The ESFP "stupid" myth.

[Chloe]

most of ESFPs I know are awesome, and intelligent.

 

[TaylorS]

Bill Clinton is an ESFP and had a Rhodes Scholarship. Dumb socialites aren't Rhodes Scholars.

 

[mortabunt]

ESFP's are easy sitcon material. Make a comedy about an INTJ, and it's going to only get IN's to watch.

 

[Koocoomoo]

All the ESFPs I've ever met are f***ing retarted.

 

[simulatedworld]

I know a few really bright ESFPs, but not that many.

 

[Grungemouse]

All the ESFPs I've ever met are f***ing retarted.

Lolz.

 

[Lex Talionis]

It's funny that the title of this thread is "The ESFP "stupid" myth," when in reality, the so called "myth" is based after direct observation in the real world.

Let's face it, ESFPs are predisposed to stupidity, and there is no use defending them. They are shallow, linear minded, unoriginal in every way, tasteless, clearly lack abstract reasoning and don't care for it at all (sure sign of somebody with an insufficient critical thinking ability, it just doesn't exist for them!), and are "intelligent" only in the most practical of ways. This is hardly indicative of true intelligence (i.e. NT), and is more suited for somebody who lacks real world perspective (another flaw you can add to their rather lengthy list.) That being said, I find it comical that some of you point out anecdotal evidence of ESFP computer programmers and "intellectuals" (as if, even if some do exist, they're using SF skills to derive the logic required to understand the material! HAH!), when it is clearly contradictory to the facts. Cut the PC nonsense and call a spade a spade.

Just to add contrast to the anecdotal evidence of the pervasiveness of supposedly "smart" ESFPs, I will bring in some anecdotal evidence of my own: I know at least four proven ESFPs (which I have informally managed to test), all of whom are complete and utter morons, who albeit putting up a pretty front, are at the lower end of the thinking chain. Whatever they amount to in life external of social pretense, will never be due to their ESFP skills.

To finish it, I would like to state that this is not intended to be a rant or slander against ESFPs, it is simply the observed truth about the ESFP when it comes to the topic of being stupid. There is also no need to complain about the fact that I may be "overgeneralizing" ESFPs, which is not the case in the least, and while my remarks obviously don't apply to every single ESFP equally, they do apply to the Myer-Briggs archetype of the ESFP, and so their contents naturally manifest themselves in the real world. ESFPs are generally nice and cheerful, and easy to deal with, but intelligence is rarely one of their traits.

 

[Salt n' pepper]

I only know one ESFP (male). I asked him to take the MBTI and he tested ESFP. With that said, he is one of the most retarded, non self-aware, tactless, judgmental and cognitively challenged person I know. I laugh at him constantly and I can't bother to argue with him because all he's got is: "that's the way it is", "that's the way it should be", "just 'cause" and "but it's wrong" (with nothing to back it up). He does not listen to facts, reasoning or answer directly to questions about subjects he feels uncomfortable with. He's a total sheep and does whatever everyone else does without thinking it through. He's awkward and stiff, always seeking other peoples approval. Also, he talks shit about people behind their backs, while acting nice and friendly towards them face to face. He's very easy to befriend and to get along with, but there's no depth to him. There's only Level 1. He can also change his mind about some thing quick, without any kind of responsibility to the task at hand. He just doesn't think long range. But, I've known him for years, he's my friend and I have a good time around him. Most of the time. That's just my observation of one ESFP I've known since junior high.

 

[Charmed Justice]

Most of the ESFPs I know are highly intelligent, but make no effort to have others think so.

 

[redacted]

I know a few ESFPs. My current roommate is incredibly smart, she got over 1500 on her SAT and had a 3.8+ at UCB. I still think certain actions she takes are completely idiotic, though

Another guy I know is ESFP and is one of the smartest people I know. He just doesn't really care much about having N style conversations. But he follows everything everyone says, and is much quicker than almost anyone.

Both are very impulsive, though, and are always getting wasted and acting like idiots.

The third ESFP in my extended friend group isn't very smart (although she still got into Berkeley, though that's not necessarily saying much)...and I'm always really annoyed by her. It seems like she doesn't plan anything at all, and never learns from her mistakes.

But yeah...I don't think most types are significantly correlated to intelligence, except maybe IxTxs being predisposed towards thinking more in a way that makes them better on IQ tests. Any statistics anyone can use in response to this can be thrown out as you never really know if people are typed correctly.

 

[Jeffster]

Lex, way to use your first post to bash millions of people simultaneously! We can only hope to be further enlightened by your keen insights on why a bunch of people you don't know suck!

 

[Lex Talionis]

But yeah...I don't think most types are significantly correlated to intelligence, except maybe IxTxs being predisposed towards thinking more in a way that makes them better on IQ tests. Any statistics anyone can use in response to this can be thrown out as you never really know if people are typed correctly.

