[MBTI General] Are You Sick of Being an N in an S world?

[BlackCat]

Being an N in a S world is a unique experience and I wouldn't want it to be any other way. I think there are two things you must consider here- our relationships with S-types AND our relationships with N-types.

Being in an S-type dominated world:
It can be frustrating when it sometimes seems that the average person doesn't really "get" you. We tend to have different motivations, perspectives and insights. Once we're done moaning and griping at how misunderstood we are, I find that it makes for quite a fulfilling challenge to try and convey our ideas and intentions to S-types. Often, I find that well-developed S-types value and appreciate N-types very much, at least for our contributions if not for our personalities- and mutual respect is the foundation of any decent relationship.

Even the most counter-intuitive S-type has something about him or her that we as N-types can probably learn from. I have S-type friends whose companionship I absolutely treasure because they keep me grounded, they make me look at things differently and have taught me many lessons which other N-types tend to be somewhat ignorant of.

Meeting other N-types:
This is my favourite part about being an N-type, which is finding other individuals whom you can relate with at a deeper level than the average person. They're rare- few and far between, but that's what makes the relationships with them so much more important and fulfilling. I am fairly confident when I say that N-types seem to have more meaningful relationships in general, because we tend to be more aware of the big picture. I have witnessed too often the superficial nature of some S-type relationships and I tire of them fairly easily. Other N-types are familiar with and sympathetic to the challenges of living in an S-type world and can provide companionship that is substantially more invigorating in comparison.

Ultimately, life is a unique adventure that has great value in its diversity. Perhaps (and I think this is rather likely) in future generations, the concentration of N-types in society would increase. This has complex implications of every kind, and we could begin an entire new discussion on the topic. As for now, I think as long as we try to build meaningful relationships with everybody around us, try to understand people's motivations without belittling those who are different and seek to learn as much as we can from every experience, we should do okay. It's not inherently good or bad to be unique- it is, above all, an opportunity- and I think we ought to seize it to do the best we can for ourselves and those we care about. The moment you begin to develop a defeatist attitude, you're depriving yourself of a chance to truly enjoy all that life has to offer.

This is just one of those things... how do you really know that these people are intuitives? How can you know that you aren't just labelling everyone you relate to an intuitive via confirmation bias? This happens a lot I've noticed, hell some people still think I'm an INFP.

 

[cascadeco]

Well said.

I have to say for the 'Fe' part, I think there's a lot to it. For any kind of 'difference' you have that could make you not gel as well in a group, things like Fe helps. What also helps is to be of the same socio/economic status, come from the same religious background, etc. But, those are things you can't really change in the moment. What you can affect are your actions.

Fe - or moving away from functions to *actions* - really just being hospitable/warm/outgoing etc. is socially valued and approved of (at least in North America?) and it can put others at ease so I think it does help smooth over or equalize other potential differences that could be a source of tension. It basically means you have to make (more) effort to normalize relations.

I still think "being out of it" and "space cadet" or "out there" are the biggest interpersonal criticisms that can be levelled against an "N" in an "S" world but otherwise I don't quite understand the N/S disconnect people mention on the forum.

I also think being NP exacerbates any "N/S friction" though. I know I was always considered a freak, the weird kid, strange, probable "lesbian" (LOL that's what strange women are often called regardless of actual sexual orientation) etc. which mellowed out to 'alternachick' all throughout school up to college graduation and I'm sure other NPs can relate. It was not something I necessarily wanted for myself or tried to achieve, that was the way I was labelled. But I don't think purely "N" was the cause of that...

Thanks.

And you make excellent points too.

As for myself growing up, I don't know that I was considered a 'freak' per se, but I do know that I only had one friend and I didn't feel like I had anything in common with anyone else. I was fearful of many people, so I stayed in my shell. Honestly though, a lot of that was sort of self-imposed, and in many ways it had more to do with my own insecurities than the fact that other people would have rejected the 'true me'.

Proteanmix - as always, you raise some good points, but I'll just highlight a few that really resonate with me.

