Question for sensors?

[Zhash]

What abstract problem? That Shimpei is a sensor? That's already been established, and I'm asking-- so what. I'm aware that Zhash didn't really care to try and communicate with Shimpei beyond labeling her as a sensor-- I was making my own rhetorical point there that apparently flew right by you.

You didn't get it, Ivy. Sorry. That's the difference.

[Ivy]

You didn't get it, Ivy. Sorry. That's the difference.

LOL.

[Zhash]

Your point was seemingly...nevermind that theoretical mumbo-jumbo... lets focus on the more humane goals... on the more practical... namely using typology to make communication differences diminish...instead of pointing out that Shimpei does not understand because she is a sensor... why dont you take into account how sensors communicate and present it in a way she will be more likely to understand.

Absolutely. Sensors are also the least likely to be introspective. They would rather just fire off based on their tunnel vision.

[SolitaryWalker]

Re function order:

I don't know anything about these random people's function order theories, but logically, would it not be different depending on the relative strengths of the four functions? (Beyond the Ti-Ne-Si-Fe basic order, that is)

For example, an INTP who has a weaker T (ie leaning towards INFP) would have Fi higher in the function order than one with a very strong T. An INTP with a weak P would have Te (and probably Ni) higher in the order than an INTP with a strong P. And so on. So I don't think there can really be one function order for all INTPs.

Does this not make sense?

INTPs with a weak P are the ones with an under-developed Ne.

I see no reason to believe that functions grow in a different fashion for different people of the same temperament. It makes more sense to say that some have gotten further along the path than others.

[meshou]

I see no reason to believe that functions grow in a different fashion for different people of the same temperament. It makes more sense to say that some have gotten further along the path than others.

Because the idea that there are really only sixteen variations on people in the world is a little silly. People either have to grow differently, or there have to be traits MBTI doesn't describe, or both.

[SolitaryWalker]

Because the idea that there are really only sixteen variations on people in the world is a little silly. People either have to grow differently, or there have to be traits MBTI doesn't describe, or both.

How about type stays the same. There are only 16 types..yet a myriad of personalities.. a wide variety of fashions that those 16 types manifest themselves in... this is why its possible to have people of the same type have very different personalities to the point where its hard to believe they are of the same temperament..

[Shimpei]

Absolutely. Sensors are also the least likely to be introspective. They would rather just fire off based on their tunnel vision.

That's preposterous. How about your being highly opinionated?

[Geoff]

The big problem is that the type descriptions are written by intuitives. So they are hugely negative towards sensors. Some of the sensor type descriptions are downright insulting,and poor reflections of the rich multi faceted nature of many sensors that I meet and have the pleasure of working with and spending my free time with.

They don't suffer with tunnel vision, they don't have an inability to use their imagination. They just have a slightly different function order.

Stupid people of all types are dull and unimaginative. Clever people of all types are interesting and imaginative.

Part of the problem here is that intuitives will look at someone they don't like and attach a "sensor" badge to it, and this continues to colour their conception of other sensors. Despite the fact that many they don't like could be intuitives. It's self perpetuating. Don't like someone you know who hasn't been tested? Why, they MUST be my type opposite.

-Geoff

[ptgatsby]

That's preposterous. How about your being highly opinionated?

That'd be INTJ-ness in action There is a degree of irony in having an INTJ call other tunnel visioned...


Geoff, That pretty much covers it.

[Alesia]

The big problem is that the type descriptions are written by intuitives. So they are hugely negative towards sensors. Some of the sensor type descriptions are downright insulting,and poor reflections of the rich multi faceted nature of many sensors that I meet and have the pleasure of working with and spending my free time with.

They don't suffer with tunnel vision, they don't have an inability to use their imagination. They just have a slightly different function order.

Stupid people of all types are dull and unimaginative. Clever people of all types are interesting and imaginative.

Part of the problem here is that intuitives will look at someone they don't like and attach a "sensor" badge to it, and this continues to colour their conception of other sensors. Despite the fact that many they don't like could be intuitives. It's self perpetuating. Don't like someone you know who hasn't been tested? Why, they MUST be my type opposite.

-Geoff

Amen. I totally agree. And also, is there a person who is creative and imaginative? Well, they must be N. Wrong!