Why shouldn't statistics correlating personality type to intelligence be valid? It makes perfect sense, and if a large enough sample is tested (which, over the years, is undoubted), then the unfounded conjecture that "you never know if people are typed correctly" becomes almost insignificant.

As it stands, the four types that have consistently been linked with higher IQ per population are, in the order as follows: INTJs, INTPs, (big surprise that the two most rational thinkers would score the highest, eh? ), INFJs, and INFPs (both are introverted intuits; INFJs have Ti as a tertiary function and use logic to support their idealistic nature, while INFPs are usually concerned about problems relating to humanity which requires some form of abstract reasoning, however diluted with feeling.) Now of course, IQ is only the technical part of intelligence, and it doesn't say much about how we use our intelligence in the real world, that is something personality does, so the fact that INFJs and INFPs score high on IQ tests does not necessarily mean that on average they are more mentally capable than ENTJs and ENTPs, but that's beside the point.

Lex, way to use your first post to bash millions of people simultaneously! We can only hope to be further enlightened by your keen insights on why a bunch of people you don't know suck!

Eh, are you somehow implying that because I have not personally met every single ESFP, I cannot judge them based on their general characteristics as described both by Myer-Briggs and supported by my real life observation? I'm afraid that with your logic, the entire science of statistical analysis would become obsolete.

 

[BlackCat]

Why shouldn't statistics correlating personality type to intelligence be valid? It makes perfect sense, and if a large enough sample is tested (which, over the years, is undoubted), then the unfounded conjecture that "you never know if people are typed correctly" becomes almost insignificant.

But here is the question... what KIND of intelligence? Every type fits some niche in the world, every type serves a purpose. There are a lot of sorts of intelligence, so I would say that if there were statistics that were made from a huge sample of people who were typed correctly about the many kinds of intelligences, then you'd be onto something useful. But then someone would abuse this and only hire certain positions based on type and it would get messy.

It should just be avoided.

 

[Lex Talionis]

But here is the question... what KIND of intelligence? Every type fits some niche in the world, every type serves a purpose. There are a lot of sorts of intelligence, so I would say that if there were statistics that were made from a huge sample of people who were typed correctly about the many kinds of intelligences, then you'd be onto something useful. But then someone would abuse this and only hire certain positions based on type and it would get messy.

It should just be avoided.

I don't believe that there are many different "types" of intelligences. Intelligence to me, in a simple and concise definition is the ability to solve problems, as well as the ability to deduct and infer logical conclusions based on given knowledge in a manner that is objective and precise. How that ability manifests itself in terms of its impact on different aspects of society is entirely based on the individual(s) in question and the given situation(s) they find themselves in.

Every other type of "intelligence" is either subjective in construction, or clearly something taught as opposed to solved by one's own mental ability. Therefore, using my definition of intelligence, which is pretty much the standard in the field of psychometrics, it is clear that one needs to have both the innate processing power (IQ), as well as the ability to use that power effectively (personality.) From there, it is entirely reasonable to correlate intelligence with the different personality types, regardless of raw IQ amongst individuals of any one type.

 

[BlackCat]

Well why worry? Just judge someone based on how they are when you meet them, no need to be so broad. You don't need to be prepared.

 

[Katsuni]

Lex, way to use your first post to bash millions of people simultaneously! We can only hope to be further enlightened by your keen insights on why a bunch of people you don't know suck!

Oh leave him alone. He's an INTJ; he thinks things through logically... but doesn't bother to base his insights on actual external stimuli (like actual people, just his own interpretation of them), and is highly judgemental, unable to see things from other's perspectives.

He's doomed to be socially inept to the end of his days, and stick to strict rules that're abstract and don't actually have any baring in sense, and use all his intelligence to 'proove' his bizzare concepts, ignoring anything that doesn't match his predisposed ideas.


This is an example of whot happens when yeu use a type too harshly, and don't consider the rammifications of such, or that individuals exist outside of such. Being smart has nothing to do with personality type at all. personality type just implies how yeu're more likely to use that intelligence, and in which ways yeu're naturally adept to applying it.

That being said, the ESFP can be very intelligent on an individual level, regardless of whot Lex thinks.

However, he has a point, that virtually all of them, will tend to display it very poorly. When they use their intelligence, though they may be capable of being booksmart, it'll be more based on being a sensor; massive capacity to suck up raw data and memorize it... this doesn't really do much for them though because they can't really apply it all that well in a clinical setting usually.

Moreso, they'll be prone to doing some rather foolhardy things without thinking it through, and be far more interested in social stuff, except they won't have the attention span to really bother getting deeply involved.

Most likely though, they will be capable of using any intelligence they have to incredible degree when applying it to social situations. Many famous actors, singers, and so on have been known for this, because they can appeal to the shallow masses with incredable ease at a distance.

This doesn't make them stupid, it just means they apply their intelligence more adeptly in certain situations and certain ways. It may not be traditionally considered 'normal intelligence' though, but it's still a form of intelligence.

