[MBTI General] N v. S

[Angry Ayrab]

But God isn't dead.

Wow that was quick...

I agree but wasn't expecting such a sensor response... An INTP would have maybe discussed the consequences of a dead god or the need to believe in a god.

You see how this isn't working.

 

[Jeffster]

Wow that was quick...

I agree but wasn't expecting such a sensor response... An INTP would have maybe discussed the consequences of a dead god or the need to believe in a god.

You see how this isn't working.

Yeah, I'm trying to respond how I would in a normal conversation. I mean, I thought of other stuff to say here, but that's because I stopped and thought about it for a minute, whereas if we are in the original scenario of the first post in this thread, it's an in-person conversation. And that would have been my response in person. So, what do you say to that? Maybe we can still save it.

 

[Angry Ayrab]

Yeah, I'm trying to respond how I would in a normal conversation. I mean, I thought of other stuff to say here, but that's because I stopped and thought about it for a minute, whereas if we are in the original scenario of the first post in this thread, it's an in-person conversation. And that would have been my response in person. So, what do you say to that? Maybe we can still save it.

Lol, I thought you were playing the S card too well. This conversation could easily be saved, just by prying around on your interests in the topic. Maybe you hate heathens or maybe you do believe that immorality stems from an absence of belief in a hereafter and so on and so forth. I was just messing around earlier, and wouldn't have really said it is not working in real life. I would have just probably done what I just said, or if I found myself boring you, I would have found something you were interested in to talk about.

 

[proteanmix]

Well by nature, a deep and philosophical topic is usually a discussion of an untangible or abstract thing, Religion fits this criteria. On the contrary, You can find many stimulating discussions about the wheather, they don't have to be philosophical, they can be scientific and still intuitive.

Yeah I get that, but religion is like the McDonald's of deep and abstract topics. It seems so obvious to me. I'd rather pull a deep topic out of the mundane, something most people can relate to, a place you can find uncommon wisdom. Religion is one of the fastest ways to kill a good discussion because it's a topic where catalyzation can quickly occur.

 

[Jeffster]

The co-worker that I have the longest conversations with is an INFJ. But I have never really stopped to think about if most of our conversations are "sensor talk." I guess probably a lot of them are. But in the last couple months, we have talked a lot of theory because I got into MBTI/Keirsey/personality type stuff so I've shared a lot of that with her. Now my presentation of it may have focused on the concrete applications of the principles (much like Keirsey does) but I still had to discuss enough of the theory for the applications to make any sense.

I guess maybe I don't recognize enough of what the difference is to notice. I know there are many topics on this forum that I tune out of really fast. Maybe those are the more "N-based" ones? It seems likely. The funny thing is that a lot of the poetry/lyrics that I've written in my life seem very abstract to me. I always wrote just like emptying a bucket, pouring stuff out of my mind onto the page. You can see one example in the most recent page in my personal thread, and I was reading many more last night that were much more stream-of-thought than that. But the other thing I noticed is, almost all of the weird references in my writing, I can remember what they are literally referring to. Not everything, some are just random word spewing, but a lot of them I know exactly what I was talking about, even if no one else could figure it out.

 

[Jeffster]

Yeah I get that, but religion is like the McDonald's of deep and abstract topics. It seems so obvious to me. I'd rather pull a deep topic out of the mundane, something most people can relate to, a place you can find uncommon wisdom. Religion is one of the fastest ways to kill a good discussion because it's a topic where catalyzation can quickly occur.

Yeah, it's much better to talk about our preferred weapons or the proper way to go about a riot at a basketball arena.

 

[Angry Ayrab]

Yeah, it's much better to talk about our preferred weapons or the proper way to go about a riot at a basketball arena.

That would be a cool effing topic actually.

 

[Jeffster]

That would be a cool effing topic actually.

It was. You should come in our Ventrilo chats sometime.

And soon, because in a couple weeks I'm gonna be too busy to chat as much.

 

[Rachelinpa]

Yeah, I've experienced that with Ss, but not all of them. Some Ss are very deep and are great listeners, I find. At the same time, I have gone on some pretty disasterous S dates. We just run out of things to talk about and are much better off if we just do stuff together. I do sometimes wonder if they are dumb when I ask a question and they can't come up with the words to answer it, but then you watch them talking to other Ss and they are some of the most intelligent people I've ever met. To be fair, I'm pretty sure they feel the same way about me when I cannot talk about anything concrete (although, I've been working on it)!

Wild!

Example. I asked this ESTJ to tell me about his friend...

ME: "Tell me what your best friend is like!"

HIM: "You always ask me this! I can't describe people... I can tell you where they are from and what they do, but I don't think that's what you want to know..."

I mean, I'm like... how can you not possibly know how to describe someone? But, it seems the vocabularly simply isn't there! Baffling. At the same time, if you were to ask him about the latest news or sports he would be able to talk about it for hours!

 

[Sunshine]

Ugh. I hate that. I'm horrible at putting things into words. Lol it doesn't mean I'm dumb though. I just don't think in words. You're so lucky you don't have that problem.

