How to tell S or N & T or F

[Eastwood]

I was wondering if there is a consistent narrative between how we learn and how we take in information. I know this seems silly to even question, but I found that I am a hands on learner. Does this make me a sensor because I take in the information through acting on the five senses? Or Could I be intuitive? Perhaps the engagement alone is not enough to tell if the information is being circumvented through a process of "Thin-Sclicing" (from the book Blink, by Malcolm Gladwell.) In other words, processing on a subconscious level any intuitive characteristics.

I also feel trapped in this cliche of Thinkers are to assertive and are assholes, while Feelers are soft and dumb. (Of-course theses are all ridiculous cliches, but I wanted to get a good dialogue of how I can look beyond this, to discover my own type.)

 

[RadicalDoubt]

(If you're not a fan of my response, the link to the official mbti can be found near the beginning of this thread: Would you like help with determining your dichotomies?
Also the facets could help: Descriptions of the MBTI Step II Facets )

Being a hands on learner doesn't really lean towards sensor or intuitive, as the majority of people are visual/kinesthetic learners to begin with. Dichtometrically speaking, for the S and N boundary I'd look at where you find most comfort in your dealings; The realm of abstract or the realm of the tangible world? Of course there is a lot of grey between the two, but typically sensing types are more inclined to focus on practicality and realistic application (ie. let's fix the wheel, not reinvent the entire thing. It's not like there are no good aspects to our current model.) and at the extremes can be evasive of change and quick to turn down ideas that seem overly abstract/idealistic. Intuitive types on the other hand are more inclined to focus on the theoretical and what could be (ie. Reinventing the wheel is good especially if the new wheel works far better.) and at extremes can become overly idealistic/fantastical and inattentive to reality.

With T and F on the other hand, I'd suggest to look at where your interests lie. Do you tend to gravitate to/are interested in human oriented subjects and activities (ie. psychology, ethical philosophy, arts via expression, ect ect)(F) or do you not really care much for the human aspect of things (T)? Extremes wise, do you tend to be more tolerant of the icy businessman (ie. at least he gets work done)(T) or the oversensitive warrior archetype (ie. You can't really blame people for getting upset even if it is irrational/ridiculous)(F)? At it's worst, T has a difficulty understanding the purpose of ethically based arguments and F struggles to separate their emotions from tasks.

Yeah, so everything definitly isn't this black and white, but by expanding the reference frame you're looking at via posing such extremes in behavior, it might be a bit clearer where on the spectrum between these two axes you fall. Of course you could also be in the center (or very close to it), but usually people have at least a minute preference...

 

[Doctor Cringelord]

I learn in a somewhat hands-on manner, but I find that this stimulates my mind to leap all over the place in terms of exploring ideas and potential routes and possibilities.