• 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.

Can INFPs have high IQs?

Aleksei

Yeah, I can fly.
Joined
Mar 10, 2010
Messages
3,626
MBTI Type
ENTJ
Enneagram
7w6
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Well you have a really single minded way of looking at things. I'm going to repeat myself again, I think that sensors who are intelligent score as N's on tests because of the way tests are laid out. Because the makers may think that N = intelligent and S = simpleton. So the non simpleton S's would score as Ns. You seem to think that all tests are flawless and score every S as an S and every N as an N.

And I ask you this-



Why?
From my debate with you on Harry Potter I remember you getting the definition of Feeler wrong and the definition of Extrovert wrong (Or, more concretely, denying the actual definitions as such because they did not fit your argument). So I'm gonna answer your question with another question: What exactly do you think a Sensor is?
 
G

garbage

Guest
This thread's about five months old. I posted it when I knew nothing about mbti.

I'm not knocking your questions (questions are good), but I sure as hell am knocking the answers you got

:hug: keep on truckin'


yeah

The one thing to note is that many of the posts in these threads are borderline retarded, but they don't sound retarded because of the verbiage they use


lol this would not be the most reliable of sources, no

* August 26, 2007: I apologize for not having documented the source of the statistics that I cite here. I dimly recall finding them on or via the website of Mensa USA, but I am not certain of that. And I can no longer find the source by searching the web.

Unfortunately.. well, how many people "dimly recall" things without being able to point to primary sources? Lots of people. Too many people.
 

Forever_Jung

Active member
Joined
May 23, 2009
Messages
2,644
MBTI Type
ESFJ
Unfortunately.. well, how many people "dimly recall" things without being able to point to primary sources? Lots of people. Too many people.

In all my college papers I just cite a "dim recollection of something I read on the internet" and the prof's are cool. :newwink:
 

BlackCat

Shaman
Joined
Nov 19, 2008
Messages
7,038
MBTI Type
ESFP
Enneagram
9w8
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
From my debate with you on Harry Potter I remember you getting the definition of Feeler wrong and the definition of Extrovert wrong (Or, more concretely, denying the actual definitions as such because they did not fit your argument). So I'm gonna answer your question with another question: What exactly do you think a Sensor is?

:doh:

You're the one that seems to not have any idea of what he's talking about.

And I didn't define those things because it wouldn't have honestly mattered. You would have just retorted "well you're wrong and I'm right as usual HAHAHAHAHAHA"

Extroversion/Introversion deals with people's mental energy. Introverts store up energy from being with their thoughts and interacting with the world in some way uses the energy. Introverts go crazy without interacting in some way because they have too much bottled in. But too much interacting drains introverts. Extroverts, on the other hand, get that crazy feeling if they aren't being stimulated mentally. They get the drained feeling if nothing is happening or there is nothing to do. Actual research has been done on this, it all deals with how people interact with the world. I stopped responding because you called me stupid for thinking that extroversion had nothing to do with liking people or something like that. :doh: I didn't want to waste my time.

And I never defined feeler either. So how was my definition wrong?

It's hard to define sensor, but simply a sensor is someone who has the Se or Si process as one of their first two functions.

You seem to be stuck on the dichotomies themselves rather than using the functions. That's just not really an accurate way to typewatch. Using the actual dichotomies gets really confusing. MBTI typing people is more along the lines of analyzing where someone is coming from when they are sharing their thoughts (in whatever way), it's not really about behavior.

I'm guessing you're going to respond to just one line of this post and totally miss the point like last time and totally ignore the rest of it lol.
 