 

[Maverick]

The S/N makes a big difference in topics of conversation. Both have trouble understanding each other and "what's the point" about what the other is saying.

For example:

ESTJ: What place is the best to get the cheapest x or y; ENTJ: do you really need x or y?

S: The question of "meaning" is useless, because the meaning is self-evident: of course you need x or y, or else they wouldn't be talking about it
N: The question of "meaning" is the priority, everyone says x and y is necessary but it really isn't

ESTJ: What are the latest results in sports; ENTJ: what strategy did the coach use for this season compared to the last

S: Who cares about the strategy if you're not the coach, it's useless
N: Who cares about the results if you cannot understand what led to them

ESTJ: Problems they have with administrations; ENTJ: how could administrations be made more efficient

S: Who cares about how administrations could be made better, you're not in a position to change them. That's idealistic.
N: Who cares about complaining, if you don't have a better way, don't rant.

So it's really a question of putting yourself in their shoes...

 

[Algora J]

Well of course you're not supposed to get into NT conversations with an SF unless you just want to hear yourself talk.

What I really like about two of my ESFP friends is that they are party people. 1 of them gives me good insight about certain aspects I would've never thought of myself, since indeed we have nearly opposite personalities. She also says the most outrageous things sometimes that makes me laugh out loud. A good person, but for those deep, intellectual, stimulating conversations, don't expect to have one with an ESFP. They're all about fun fun fun.

 

[Sunshine]

How do you define "deep"?

Meaningful?

 

[Algora J]

How do you define "deep"?

Meaningful?

Well when 1 ESFP smokes some pot, I think that opens up her auxillary T function. And we can analyze something linear together. However, when I mean by "deep" I am referring to the subtext and context of the intricacies of a particular subject, and those I find I've mainly had great conversations with other NTs, ESTJs or INFJs usually.

 

[Sunshine]

lol I love how that started out with "Well when 1 ESFP smokes pot..."

Ah ok so you meant complex.

 

[Jeffster]

We can be plenty deep, darn it! I just spent more than an hour talking about how Brett Favre is driven to keep playing football because he's a SPazz like me and not because he wants more fame and fortune. He has a compulsion to play and has a hunger for challenges, like turning around a sucky Jets team. I contrasted that with an SJ glory-hound like Roger Clemens who wanted to be known as the best ever so was competitive for status reasons not for compulsion reasons. And at the end of the conversation, the dude I was talking to said I had given him a new perspective that he hadn't thought about before and maybe he was wrong when he said Favre is just an egomaniac who wants attention for himself and doesn't care who gets screwed in the process.

See, that's some deep stuff right there, somebody give me a freakin sticker or something!

 

[substitute]

The S/N makes a big difference in topics of conversation. Both have trouble understanding each other and "what's the point" about what the other is saying.

For example:

ESTJ: What place is the best to get the cheapest x or y; ENTJ: do you really need x or y?

S: The question of "meaning" is useless, because the meaning is self-evident: of course you need x or y, or else they wouldn't be talking about it
N: The question of "meaning" is the priority, everyone says x and y is necessary but it really isn't

ESTJ: What are the latest results in sports; ENTJ: what strategy did the coach use for this season compared to the last

S: Who cares about the strategy if you're not the coach, it's useless
N: Who cares about the results if you cannot understand what led to them

ESTJ: Problems they have with administrations; ENTJ: how could administrations be made more efficient

S: Who cares about how administrations could be made better, you're not in a position to change them. That's idealistic.
N: Who cares about complaining, if you don't have a better way, don't rant.

So it's really a question of putting yourself in their shoes...

+3

 

[Little Linguist]

The S/N makes a big difference in topics of conversation. Both have trouble understanding each other and "what's the point" about what the other is saying.

For example:

ESTJ: What place is the best to get the cheapest x or y; ENTJ: do you really need x or y?

S: The question of "meaning" is useless, because the meaning is self-evident: of course you need x or y, or else they wouldn't be talking about it
N: The question of "meaning" is the priority, everyone says x and y is necessary but it really isn't

ESTJ: What are the latest results in sports; ENTJ: what strategy did the coach use for this season compared to the last

S: Who cares about the strategy if you're not the coach, it's useless
N: Who cares about the results if you cannot understand what led to them

ESTJ: Problems they have with administrations; ENTJ: how could administrations be made more efficient

S: Who cares about how administrations could be made better, you're not in a position to change them. That's idealistic.
N: Who cares about complaining, if you don't have a better way, don't rant.

So it's really a question of putting yourself in their shoes...

This was a really cool analysis that definitely made things clearer for me. I wish people could do this for all the types!!!

 

[animenagai]

maverick hit it bang on the head. good one bro. this is an extreme version of N vs S though, i find that i can philosophize with S's as long as it's a subject relevant to them. if the guy is interested in politics, i can talk about communism vs marxism. if he has strong morals i can talk about the short comings of human rights etc. i find that ST's are easier to talk to than SF's with this kind of stuff.

 

[Jack Flak]

Maverick makes plenty of sense, but unless the stereotype is intentional I don't think Sensors are being given enough credit.