• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

Does N accomodate S more than S accomodates N?

Esoteric Wench

Professional Trickster
Joined
Dec 20, 2009
Messages
945
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
7w8
Whether we are S or N, we must live in a world filled with objects with which we interact using our five senses. <--- This seems like an unavoidable part of the human experience. So would it not stand to reason that iNtuitives must become at least somewhat proficient in the purview of Sensing because they must use their eyes, ears, nose, tongue, and hands? In other words, regardless of preference, the Sensing world is unavoidable.

Whereas, it is possible for those with a Sensing preference to operate relatively oblivious to the world of abstraction. In other words, a non-well-rounded S can conceivably focus on the concrete world around them and give little thought to concepts or theory or abstract ideas.

Thus, my theory is that it usually falls upon the N to communicate in his non-native S language with Ss. By the same token, Ss very rarely try to communicate with Ns in the language of abstraction. In fact, they are usually unaware that there is a level of abstraction going on in their dealings with Ns.

BTW, let's not lets this thread deteriorate into another, "It sucks to be an N living in an S world" thread. N is not superior to S, nor S to N. The purpose of this thread to discuss the theory I'm proffering, which is:


  1. Ns learn to communicate in an S style even though it's not their native language more often than Ss learn to communicate in an N style.
  2. The reason for this disparity is that even if one is born with an N preference, one cannot escape operating in the concrete world we are all born into. Thus, Ns have more practice with thinking in Sensing ways than vice versa.
  3. Points 1 and 2 explain why Ns feel like they are always the ones having to accommodate Ss, whereas Ss do little to accommodate Ns. It's not that Ss are inconsiderate per se. It's just that Ns must learn to speak in S whereas, Ss do not have to learn to speak in N.
Any thoughts?
 

Orangey

Blah
Joined
Jun 26, 2008
Messages
6,354
MBTI Type
ESTP
Enneagram
6w5
Any thoughts?

Yes:

1. I don't think physically interacting with the world is strictly an S activity. Functions just cannot be broken down like that into discrete behaviors. That kind of a view is taking the word "sensing" quite a bit too literally.

2. I'm not seeing the connection between having to interact with the world via your senses and having to "speak S."

3. I don't understand what it means to "speak S." Could you elaborate in a way that is not retarded?
 

Totenkindly

@.~*virinaĉo*~.@
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
50,187
MBTI Type
BELF
Enneagram
594
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Esoteric Wench said:
Thus, my theory is that it usually falls upon the N to communicate in his non-native S language with Ss. By the same token, Ss very rarely try to communicate with Ns in the language of abstraction.

That's my personal experience in my very-S family and religious culture -- I feel like I have been forced to speak in terms they grasp, whereas they have a lot of trouble seeing connections between things and often react with cynicism/skepticism, and only a few ever really manage to listen long enough to develop an understanding of where I might be coming from; N by nature goes into all frames in order to pattern-search, whereas S is lacking both need to engage and also tends to just think that N is imagining things if they can't see it readily at first. And in the points of contention I've had with family, typically I grasp where they are coming from long before they (if ever) recognize where I'm coming from, and there are unresolved issues because they just kind of wrote me off, whereas I was vulnerable because I understood their POV enough to try to accommodate without having the favor returned.

So there's a confirmation from my pool of experience, to help you out; but that's all I care to say about it.

3. I don't understand what it means to "speak S." Could you elaborate in a way that is not retarded?

...Yet another reason why I've given up discussing such things.
 
G

Ginkgo

Guest
Whether we are S or N, we must live in a world filled with objects with which we interact using our five senses. <--- This seems like an unavoidable part of the human experience. So would it not stand to reason that iNtuitives must become at least somewhat proficient in the purview of Sensing because they must use their eyes, ears, nose, tongue, and hands? In other words, regardless of preference, the Sensing world is unavoidable.

Whereas, it is possible for those with a Sensing preference to operate relatively oblivious to the world of abstraction. In other words, a non-well-rounded S can conceivably focus on the concrete world around them and give little thought to concepts or theory or abstract ideas.

Thus, my theory is that it usually falls upon the N to communicate in his non-native S language with Ss. By the same token, Ss very rarely try to communicate with Ns in the language of abstraction. In fact, they are usually unaware that there is a level of abstraction going on in their dealings with Ns.

BTW, let's not lets this thread deteriorate into another, "It sucks to be an N living in an S world" thread. N is not superior to S, nor S to N. The purpose of this thread to discuss the theory I'm proffering, which is:


  1. Ns learn to communicate in an S style even though it's not their native language more often than Ss learn to communicate in an N style.
  2. The reason for this disparity is that even if one is born with an N preference, one cannot escape operating in the concrete world we are all born into. Thus, Ns have more practice with thinking in Sensing ways than vice versa.
  3. Points 1 and 2 explain why Ns feel like they are always the ones having to accommodate Ss, whereas Ss do little to accommodate Ns. It's not that Ss are inconsiderate per se. It's just that Ns must learn to speak in S whereas, Ss do not have to learn to speak in N.
Any thoughts?

