• 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.

[NT] Stupid NTs

LostInNerSpace

New member
Joined
Jan 25, 2008
Messages
1,027
MBTI Type
INTP
This probably has something to do with why NTs are such pretentious douches; we're raised being told how brilliant and special we are and so we get into this ridiculous sort of complacent mindset where we don't think we even have to try at anything. It's pretty bad.

Speak for yourself. One of my high school teachers said she thought I was a bit thick--in front of the whole class. She didn't realize I was sitting in the front row.:angry:
 

Usehername

On a mission
Joined
May 30, 2007
Messages
3,794
It's not sarcasm. It's a well known fact that intuitive people have an advantage in science and philosophy. I thought it was obvious.

Have you ever studied a field in great depth? Once you do, you'll recognize the many dimensions and facets within each field, i.e. there are some pockets in every field (no matter what the field) that cater to probably every type of intelligence. Intelligence aside, just because the first "gate" to get within the field might require more effort from someone with a different intellectual skillset doesn't mean that all the gates within the discipline require the same pass-key, if you will.
Plus, like is clear in my example, my ISFJ grandpa is hella smart. He's probably able to understand a lot more than most NTs, and he's not the only SF to do that. Intelligence and type are not related.

You're really limiting your variables when you assert that personality types should be such deterministic predictors of where one can succeed. What about motivation, like Toonia referenced? Work ethic? Time management skills? The list goes on.

Can you name one good ISFJ scientist? Or at least an average one?

While some cases like Einstein or Feynman are prototypes of their NTPness, I'd wager that a lot of people are projecting the wrong type onto some individuals that are succeeding in fields that they're not "supposed" to be succeeding in.

Back to my ISFJ grandpa, for example--it's not like I'm bad at typing, he is just a supreme introvert (thus not displaying a lot of data from which to gather type-evidence) AND demonstrably intelligent in prototypical NT areas that I presumed he was INTP. He really looked the type, and had to explain to me his ISFJness once he read the description, which I then saw how it fit.
 

A-J

New member
Joined
Jan 20, 2009
Messages
13
MBTI Type
INTP
Have you ever studied a field in great depth? Once you do, you'll recognize the many dimensions and facets within each field, i.e. there are some pockets in every field (no matter what the field) that cater to probably every type of intelligence. Intelligence aside, just because the first "gate" to get within the field might require more effort from someone with a different intellectual skillset doesn't mean that all the gates within the discipline require the same pass-key, if you will.

Amen. Type measures preference. While there seems to be (I don't remember the studies offhand) correlation between N and intelligence, that's most likely to have intelligence as the cause and N preference as the effect. People tend to prefer things they are good at and avoid those they're not good at. Correlation is not an absolute - here it merely means that, other things being equal, people with N preference are more likely intelligent, not that they absolutely will be. Take 1000 people with N and 1000 with S preference. The N group will have more gifted people but the S group will also have some.

You're really limiting your variables when you assert that personality types should be such deterministic predictors of where one can succeed. What about motivation, like Toonia referenced? Work ethic? Time management skills? The list goes on.

Once you get past certain level, intelligence stops being a good predictor of success and is replaced by other things such as listed here. At each point, the skill you're relatively worst at will likely be the limiting factor. Once you are past the "required" intelligence, you're probably capable of scientific research. When your work ethic is good enough, you can perform consistent studies and hit deadlines for papers. If you're good at networking, you will have more opportunities for collaboration with your peers and higher chance of being cited in other papers. The list goes on.
 

Valuable_Money

New member
Joined
Jun 19, 2009
Messages
679
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
5w6
Point 1: Everyone has their own brand of intelligence, yes. NTs should be able to acknowledge theirs without offending everyone else or making them feel inferior. Go ahead say it.

Admit it!



NTs are smart.....and it's okay.


They have worked hard at it, are probably naturally inclined, and are driven by intellectual pursuits. This is part of there personality. They pride themselves on their intellectual achievements. How can you deny NT intelligence?

Haters.


Hmmmm Lets see what the POST CONDENSOR 3000TM says:


"Im not a narccassist I just happen to be the greatest human being in the world."

"IM SMARTER THAN ALL OF YOU STOP CALLING ME STUPID I CANT BE STUPID CAUSE IM AN NT"

The POST CONDENSOR 3000TM detects 4% chance of a troll.
 

Hendo Barbarosa

New member
Joined
Dec 26, 2008
Messages
197
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w4
Plus, like is clear in my example, my ISFJ grandpa is hella smart. He's probably able to understand a lot more than most NTs, and he's not the only SF to do that. Intelligence and type are not related.

(forgive anything I might've missed if I'm repeating other people's thoughts, I'm still catching up with this thread actively...)