Aleksei

Yeah, I can fly.
Joined
Mar 10, 2010
Messages
3,626
MBTI Type
ENTJ
Enneagram
7w6
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
You're the one that seems to not have any idea of what he's talking about.
Aleksei's First Law of Debate: If you argue against me, you are wrong. :yes:

And I didn't define those things because it wouldn't have honestly mattered. You would have just retorted "well you're wrong and I'm right as usual HAHAHAHAHAHA"
Would you deny me that pleasure? you are one cruel ISFP. :cry:

Extroversion/Introversion deals with people's mental energy. Introverts store up energy from being with their thoughts and interacting with the world in some way uses the energy. Introverts go crazy without interacting in some way because they have too much bottled in. But too much interacting drains introverts. Extroverts, on the other hand, get that crazy feeling if they aren't being stimulated mentally. They get the drained feeling if nothing is happening or there is nothing to do. Actual research has been done on this, it all deals with how people interact with the world. I stopped responding because you called me stupid for thinking that extroversion had nothing to do with liking people or something like that. :doh: I didn't want to waste my time.
Extraversion and introversion - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The trait of extraversion-introversion is a central dimension of human personality. Extraverts (also spelled extroverts[1]) tend to be gregarious, assertive, and interested in seeking out excitement. Introverts, in contrast, tend to be more reserved, less outgoing, and less sociable. They are not necessarily loners but they tend to have smaller circles of friends and are less likely to thrive on making new social contacts. Introverts are less likely to seek stimulation from others because their own thoughts and imagination are stimulating enough. A common misconception is that all introverts suffer from social anxiety or shyness. Introversion does not describe social discomfort but rather social preference. An introvert may not be shy at all but may merely prefer non social or less social activities.

Extraversion and introversion - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

According to Carl Jung, introversion and extraversion refer to the direction of psychic energy. If a person’s psychic energy usually flows outwards then he or she is an extravert, while if the energy usually flows inwards, the person is an introvert.[9] Extraverts feel an increase of perceived energy when interacting with a large group of people, but a decrease of energy when left alone. Conversely, introverts feel an increase of energy when alone, but a decrease of energy when surrounded by a large group of people. Most modern psychologists consider theories of psychic energy to be obsolete. First, it is difficult to operationalize mental "energy" in ways that can be scientifically measured and tested. Second, more detailed explanations of extraversion and the brain have replaced Jung's rather speculative theories.[10] Nevertheless, the concept is still in popular usage in the general sense of "feeling energized" in particular situations. Jung’s primary legacy in this area may be the popularizing of the terms introvert and extravert to refer to a particular dimension of personality.

So basically, extroversion in the Jungian sense refers to whether a person is emotionally stimulated or drained by social contact. It has nothing to do with mental stimulation, and most introverts seek mental stimulation regardless -- Only they prefer to do so in isolation. Not being Howard Hughes is not being an extrovert. ;)

And I never defined feeler either. So how was my definition wrong?
As I remember it you discarded the body of the Feeler/Thinker dichotomy because it described Harry as a Thinker -- whereas you wanted to believe he shared a type with you. Awww.

It's hard to define sensor, but simply a sensor is someone who has the Se or Si process as one of their first two functions.
So, you have no idea. I thought as much.

A sensor, for your information, is someone who processes information primarily through feedback from their senses (hence the word) and memory. A sensor is hyperaware of what goes on around him (Se) or what has happened around them in the past (Si). Sensors are not intuitors because while they're more aware of their surroundings than the latter, they lack the ability or inclination to tie in their observations into a larger picture, that is, to conceptualize. Hence, Sensors think of what is or what was, whereas intuitors (both Ni and Ne) think of what could be, which is a cognitive process sometimes known as an "imagination."

You seem to be stuck on the dichotomies themselves rather than using the functions. That's just not really an accurate way to typewatch. Using the actual dichotomies gets really confusing. MBTI typing people is more along the lines of analyzing where someone is coming from when they are sharing their thoughts (in whatever way), it's not really about behavior.
Functional analysis get even more confusing because, to put it bluntly, it makes no sense. Carl Jung was on acid when he drew it up. The functions themselves are good, but the way he ties them together isn't. It is self-contradictory (Per Jung Extroverts should be P-dom and J-aux, yet ExxJs are supposedly J-dom P-aux, which contradicts reality), and at times simply absurd. I've done functional analysis on myself, my mother and several of my friends, and none of our functional preferences match our types (or according to Jungian analysis should even be possible).