I just view being S or N as an insignificant and unremarkable way of categorizing a person and it says very little about you. I personally find out more meaningful information about a person knowing they grew up in Ethiopia and came to America when they were 12 and talking about how their previous life and how they adjusted than them telling me they're an ENFP.

I know how to find people I click with on a more substantial level and I don't expect to have anything more than a superficial relationship with 99% of the people I come into contact with. For those that I do have more substantial relations with, well that just requires more work and investment period.blank.

...........To me it seems more of a matter of being able to extract meaning from those interactions rather than rendering most interactions as meaningless.

 

[Jaguar]

I probably shouldn't put this in a function charged thread because I do not think this is necessarily an S thing, but there is something that wearies me deeply when interacting in the world. It is the work ethic that equates character with coming into work no matter how sick you are, how dangerous the roads, etc. This is a point of complete exasperation to me because it attempts to personalize the manipulation for the benefit of the company.

If a company doesn't value its people, they deserve chapter 7.

 

[Walking Tourist]

It's a bird, it's a plane... it's Super N!!! Leaping tall structures in a single bound, eating whole cakes in a single bite, reaching up and taking the moon and the stars from the sky with one hand...
... and putting the moon and the stars on a silver platter just for me... your friendly SP.

Happy Valentines Day!

I love being an intuitive in a sensing world! I have powers that the others don't have, that makes me feel like I'm some kind of superhero.

 

[BlackCat]

I think that confirmation bias plays a big role here. I'm going to agree with what proteanmix put earlier in the thread; finding someone's life experience more interesting than their N'ness. I think the following response by the ENFP OP was because ENFPs lead with Ne, and may be more interested in someone's ideas rather than how they grew up and how they themselves see the world.

But my mom is an ENFJ majorly interested in matters of spirituality. When I first described S vs N to her, she had a mini revelation and exclaimed that all of the people that didn't understand her and didn't value spirituality were sensors, and that all of her friends who "got" her and liked discussing these things with her were intuitive. Confirmation bias. I then went to meet her spirituality friends, and they included an ESTP, ISFJ, ISFP, and ENFP. They related because they had similar ideas about the world and similar ideas about spirituality. Not because they were intuitive.

I sound like a broken record here, but you mainly relate to people based on their interests, hobbies, and things that they like to think about. Not S vs N. I have equally good conversations with my S and N friends, because we are both interested in video games, school and careers, and each other's lives. Not because of some preference. The sensors that were with my mom were beyond me, I wasn't interested in them at all because we couldn't relate at all. I have also met intuitives that I saw as caring about things that didn't matter at all (and sensors as well... for example church/religion and useless philosophy).

This is why you like all of these intuitives you meet on here. They are also interested in type theory. But, due to confirmation bias, you assume it's because they are intuitive. Sure they probably got here because they are intuitive (a lot of sensors just aren't interested in this kind of thing because they don't see how it's useful), but that doesn't mean that all intuitives will be this way.

A lot of my family members who are intuitive who I've introduced to type theory have insisted that their significant others were intuitive; when they clearly weren't. It seems that a lot of people do this for some reason... For example my INFP great aunt thought that her husband (an ESTP) was an intuitive because he was very interested in Christianity, Jesus, and God (he was a very spiritual man). And also because he knew how to solve problems very quickly that arose in his life (I guess appearing to be Ne? When it's just practicality). She said that that was because he was good at getting ideas; but that just, again, seems like practicality in use. He would always solve problems based on what he already had or what was noticeably needed in a situation.

My point is, I guess, that N and S are just ways of thinking. But they can accomplish similar things through different means (and often do). Ns and Ss can be interested in similar things and bond with each other because of that. Yeah.

Well, there's my ramble for the day!

 

[cafe]

Nah, it's okay. Just wish I was better at it sometimes.

 

[BlackCat]

Another point that I would like to make is that intuition vs sensing in this theory are PREFERENCES. I prefer sensing, and yet I have been called a very intuitive person by my peers and family. There are also a lot of intuitives who are very practical people, but still prefer intuition as a mental process.