Are you unaware of the world?
 

entropie

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 24, 2008
Messages
16,767
MBTI Type
entp
Enneagram
783
The majority of sensors I know, force their way of understanding on me yes. They usually make me rephrase things as often until they understand it. I try to avoid those people. Over the years I have become very calm for an extroverted person, that's why I am posting on online forums :). But I figured its better and easier for me when I dont open my mouth. I learnt some rules of communication and phrases that always work and that has made it easier aswell.

I suffer heavily from my perception, if you may say so, it is a huge undertaking for me to concentrate in the daily life and to speak appropiatly. At busy days I never end a day without a headache and this not because work was so hard.

I'ld wish for many many people to see the world with a little more fun, N people included. And despite all that there are those other people, like my estj boss a woman with tremendous life experience and wisdom. She's definitly no N, I even already know her on a private basis so I can really judge. She speaks with me like we are equals and goes thru all the troubles decyphering the chaos that my brain spit out.

People like her show me that there is always another possibility to the one one is used to and that gives me hope.
 

swordpath

New member
Joined
Oct 24, 2007
Messages
10,547
MBTI Type
ISTx
Enneagram
5w6
To me, it almost seems like people treat the S/N functions as: All N's are S's in addition, but not all S's are N's.

So basically making N's look elite, and S's as lacking in mental strength. That's the vibe I get.
 

Orangey

Blah
Joined
Jun 26, 2008
Messages
6,354
MBTI Type
ESTP
Enneagram
6w5
To me, it almost seems like people treat the S/N functions as: All N's are S's in addition, but not all S's are N's.

So basically making N's look elite, and S's as lacking in mental strength. That's the vibe I get.

Exactly.

...Yet another reason why I've given up discussing such things.

It doesn't seem like you have.
 

entropie

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 24, 2008
Messages
16,767
MBTI Type
entp
Enneagram
783
I am convinced that the majority of mankind really is a strong mixture of N and S, tho they may prefer one when asked, I doubt there is something like a N artist elite or S racedriver champions, think these are mor the most extreme formes.

Where I come from I sometimes have the feeling I am living in extreme Sensorcentral, cause having fantasy here really is a damn rare thing. But maybe everybody who feels lonely thinks so about his environment, I dont know. I am convinced that sensors get far too bad reputation on this board and I wonder what intention myers briggs had when they named the temeperaments as they did. It was everything but really clever
 
G

Ginkgo

Guest
To me, it almost seems like people treat the S/N functions as: All N's are S's in addition, but not all S's are N's.

So basically making N's look elite, and S's as lacking in mental strength. That's the vibe I get.

Yes. There's an air of superiority about it. The OP is baseless, it attempts to establish a conclusion from only possibilities and conjectures. I don't see any value in the whole line of thinking, honestly.
 
T

ThatGirl

Guest
The problem is that S with S still exists, while N needs to enter S to evolve into something tangable.

I think it is twice the work to get S on board with N than it is to get N on board with S. Then again, good N can be pretty fucking stubborn.
 

Orangey

Blah
Joined
Jun 26, 2008
Messages
6,354
MBTI Type
ESTP
Enneagram
6w5
Ugh. As though there are S and N ways of doing/seeing things that all or even most Ss/Ns are on board with. Like they're clubs or something.

This makes me think that most of you probably type as S anyone who annoys you IRL.
 

entropie

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 24, 2008
Messages
16,767
MBTI Type
entp
Enneagram
783
Yea, but then again all the weirdos get the N label, what gets you in really difficult situations when you trusted that people eating lunatic with only being a confused nice intp :D
 

Tallulah

Emerging
Joined
Feb 19, 2008
Messages
6,009
MBTI Type
INTP
Trying to take emotions totally out of it, my experience has been that my S friends probably accommodate me equally, even if they sometimes think I'm probably nuts or possibly find some of my areas of nerdiness boring. (there are also areas of their nerdiness I find boring, and I think that's more individual-driven). As far as S-accommodation, I will say that I have experienced that more in the typical SJ-Guardians-of-the-way-people-should-act-in-decent-society stuff. When you get a large group of unchallenged and very traditional SJs, you get very little in the way of listening to other perspectives or trying to understand them. But then, I see something similar when you get a bunch of elitist, self-congratulatory Ns who refuse to accept real-world data that is right in front of their faces. I am equally frustrated with both.
 

Totenkindly

@.~*virinaĉo*~.@
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
50,187
MBTI Type
BELF
Enneagram
594
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
It doesn't seem like you have.