I'm guessing you're going to respond to just one line of this post and totally miss the point like last time and totally ignore the rest of it lol.
You guessed wrong. ;)
 

Lexicon

Temporal Mechanic
Staff member
Joined
Sep 28, 2008
Messages
12,342
MBTI Type
JINX
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Oh ffs, who keeps digging this shit up.
AND WHY
 
W

WALMART

Guest
of the people i've intellectually envied, infp's have been more than a couple
 

Standuble

New member
Joined
Aug 23, 2011
Messages
1,149
I don't think I have a high IQ but I'm sure there have been many of our number who could meet the grade.

By the sounds of things it's overrated anyway. I've seen the masses trumpeting their "IQ score" around and yet found their worldview and understanding of events to be poor and my conclusion of them to be "I think you're stupid" although in a less direct and blunt way. Once I was told that IQ score merely measures the rate of development, that a man with an IQ of 200 merely learns and grasps things twice as fast and twice as easy as someone with an IQ of 100. If that were true then one could learn fast but remember little and thus still have little potential to apply their knowledge. They may still have a poor facility to grasp certain modes of thinking, essentially being retarded. The only difference being is that they are only twice as fast as an other idiot with an IQ of 100 and cannot be anywhere near the same league as someone with an IQ of 100 but who has their entire brain engineered towards that mode of thinking.

Not mentioning any names NT types.
 

EcK

The Memes Justify the End
Joined
Nov 21, 2008
Messages
7,708
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
738
I don't think I have a high IQ but I'm sure there have been many of our number who could meet the grade.

By the sounds of things it's overrated anyway. I've seen the masses trumpeting their "IQ score" around and yet found their worldview and understanding of events to be poor and my conclusion of them to be "I think you're stupid" although in a less direct and blunt way. Once I was told that IQ score merely measures the rate of development, that a man with an IQ of 200 merely learns and grasps things twice as fast and twice as easy as someone with an IQ of 100. If that were true then one could learn fast but remember little and thus still have little potential to apply their knowledge. They may still have a poor facility to grasp certain modes of thinking, essentially being retarded. The only difference being is that they are only twice as fast as an other idiot with an IQ of 100 and cannot be anywhere near the same league as someone with an IQ of 100 but who has their entire brain engineered towards that mode of thinking.

Not mentioning any names NT types.
that is a common misconception.

past a certain point people with large gaps in iq just think qualitatively differently. Is it really smart to just give your biased self serving opinion as a basis for your whole argument despite not having any kind of data to back it up. and then judge people for being stupid...? I think googling a few studies would have been just as fast and have provided us with a slightly more informed opinion.

I think it's note worthy.

to answer the thread. statistical trends/correlation say that yes. personal exp[erience say that yes (the title after all doesnt talk about stats and trend, just capability, so i only need one example)
 

Rasofy

royal member
Joined
Mar 7, 2011
Messages
5,881
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
They likely have the highest average IQ among Fs.

[citation needed]
 

Standuble

New member
Joined
Aug 23, 2011
Messages
1,149
that is a regular misconception.

past a certain point people with large gaps in iq just think qualitatively differently.

As a regular Joe regular misconceptions are my cup of tea. Which part were you referring to exactly with that comment if I may ask? The section that asserts that IQ = rate of change? If yes then I would have thought that was evident as there would need to be a more effective, efficient or outright completely different mechanism at work with the higher ranker in order to comprehend quicker than a lesser.
 

EcK

The Memes Justify the End
Joined
Nov 21, 2008
Messages
7,708
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
738
As a regular Joe regular misconceptions are my cup of tea. Which part were you referring to exactly with that comment if I may ask? The section that asserts that IQ = rate of change?

imagine a road system that is self regulating to a degree based on specific speed ranges and limits. The end goal of the system is "of course" to avoid accidents & get people to their destination as reliably and efficiently as possible while taking into account budgeting & other physical constraints. Now imagine you have similar starting parameters but everyone can now drive 'twice as fast'. the optimum road system wouldn't be the same as the one with the original speed ranges.

elementary.
 
Top