That being said, a programmer's skills aren't really known for being a thinking profession; it's more a matter of memorization and applying such with great detail in repetitive fashion. The S of the ESFP fits perfectly here, so it is a partial preferance for them.

The cognitive functions also have some use towards these goals.

But anyways, certain types of things can be done by the ESFP's better than others. Those that take their strengths and run with them, do very well. Those that're intelligent can apply them towards those strengths.

That being said, however, an ESFP is not innately adept at certain tasks, and no matter how intelligent they may be, they just won't really think in the manner which naturally lends itself to that task. Most of these tasks they generally are less adept at are the "traditionally intellectual" type thinking, that an NT is more well known for.

This isn't a bad thing, just a different application of intelligence. Lex is just being biased on his definition of "intelligence", seeing only the singular method of application, and decreeing his way be the right and only way. Were he a P, he'd have an easier time seeing alternate perspectives,a nd wouldn't be making such an ass out of himself =3

 

[Lauren Ashley]

Oh leave him alone. He's an INTJ; he thinks things through logically... but doesn't bother to base his insights on actual external stimuli (like actual people, just his own interpretation of them), and is highly judgemental, unable to see things from other's perspectives.

... Lex is just being biased on his definition of "intelligence", seeing only the singular method of application, and decreeing his way be the right and only way. Were he a P, he'd have an easier time seeing alternate perspectives,a nd wouldn't be making such an ass out of himself =3

I love when some Ps on this forum display their "lack of judgment and ability to see alternate perspectives" by stating that Js are judgmental and have a hard time seeing alternate perspectives.

Fact: Everyone judges and has an opinion. Not just extraverted judgers.

You're doing the same as he is; making broad generalizations about others based on type.

 

[Katsuni]

I love when some Ps on this forum display their lack of judgment and ability to see alternate perspectives by saying that Js are judgmental and have a hard time seeing alternate perspectives.

Fact: Everyone judges and has an opinion. Not just extraverted judgers.

You're doing the same as he is; making broad generalizations about others based on type.

Oh but of course!

Everyone judges and has an opinion, though some are obviously far moreso than others. Some are very "This is my opinion, I refuse to see anyone else's as being valid!". Others may hold a conviction to their own opinion, but can understand another's point of view as well, even if they don't agree with it.

That being said, a stronger P will tend to make people see things from other's perspectives. It doesn't mean that they'll change their OWN opinion, but it means they'll at least be more amicable towards opinions which don't match their own.

I do in fact see things from his perspective, I just don't agree with it =3

He, however, probably won't be able to see it from my perspective at all, he'll just know it is different from his own, as yeu are likely to do so as well, and disagree with me.

These are obviously generalizations, as an ENTP, it's how I work ^.^ I start off with broad strokes, and refine and narrow it down during conversation, clipping out the bits that don't fit. Such is the way my mind works, though admittedly this leaves me flawed as well, as it means that I look like I'm changing my mind endlessly, or nitpicking, or giving ground.

Admittedly it's actually a mixture of all of the above XD My opinion's not neccesarily set in stone; if I can get enough evidence to back it up, then great! However, I shall start out with the broad concept first, and narrow it down incrementally past that point, until it makes sense to me from all angles. If it doesn't make sense to me and has gaps that aren't capable of being explained, I'll discard such, until such time as I am given a new person to discuss it with, or a significant amount of time has passed (generally about 6 months I've found to discuss the same topic with the same person) so that they will be capable of providing new insight and argument into the matter. They may've been right, they just may not have been capable of explaining why.

And so, we each have our own flaws, however, to understand such is to be able to utilize such. I know my ways look poor to many, but it really does work quite effectively. Assumming people don't get fed up and frustrated before I'm done XD

 

[Lauren Ashley]

That being said, a stronger P will tend to make people see things from other's perspectives. It doesn't mean that they'll change their OWN opinion, but it means they'll at least be more amicable towards opinions which don't match their own.

I beg to differ. And a perusal around this forum will show you that, at the very least, the Ps on this forum aren't anymore apt to see things from other's perspectives than Js are. Including the NPs, the bastion of open-mindness and acceptance.

He, however, probably won't be able to see it from my perspective at all, he'll just know it is different from his own, as yeu are likely to do so as well, and disagree with me.

Yes, now condemn and generalize me as well, based on my self-reported type and nothing else. You're proving your case quite marvelously.

Actually, I'm the same as you:

I do in fact see things from his perspective, I just don't agree with it =3

Admittedly it's actually a mixture of all of the above XD My opinion's not neccesarily set in stone; if I can get enough evidence to back it up, then great! However, I shall start out with the broad concept first, and narrow it down incrementally past that point, until it makes sense to me from all angles.

And what makes you believe that that is not the way Lex, or any other J, arrived at their opinion?

 

[mattness]

i didn't read all of this but i just wanted to say that i have a masters in music theory. i can't spell all that great but i can write Musette tab that would blow your fucking mind