Note that you said he UNDERSTANDS a lot more than most NTs (this is almost definitely true) but what other people in this thread have essentially been pointing out is that the intuitive streak (esp. secondary, semi-conscious INTP Ne) is better for taking said knowledge and creating new, previously unthought of connections with it. Interestingly enough a lot of the argument in this thread is that since he's Si dominant, (although incredibly adept and memorizing and utilizing the given body of scientific knowledge) he'll probably not be as good at using his inferior Ne to make the new and striking connections with that data that a "successful" (in the sense of being different or innovative, I suppose) scientist or philosopher would be defined by.

That said, people need to also respect the fact or idea that by the functions themselves, an INTP uses dominant Ti and Si to build their storehouse of knowledge (Si assists in the "encyclopedia" factor) and surprisingly enough, guess who uses Si and Ti in that same introverted-functional duo?

The ISFJ.

So there could be two possible reasons why he tested this way even given his extensive intellect:

a.) Maybe he has different ways of expressing and understanding his given type somehow, and that broke the test?

b.) He is in fact an ISFJ with (despite to the cries and wails of people on this board/chatroom) a higher functioning tertiary Ti that comes from ignoring more of his less conscious secondary function Fe and focusing instead on an SiTi configuration that would indeed look very similar (but would probably have subtle but striking differences of approach) to the INTP's way of analyzing the same problem.

Really the best way to know would be to take a valid INTP and get him to have a conversation with the ISFJ, while observing any comparisons and contrast...
 

Thalassa

Permabanned
Joined
May 3, 2009
Messages
25,183
MBTI Type
ISFP
Enneagram
6w7
Instinctual Variant
sx
Hmmmm Lets see what the POST CONDENSOR 3000TM says:


"Im not a narccassist I just happen to be the greatest human being in the world."

"IM SMARTER THAN ALL OF YOU STOP CALLING ME STUPID I CANT BE STUPID CAUSE IM AN NT"

The POST CONDENSOR 3000TM detects 4% chance of a troll.

For some reason my visceral response to this thread keeps being "Ayn Rand."
 

Hendo Barbarosa

New member
Joined
Dec 26, 2008
Messages
197
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w4
This one time someone called her out on, of all places, the Phil Donahue show, and her response was (paraphrase mine) "So let me get this straight, just so I understand the situation correctly: Which one of us is famous/has a book and which one is just a person in the audience?"
 

BlueScreen

Fail 2.0
Joined
Nov 8, 2008
Messages
2,668
MBTI Type
YMCA
Just some thoughts.

I think we need evidence to claim anything is NT-type intelligence. As far as IQ tests go, the only thing I've heard is that they are N biased.

Einstein is a pretty classic INTP. I'm not doubting it. I think a lot of great scientists get stereotyped to be NT by field though, and not a lot of people have really gone into their personalities.
 

Kalach

Filthy Apes!
Joined
Dec 3, 2008
Messages
4,310
MBTI Type
INTJ
I don't think you'll find an NT anywhere that doesn't want to be "intelligent". "Clever', "smart", "insightful", "right", "true", all those. Some may not do it well. All will desire it. Any T will want to be smart, surely. "Smart" would mean they're succeeding at their preferred mode of being. Or, if not "smart", maybe just "not stupid". "Stupid" would be shameful.

NT: "Naw, Tom, let's just go play with turtles, I got a shotgun n everything, fuckin algorythmns and workflow and computers, dunno what ya talkin about. I'm clever, but. Real clever. I got cheese for catching the turtles."
 

BlueScreen

Fail 2.0
Joined
Nov 8, 2008
Messages
2,668
MBTI Type
YMCA
:). I know they seem to want to be intelligent, but might that skew the view of some of the less perceptive types. Like when the government repeats something enough, people start believing it, and even the government starts believing it. Though there is also the idea that what you want to be, you become.
 

Kalach

Filthy Apes!
Joined
Dec 3, 2008
Messages
4,310
MBTI Type
INTJ
Naw, I'm saying something like it's going to be hard work taking "intelligent" out of the definition of NT. Like, what's an NT? Oh, just some guy who thinks a lot, might not get it right, kinda crap at feeling stuff too, but whatcha gonna do, right?

If we're potentially quite dumb, what have we got left?

Thus, whip out the IQ test and get ready to weep, the smart guys are coming to town!



And for thread purposes, if it takes you five years to understand new theoretical principles, no, that's not being N. Being N means you immediately--IMMEDIATELY!--see possibilities for connection to what you know. You don't actually understand immediately, but you do see the web of connection start spinning. Or at least you think it'll start spinning because you know that's what you do when understanding is on its way.