Did you see me discussing it, or me just putting in my POV and getting the hell out without doing a back-and-forth about the topic? (Or do you define "discussion" in a way that doesn't include an actual "discussion"?)

I considered just writing her privately.
I'll just do that next time, thanks.
 

Viridian

New member
Joined
Dec 30, 2010
Messages
3,036
MBTI Type
IsFJ
I must say, firstly, I don't see any ill will in your posts, and you seem aware of the sterotypes oft-invoked in such discussions, so tip o' the hat to you, Ms. Wench! :D This thread might just not become a conflagration.

That said, I must take issue with the idea that Sensors don't have to "speak N" - as an university student, I am often exposed to abstract ideas even in more "concrete" courses (Journalism, for instance which tends to attract quite a few STJs, or so I hear). The world often seems like a complex place to me, an iNtuitive*, so I imagine Sensors feel a bit lost as well; we're both missing a part of the puzzle in that way, as well as in many others. It's not that rare for someone, N or S, feel like the world is a labirynthine place.

* Some people think I'm an ISFP or ISFJ, so take that with a grain of salt, I guess. :unsure:
 
T

ThatGirl

Guest
Ugh. As though there are S and N ways of doing/seeing things that all or even most Ss/Ns are on board with. Like they're clubs or something.

This makes me think that most of you probably type as S anyone who annoys you IRL.

Ugh,That's why it is called a function. There are similarities between similar minds. that's why I said n can be stubborn as hell, I've fought to death with other ns about who was right, and we had to take the scenario into s territory to come to an agreenment.

Anyway, my post wasn't speaking interpersonally. The same conflict can go on inside one persons thought process.
 

strychnine

All Natural! All Good!
Joined
Jun 23, 2010
Messages
895
Thus, my theory is that it usually falls upon the N to communicate in his non-native S language with Ss. By the same token, Ss very rarely try to communicate with Ns in the language of abstraction. In fact, they are usually unaware that there is a level of abstraction going on in their dealings with Ns.

Your theory fits with my experience.
I notice the same unawareness from S-types that are not familiar with MBTI. I think it's because there are more Ss than Ns in the world, so Ss have less incentive to speak N than Ns to do speak S.
Also, I'm not going to try and explain what I mean by N vs. S speak, but I agree that there is a difference. A similar shitstorm ensued when I tried to point this out in my thread about anti-S bias, if anyone still remembers that stupid thing. lolz.
 

Saslou

New member
Joined
Feb 1, 2009
Messages
4,910
MBTI Type
ESFJ
I fully understand where the OP is coming from and don't see this as a possible mud throwing competition :huh:

If there are more S's in the world then it would make complete sense for an N to have to try and speak the language in order to gain some returns. But just as with anything in this life, put the effort in and you'll see the gains.

i do this with N people, some are easier to speak to than others .. I won't hold it against them. It's easier to understand now i am fully aware.

I find personally that S speak is easy IRL but N speak is easier in one's mind.
 

Esoteric Wench

Professional Trickster
Joined
Dec 20, 2009
Messages
945
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
7w8
1. I don't think physically interacting with the world is strictly an S activity. Functions just cannot be broken down like that into discrete behaviors. That kind of a view is taking the word "sensing" quite a bit too literally.

Caveat: I don't know if I can really fully understand what it is to be S, so I'm just muddling my way through and explaining it as I see it. If I'm taking "sensing" a bit too literally, I apologize. Can you explain it any better to help me understand it more?

2. I'm not seeing the connection between having to interact with the world via your senses and having to "speak S."
3. I don't understand what it means to "speak S." Could you elaborate in a way that is not retarded?

This is a quote about what it is to be a Sensor from www.myersbriggs.org:

Sensing (S): Paying attention to physical reality, what I see, hear, touch, taste, and smell. I’m concerned with what is actual, present, current, and real. I notice facts and I remember details that are important to me. I like to see the practical use of things and learn best when I see how to use what I’m learning. Experience speaks to me louder than words.

So when I say speaking S, I mean that when Ss speak they tend to talk about their physical reality more than their impressions or the meaning and patterns of the information they see.

You're right, of course, that for the sake of this argument, I'm putting what it is to be S into a neat little package of "S speak." I don't want to minimize the complexity of being an S. The best I can do is to explain how it seems to be from my N perspective. I'm open to corrections, clarifications if you think I've got it wrong.

So to reiterate, my theory is that Ns must operate in the S realm of thinking. Being a human being forces Ns to do this. But being a human being doesn't necessarily require anyone to think in the N realm. Ergo, Ns have more practice using their Sensing preference and this, in general, makes it easier for Ns to connect with and accommodate S thinking than vice versa.
 
Top