A lot of sensors label themselves as intuitive because of the stereotypes thrown around. They make the same mistake that I did, I said "well I'm a pretty intuitive person, so I guess I'm an intuitive. Sensing just seems like a normal thing." This is a result of the bias from the NTs that write this stuff, like the INTPs who label every annoying outgoing person in their life as an ESFJ and base their descriptions off of that.

Just saying. They are PROCESSES. You can be very intuitive as a sensor. It all just varies. You have to get down to the nit and grit of what the funcitons actually mean when they manifest in a person. Being "insightful" and "mentally quick" are just signs of an intelligent person, not an intuitive person. I'm sure that there are a lot of really stupid intuitives who label themselves as sensors here.

One thing I've noticed, there are a lot of INFJs here who are ISFJ because of the point I made above. And they of course deny it because they are intelligent and consider themselves an intuitive and insightful person. Same with INTJs who are actually ISTJ, but there aren't as many of those here.

 

[PeaceBaby]

+100 for mentioning confirmation bias, BlackCat!

 

[Snuggletron]

Intuitives just like to play the type card, because it's easier than trying to justify our lack of job commitment and initiative to raise our own biological children.

 

[Esoteric Wench]

I disagree. The majority is drawn to university(lecturers are different, I meant the students) because this will provide status and high salary, material style of living. Textbook S territory.

I was only referring to professors... not students. (Except Ph.D. students who were trying to become professors.) I have not seen any studies, but I would guess that you are correct that the type of college STUDENTS reflects type distribution of the greater population.

But for academics (i.e., professors and lecturers), these careers are dominated by Intuitives. This is not a matter of my opinion, btw. The Center for the Applications of Psychological Type (CAPT) has been compiling empirical data about the relationship between career and type. The data clearly shows that people often self-select into careers that play to their strengths. Thus, there is some predictability about what types will choose which careers. You can read a summary by type here: Workplace and Careers - CAPT.org. It is a fact that most professors in four-year liberal arts collages are Intuitives.

Here's some more data. Below is a graph showing the typical personality type demands made in an academic career. The darker areas indicate high demand, lighter ones less demand. So if your personality type is in a darker area, then this career matches your personality. This graph is for a university professor. Note that NO SENSORS are in the darkest areas. So not only are Intuitives attracted to careers as academics, but such careers play to an Intuitive's strengths.

 

[BlackCat]

^The IS_Ps are darker than the EN_Js in that chart... The IS_Js are the same color as the EN_Js. That's a cool site though.

 

[Esoteric Wench]

I'd say it's Judging perceiving mode that is the greatest difference. Then it's F/T, I/E and last N/S.

Well, I guess I would say that the answer to this question about which preferences are the most differentiating is a tricky one because it all has to do with how one defines "the greatest difference." I appreciate your honest feedback.

I would argue that the S-N preference is the most important / greatest difference because it's about our starting point. This preference controls the kind of information we take into our consciousness. After the information is in our brains, only then can we make decisions upon it (T-F) and organize it (J-P).

Kiersey would agree. For Keirsey, the Intuitive-Sensor dichotomy is the most important difference two people could have. And he argued, it is so important that it controls the second most important difference. For Intuitives who frame information abstractly, the second most important dichotomy is the focus on people vs. focus on task (T-F). For Sensors who focus on tangible reality, the second most important difference is the emphasis on structure vs. process (J-P).

 

[StrappingYoungLad]

It is a fact that most professors in four-year liberal arts collages are Intuitives.

No, I think the truth is that most professors in four-year liberal arts collages that paid to take that test prefer to think of themselves as Intuitives.

 

[disregard]

I'm more concerned with being a woman in a man's world.

 

[Snuggletron]

I'm more concerned with being a woman in a man's world.

make me a sandwich.

 

[StrappingYoungLad]

I'm more concerned with being a woman in a man's world.