And for general understanding purposes, fuck! People don't have percentages on their preferences! They have percentages on their awareness of their preferences. Ergo, in fact, to discover if NTs are definitionally intelligent, we need a significantly better model than MBTI because MBTI gives no measurement at all of how strongly functional your function is. (And having said that, note that blah blah blah obviously intelligence must vary even in the NT community, for I've allowed that strength of the functioning of a function can vary. And effect of functioning must vary too. And so freakin on.)

You'll all be hearing from my lawyers.
 

A-J

New member
Joined
Jan 20, 2009
Messages
13
MBTI Type
INTP
Just some thoughts.

I think we need evidence to claim anything is NT-type intelligence. As far as IQ tests go, the only thing I've heard is that they are N biased.

I wouldn't even say they are N "biased". I can see no reason that would prevent intelligence influencing cognitive preference.

I will use a bad analogy to illustrate :) :
Imagine you had a "Physical Exercise Type Indicator" with one type being long distance running (LDR). Then imagine you had another instrument that correlated well with said type such as Body mass index. It would be silly to say that "BMI is biased towards long distance running". Replace BMI with IQ and LDR with NT and you'll see that the situation is not entirely unlike.
 

SubjectA

New member
Joined
Jul 17, 2009
Messages
164
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
1
It's not sarcasm. It's a well known fact that intuitive people have an advantage in science and philosophy. I thought it was obvious.

Ace_ said:
Science and philosophy require abstract thinking. N people are abstract thinkers. They are idea people which is also a big advantage in science. Science and especially philosophy require a lot of theorizing which is obviously where intuitive people excel. You're not going to discover something new if you dislike theorizing about different possibilities.

Assuming that you even bothered to decipher the difference between S and N in the first place, you'd know that sensors and intuitives can contribute different skill sets to science. Science isn't just about dreaming up possibilities. Any scientist will tell you that.

Science and philosophy require abstract thinking. N people are abstract thinkers. They are idea people which is also a big advantage in science. Science and especially philosophy require a lot of theorizing which is obviously where intuitive people excel. You're not going to discover something new if you dislike theorizing about different possibilities.

Can you name one good ISFJ scientist? Or at least an average one?

I didn't know you could speak for the whole world now.

Given how many ISFJs are out there, you're willing to assert that not a single one of them is a successful scientist?

Having an SF doesn't prevent you from doing anything or having any successful job you want. No set of letters do.
 

Jaguar

Active member
Joined
May 5, 2007
Messages
20,647
Ergo, in fact, to discover if NTs are definitionally intelligent, we need a significantly better model than MBTI because MBTI gives no measurement at all of how strongly functional your function is.


That could be posted 100 times in this forum, and people still won't get it.

I was reading another forum and someone had "typed" a co-worker as ISFP.
The alleged ISFP then took a test and came out ENTP.
Surprising to anyone? It really shouldn't be.
There's an assumption built into MBTI:
Our preferred functions are our most conscious.

Since when did it become a fact that what we are most conscious of,
is actually stronger than what we are most unconscious of?

Someone could claim they don't prefer Se, yet clearly exhibit strength in Se without even realizing it.

Just because a type theory suggests a person is "weak" or "strong" in a particular function,
doesn't make it true.
 

Kalach

Filthy Apes!
Joined
Dec 3, 2008
Messages
4,310
MBTI Type
INTJ
Werl... a friend likes to test his girlfriends. One of them took the test three times, different result each time, none of them ISFJ, which is what I believe she fits.

But anyway by "strongly functional" I meant something like "actually works, delivers the goods".

I own to being a believer. I like function orders that pair an e with an i. I like the idea that using one kind of function will preclude easy simultaneous use of some others--like for example someone trying to say they use Ti and Fi at the same time doesn't seem right. I'm content too with the idea that the lower in the function order, the more mentally costly it is to maintain conscious use. (Like I know from experience that I can go on Se trips, appreciating flowers and trees and perspective and roads and wind and sweating, but I also know that I space out after not too long and start thinking of other things, and I can come back to the Se moment if I put some effort in, but... and so on.) I also take it for granted that somehow or other it just does happen that there are 4 chosen ones and 4 shadows. Just using myself as the one easy access subject I have, the theory does seem to work, so I believe.

The thing that bugs me however is, I guess, the lack of really personal expressive depth. The archetypes work for me so I grant them the status of working for everyone else too (just to make it easier to like the theory), but I guess the fact is, they don't really work, not really. They, and MBTI, go only so far into expressing what it is to have an identity. There's a frustrating drop off in expressive power for this model, perhaps right at the most interesting point. (Or at least it's the interesting point once one has gone some way into the model and started wanting more.)

So for example, I'd guess there'll be some IRL correlation between being NT and being intelligent, but it seems like MBTI really doesn't have the juice to genuinely say why (or why not). Or what, or how. The really interesting parts of the person, as far as MBTI goes, are left up to accidents of birth, environment, and who the hell knows what else.


*pout*

*wants better*
 
Top