I think that most 'intuitives' are mistyped sensors, and the test needs redesigned.

[skylights]

Some Ss are sensory fails too, strange as that may seem. Being interested in sensory information isn't quite the same as noticing everything that goes on around you, unfortunately. I'm often looking around me but it's like "hey look at that" "look at that" "look at that" not seeing the whole environment. Last night for example, I was looking at the pretty snow falling on my walk home and didn't see anything else at all.

fair point!!

My tendency is to pick up on what's around me, but it doesn't mean that's what my mind is focused on or what I want to discuss, or dwell on it.

that's a really good point. just because it's a tendency doesn't mean you're focused or interested. same holds true for N. i practice yoga and have found that it helps me shut down N and focus on S, which can be entirely more pleasing and engaging, not to mention lead to more insight.

i hope no one is reading N/S bias into my statements because there is definitely none believed, in either direction ;

 

[Jaguar]

1. Do you daydream a lot?

Yes

2. Are you often unaware of your surroundings?

If I was often unaware, I couldn't safely operate a car.

3. Are you abstract thinker or concrete thinker?

Both. I'm not an idiot. (The grammar in question #3 stinks.)

4. Can you easily see correlations between events?

Yes.

Congratulations. You're intuitive!

I don't need a test to tell me what I've known for decades, but thanks.

 

[Vasilisa]

I'm sensitive to noise, perhaps I'm mistyped.

 

[Jaguar]

I'm sensitive to noise, perhaps I'm mistyped.

SENSOR!!!

 

[Poki]

1. Do you daydream a lot?
No, I think alot.

2. Are you often unaware of your surroundings?
No, I am generally very aware, but normally dont do anything about it, nor do I really care

3. Are you abstract thinker or concrete thinker?
Abstract thinking is easier for me then actually visualizing something concrete.

4. Can you easily see correlations between events?
Is this like one of those puzzles where we have to find the pictures that are similiar?

Congratulations. Im lost!

 

[freeeekyyy]

True...

Sometimes I fail to see something right in front of me, and I'm the butt of the joke.

Additionally, it might be how the word is being used, but sensory information is not necessarily an interest of mine. My tendency is to pick up on what's around me, but it doesn't mean that's what my mind is focused on or what I want to discuss, or dwell on it. Interestingly, a lot of the stuff I remember I have no interest in retaining. It just sticks.

I wonder if this has to do with the difference in Si and Se. From my understanding of the functions, Si isn't really aware of physical details, but more in tune with data, facts, that sort of thing. Where Se might look at a book, for instance, and say, "it's probably about 50 pages, because it's x inches thick;" Si would look to a known table of information and say, "the book is 52 pages." I think there's an important difference there between the sensing functions which people often overlook...it's the same way with Ni and Ne.

My understanding may be flawed though, in which case this post can be disregarded.

 

[guesswho]

Questions like those are used in the MBTI tests I found online, to differentiate S from N.

My point was...How can these things be taken seriously?

Plus there are a lot of yes/no questions, that have no yes/no answer.

If everybody would be aware of their behavior , and would be able to quantify it in percentages, the questionnaire would be valid.

(The grammar in question #3 stinks.)

English is not my first language.

 

[entropie]

I am still looking for the "do you eat at burgerking or mcdonalds" question to differentiate between N or S

 

[Jaguar]

Questions like those are used in the MBTI tests I found online, to differentiate S from N.

My point was...How can these things be taken seriously?

Plus there are a lot of yes/no questions, that have no yes/no answer.

If everybody would be aware of their behavior , and would be able to quantify it in percentages, the questionnaire would be valid.


English is not my first language.

Oh, I already knew you were screwing around. I've seen your posts in other threads which address the same issues I have with the whole testing process. Not only are the questions ridiculous, we're all operating on different levels of consciousness.

Since English is not your first language, you're forgiven.

 

[KDude]

I don't daydream a lot unless there's a crush or something bothering me or I'm drawing or getting creative. Something like that.. The juices have to start flowing from something. The "crush" thing is a stretch though. I mean, it's only every once in awhile that I'm interested in that way. Basically, I don't think I'm too out of the ordinary here. You could call me ISFP if you want.

I'm not in the "moment" to the point where I'm naturally impacting the moment, but I can notice a small detail, and if it's interesting, I might exhaust it's implications or one way or another.. maybe it's something that inspires or provokes new thought and I'll start rambling about it. That, or my knack for details may go beyond what the average person may see at times. I might compliment someone on something that surprisingly, no one took the time to. Or I might get pissed off and snag someone on something they thought they were being slick about. Saying that I'm not in the moment would imply that you can fool me - which isn't easily done, if you want my opinion.

 

[IZthe411]

I wonder if this has to do with the difference in Si and Se. From my understanding of the functions, Si isn't really aware of physical details, but more in tune with data, facts, that sort of thing. Where Se might look at a book, for instance, and say, "it's probably about 50 pages, because it's x inches thick;" Si would look to a known table of information and say, "the book is 52 pages." I think there's an important difference there between the sensing functions which people often overlook...it's the same way with Ni and Ne.

My understanding may be flawed though, in which case this post can be disregarded.

I think both....Physical data could either be cold statistical data, like numbers and all of that, or it could be colors, scents, objects, etc. I'm more likely to remember an attractive or distinct facial feature, a tint on a car, or a nice suit/tie combination over even my football player's statistics this year. But I am good at remembering people's birthdays, and dates of stuff of the people in my life, although I really don't put effort into it.