You should be most concerned with being an N woman in an S patriarchal world.

 

[disregard]

make me a sandwich.

It's not the domesticity I have a problem with. I'm traditional in that sense. It's the inequity I've encountered in my limited experience in the workforce.

 

[PeaceBaby]

^ still, what's happened to good manners? It's "make me a sandwich, please" ...

 

[Esoteric Wench]

You are an N, but you fail to see the big picture of your "big picture ability," that is, to use to contribute to the quality of life, for all people. These functions aren't meant to cause separations or class distinctions. MBTI is first and foremost to understand self, and then understand others- strenghts and weaknesses. Use it to find your niche in the real world. Sensors dominate, but there's a place for all types.

Zthe411, I appreciate your comments, but I'm going to have to respectfully disagree with your police work there.

MBTI is many things to many people. You say that my big picture ability is to contribute to the quality of life of all people. Who says? That's not on my MBTI agenda. (I do want to be a positive force in the world, but that is not why I'm interested in Jungian Typology.)

I agree with you 100% that these functions aren't meant to cause separations or class distinctions. Nor are they meant to erase separations or class distinctions. MBTI is a conceptual framework for understanding the cognitive processes all humans have. What we do with this information is up to us.

I choose to use my understanding of temperament in the way a personality psychologist might: viz., to understand and predict behavior. I also use it to navigate my relationships.

I've noticed that a lot of people on this forum are deeply offended by the concept that our MBTI type controls are behavior and we have no free will. These people warn of using MBTI type to pigeonhole people, oversimplify complex human experiences, and limit expectations. I agree completely that this is a misuse of Jungian typology. But that is not what I'm doing here.

It is a universal human truth that if you can figure out what makes a person tick (i.e., their value system), then you can very accurately predict their behavior. This truth is supported by my personal experiences as well as scientific data.

People make all kinds of decisions on how to act and what to think. But what is a constant across all people, is the individuals tendency to act in their own best interests as defined by their value system. Let's consider this real world example:

For ENFPs, who highly prize intense emotional connections with their friends and loved ones, INFJs are going to be an appealing choice when choosing a mate. Is this a generalization? Yes. Does it mean that ENFPs will always marry INFJs? Heck no. But I'll tell you this: of the 7 INFJs I know, five of them are in serious relationships (lovers, best friends, business partners) with ENFPs. Given the statistical rarity of both these types, this cannot be a coincidence.

So I remind everyone who would warn me of using MBTI in the "wrong way" that each of us is a delicate mix of the cards we are dealt and the cards we choose to play.

Sometimes I feel like a prisoner of my genetic fate. For example, of the four serious dating relationships in my life two were with ISTPs - my dual per Socionics, one was with an INFJ, and one was with an INTJ. (INFJs and INTJs are per many MBTI theorists, an ENFPs ideal match.) BTW, except for my current significant other, all these relationships pre-dated my understanding of ideal temperament matches. I find it tremendously creepy that there is definitely a pattern to the MBTI type of the people I chose and the people who chose me.

Nonetheless, I do have free will. I will reveal the content of my character by the cards I choose to play. For example, I met an INFJ a while back for whom I immediately developed the worst crush. I felt like a teenager complete with stammering in the INFJ's presence. That relationship never came to fruition because I observed some red flags and chose to walk away. (Damn, I still wish that I could have taken him for a test drive, but I digress.)

Don't let your earnest and well-intentioned desire to not oversimplify complex human interactions sabotage your ability to use MBTI as a powerful tool however you see fit to use it.

 

[sleepy]

But for academics (i.e., professors and lecturers), these careers are dominated by Intuitives. This is not a matter of my opinion, btw.

They might be Ns, but their more Js. Didn't you ever notice how anal the huge majority is about timelimits, structure etc etc. I'd say 90& of all people in academia are ESFJs. The higher levels it will deflate somewhat, and mix in with other types. But not by much.

I appreciate your honest feedback.

I'd burn the whole system to the ground. Now, this is my honest opinion