ESTJ (perhaps consider ESTP or ENTJ for more power-seeking types). How many times must Hitler (and GWBush, and Oprah, and every other obvious non ESTJ) be typed on forums as an ESTJ before it sinks in that people don't know what they're doing?

I'm a little surprised at so many supposedly objective people who go off on these weird tangents about morality while condemning SJ for supposedly forcing their morality. But by making this discussion about the character of SJs rather than type, that's exactly what people are doing.

I'm really surprised your overseer let you type him btw. That's fascinating.

My overseer and his daughter (a friend of mine) are proud NTs. I actually have always liked him and for some reason unlike so many I am able to separate my type-based conflicts from my assessment of a person's character. My brother, an engineer who is deeply into type (which supposedly is impossible for "stupid, non-intellectual" ESFJs) is extremely forgiving and blames everything on himself. The overseer knows about type, but like so many here, does not seem to see that part of the reason he doesn't get my brother is because of type conflict, and not because my brother is a bad person.

It is a cause of mine that people will stop being judged based on type. This is dangerous, an ill-use of typology, and limits the utility of the theory.

Of the 16 types, I have had a good relationship with a representative of all of them save ISTP (just never knew any on a personal level). I have also been hurt by people of all temperaments. I reject type-based character assassination full-stop.

 

[maliafee]

I don't think all N's are looked down upon or discriminated against in real life, just INXX's.

That said, I think it's sad, because people don't know what they're missing.

Another thing is that Sensors can seem unbearable to Ns at times, and in my opinion this is usually when the Sensor is not just an S but a not-that-smart S (or a drunk S hehe). It's harder to tell with Ns, but when an S is pretty average or below average intelligence they can seem SO short-sighted and superficial to Ns.

Here's a little story:

My INFJ friend was in town a couple of weeks ago, so we drove to Lake Tahoe from Sacramento (about a 1.5 - 2 hour drive) to enjoy the beach and the pretty drive along the way, take pictures, etc. On the way back, I was at the wheel, and a male deer walked right in front of my car but sprung back just before I hit him. I nearly corrected left to avoid him but instantly steeled my grip and stayed forward because of the four cars coming in the opposite direction, filling up the only lane I would have had to avoid the deer. If he had decided to cross, I would have had to hit him, pure and simple. That or drive into big trees and then off a cliff. Anyway, all this happened within a couple of short seconds. According to my INFJ friend, I made a little sound of some kind and then kept driving. Though she claims she was looking straight out the window to the right (where the deer had come from), she also says she didn't even see the deer at all. It took me convincing her their had been a young stag in the first place to avoid. Once I explained the situation, she became pretty shaken up. Why? She told me she realized that if she had been driving we'd have both been killed. Not only would she have not been able to see the deer, she said, but she would not have been able to resist swerving to avoid it, therefore plowing into oncoming traffic, or diving off a cliff to our ultimate destruction.

Why did I include this S-biased story? I just wanted to remind the Ns that we Ss are good for something.

Love,
Malia
ISFP

 

[ladyinspring]

Okay, let me sum up my point.

Suppose a person has done you wrong and they are an ESTJ (or ISFP or ENTJ whatever). If you're going to post about it in open type forums, consider if what they did is rooted in their type. If you can connect their behavior to type, then consider that they might not be a bad person or inferior in anyway, it is probably a personality conflict. Consider that this same behavior when displayed to someone else might not be so bad after all, and might be exactly what that person needed. That is type, it's morally neutral.

On the other hand, if what they did was truly out of ignorance or evil, then it has nothing to do with type (because there must be knowledgeable and/or good people with the same type or typology is useless). If they are ignorant, evil, or some combination, then that is a character flaw.

Either way, I'm not saying their actions didn't hurt, but one is relevant on a type forum and can be discussed without vitriol, and the other is not.

 

[Siúil a Rúin]

Most everyone has to deal with people who disrespect, condescend, control, ignore, project, and do all various kinds of things that are frustrating and hurtful. There has developed this little culture online to feel persecuted by Ss. Does that sort of thing happen? Yeah I suspect it does, but I think you have a hard time finding people who don't deal with being ostracized in some manner.

When MBTI is applied in a prejudiced manner I weary of it because as a theory it is not that well grounded scientifically. By its nature of assessment it can't be verified. It is not related to information on the structure of the brain, or any other type of definitive information. It is a theory based on observations from a relatively small group of people. It is interesting and compelling, but has every capacity to be false in part or in its entire premise. The field of psychology itself is still quite new and developing and struggles to form effective measurement to validate its theories. It amazes me how quickly people embrace MBTI in this definitive way and then feel comfortable typing everyone they meet. Not only is there a problem with the validity of self reporting, but the next step is used where people are certain that whoever annoys them belongs to the group of "other". To be comfortable with this w/o any actual proof forms very bad habits of thinking. I make it a point to keep MBTI at a distance so that my own reasoning skills are not dulled by it.

Edit: I'll add here that I spent a short while in a master's degree in counseling psychology and was a little surprised how irrelevant MBTI was taken in that context. It wasn't deliberately rejected, but just seen as something not that serious, definitive, or related to the study of psychology. After spending time online I expected people to think it was important. It was not on the agenda to be studied, one professor made a comment about it, but said your type depends on what context you consider: family, work, etc. It was treated as pop psychology. I'm not sure everyone realizes this. I didn't before that experience.

 

[Little Linguist]

I can only say this again: The tool is simply that - a TOOL - for understanding *yourself*. Sometimes it can help with understanding others, although it's quite limited for that as well. Primarily, it can help you by providing a way to access your strengths and recognize your weaknesses. AND THESE CAN CHANGE over time.

Personally, I think prejudice against sensors is just retarded, because these very people have the key to help me develop my weakness. It'd be like starving and dying of thirst and refusing food and water. Silly. Stupid.

I think sensors are awesome, and instead of pounding each other on the head, we should uplift each other and learn from each other.

Just sayin'.