A Strong Si user would definitely correct someone that the book was 52 pages if the person said it was "about 50" pages. An older ISTJ dude I know will reconcile things down to the penny, even though at the end of the day, nobody cares about the penny.

 

[Poki]

Questions like those are used in the MBTI tests I found online, to differentiate S from N.

My point was...How can these things be taken seriously?

Plus there are a lot of yes/no questions, that have no yes/no answer.

If everybody would be aware of their behavior , and would be able to quantify it in percentages, the questionnaire would be valid.


English is not my first language.

I always poke fun at test questions. I dont like them for the same reason as you.

 

[guesswho]

I think a test with paintings to differentiate S/N preference would be more interesting...but the paintings would have to be equally beautiful...and that's kind of hard.
1.

2.

 

[Oaky]

I say we get a N vs S bash thread going for fun

Can't be done. Who would go against the sensors except for those very few who openly admit it? It seems 95% of intuitives here bash most of the intuitives for hate against the sensors creating some sort of oxymoron.

 

[Jaguar]

An older ISTJ dude I know will reconcile things down to the penny, even though at the end of the day, nobody cares about the penny.

That's my Dad. You should have seen what happened when he saw me throw a penny in the trash.
:horor:

 

[gromit]

I think a test with paintings to differentiate S/N preference would be more interesting...but the paintings would have to be equally beautiful...and that's kind of hard.

How would a painting be an S painting or an N painting?

 

[Orangey]

I agree wholeheartedly with the OP. Well, except I don't think that necessarily 90% of people here are mistyped as intuitives.

Also, here's a related article that I read a while back that helped me type myself as a sensor: "How to Tell INtuiting from Extraverted Sensing".

 

[guesswho]

For instance this can be an S painting: (it has a ton of details)
While an N painting would have less details and be more ambiguous.

So the person who is tested would have to choose between the one with more details and which reflects something more accurately , and the one with less details that is more confusing perhaps.
But what would stop a sensor from choosing an ambiguous painting? It probably won't work.

 

[Elfboy]

Oh, well, if you insist. Your post was so ridiculous I didn't think it needed a breakdown, but why not.


This makes no sense. You didn't say why the S-N axis is a "huge distinction" compared to the other axes, and it's hardly obvious that it would be so.


If by sensor you mean SP and by intuitive you mean NJ. Even then, this is not necessarily a defining characteristic, as for all people, attention is required both for the moment (so you can actually function in real life) and for the future (so your life/career goes somewhere).


I'm struggling to understand your grammar here but it sounds like you're saying sensors can't think about the future because it's just so darn hard. This is a load of bullshit.



Ok, I can believe an intuitive might fall into the pattern of thinking about the future more often (and maybe in more detail) than a sensor.



Ok bad analogy. Video games are not exactly difficult and we don't have to struggle to understand what's going on. Come on. We're not intellectually incapable.


I'm sorry, what? Why on earth is "everything clear" for the intuitive but poor sensors need a manual because it's too darn hard to figure these things out? (durrrrrr)

umm, ok. No idea where this fits into your post and it also doesn't make any sense, but ok.

You're still saying things without actually backing it up. Saying it doesn't make it true.

I'm sorry, what?! You can't possibly be serious, is this just a really lame trolling attempt?

btw, cognitive is not a noun.

–adjective
1.
of or pertaining to cognition.
2.
of or pertaining to the mental processes of perception, memory, judgment, and reasoning, as contrasted with emotional and volitional processes.


You're right, N's don't need observation or memory - they just make up everything as they go along! Screw facts, they're brilliant enough to not need any external information!

Yes....

Oh so you mean, you either have the capacity for intelligent thought to some degree (N) or you don't (S)? How very insightful of you.

Yep, you've sure convinced me that Ns are brilliant. Good lord. Go read a book (or ten) and maybe you'll get a (very faint) clue.

1st bold: If I may, I think I can explain this a little better. S vs N is considered by many people (self included) to be the most significant dynamic to MBTI because these are the information gathering functions. Ns and Ss collect completely different types of data and thus understand the world differently. when by themselves, an S asks "what" "who" "where" and "when". an N asks "how" and "why"
2nd bold: agreed, that is a horrible analogy. if anything, Sensors have an edge on Intuitive types, most of the best gamers I've met have been ISTPs
3rd bold: it's not automatically clear, but it can happen EXTREMELY fast. older people frequently tell me I understand things about the world that took them 50 years to find out (I'm 19). it can also happen automatically, especially in N dominant people (ENPs and INJs)

 

[KDude]

For instance this can be an S painting: (it has a ton of details)
While an N painting would have less details and be more ambiguous.

So the person who is tested would have to choose between the one with more details and which reflects something more accurately , and the one with less details that is more confusing perhaps.
But what would stop a sensor from choosing an ambiguous painting? It probably won't work.]

^It certainly has details, but I don't know if that's necessarily intuitive.. Depends on the point being made

Here's a painting from a friend.. he's very detailed, but not like the above. I'm not sure what type he is sometimes..tbh. Just take the painting as is though. My point is that it's detailed, yet abstract. And if someone casually told me "Yeah, that's cool" and walked away, my own capacity for details would grab them by the neck and say "GRRR.. Look more."