INTJ "Intelligent" Myth

[Jaguar]

You mean the night has come and gone and the penis is still on the table? Lol.

 

[miss fortune]

*grumbles* I haven't gotten what's mine yet today....

but I must say, to be somewhat relevant, that since most people fall near the middle of the spectrum naturally (and then they end up getting different views of themselves, which screws with the self reporting bias... :steam that this is pretty irrelevant- hardly anyone is an extreme N or S... you need BOTH to be intelligent and successful- otherwise you're full of ideas with no means of implementation, or great at carrying out other people's thoughts but lacking any vision

 

[Oaky]

This, to me, is ridiculous. I never really cared about being the smartest. In fact, I expended a lot of effort in school trying NOT to stand out for it. The truth is that we appear intelligent because our society judges intelligence in a way that benefits our natural thought processes. I basically didn't give a shit about anything I learned in school until I went to college where I got a "useless" humanities degree.

Hmmm. I had not said all INTJs were like this. I said many. More so than any other type except probably INTPs. I too, can give examples of INTJs who are not like what I had described.

 

[simulatedworld]

The fact of the matter is that while there are different kinds of intelligences, certain kinds of intelligence help you "get ahead" in the world more than others.

=implied Te value judgment. The value you've placed on "getting ahead" in the world here is biased by an unsubstantiated assumption that Te's goals are better than those of other judgment functions.

The fact that Te intelligence grants more wealth/power/influence/whatever it is that Te-ers are into merely indicates that this particular societal structure rewards that value system more than others--it has very little to do with the inherent worth of different types of intelligence.

Yes, there are multiple intelligences.

But there's also a reason why NT intelligence is thought of as the most general form of "intelligence".

Yup, and that's that the types whose self-image depends most heavily on believing themselves to be intelligent are the ones who spend the most time and effort developing tests and methods of measuring intelligence. Not surprisingly, the instruments they come up with tend to test only one kind of intelligence: their own.

There aren't many tests for Se intelligence because Se-oriented people, by and large, don't give a shit about proving their intelligence to others because it's not crucial to their self-image the way it is to NTs. :hi:

There are a number of other reasons NT intelligence is often mistaken for "general" intelligence--not the least significant of which lies in the fact that NTs grow up thinking they're smarter than everyone because NT intelligence is the only kind we test on a mass scale. (The SAT, IQ tests, etc.) NTs build "I'm smarter than everyone and that makes me valuable" into their concepts of self-worth and thus don't learn to acknowledge the existence or value of other kinds of intelligence. Admitting that they don't have a monopoly on the very thing they pride themselves on most is awfully threatening to the NT self-image.

So many people grow up with a limited impression of what intelligence is. They're told, "This number represents your mental capacity, period." In actuality it only represents that person's capacity in performing NT-related tasks, which, of course, correlate with only one of many kinds of intelligence.

Is an Ni dom really telling me I'm slipping too far into relativism?

 

[onemoretime]

Sim, while I know your point, I would also be wary of slipping too far into relativism with regards to multiple intelligences.

Yes, there are multiple intelligences.

But there's also a reason why NT intelligence is thought of as the most general form of "intelligence".

Honest question, what is that reason? I can't come up with a good answer myself.

 

[simulatedworld]

Honest question, what is that reason? I can't come up with a good answer myself.

The reason is just that that's how most people are taught to think. NTs score higher on standardized tests (which test only NT intelligence) and are told from a young age that they're special because of it.

Other types are told that they're less intelligent because they don't score as well on tests of NT intelligence, so their cognitive gifts are marginalized. It's assumed (largely by NTJs, who usually design and control the testing methods) that other intelligences are less valid because they can't be measured empirically and quantified on a numerical scale.

Typical Te: If you can't stick it in a test tube and quantify it, it's not real.

The only real reason is that we've been taught to think that way...which the INTJs should know better than anyone is never a good enough reason to believe something.

 

[onemoretime]

The reason is just that that's how most people are taught to think. NTs score higher on standardized tests (which test only NT intelligence) and are told from a young age that they're special because of it.

Other types are told that they're less intelligent because they don't score as well on tests of NT intelligence, so their cognitive gifts are marginalized. It's assumed (largely by NTJs, who usually design and control the testing methods) that other intelligences are less valid because they can't be measured empirically and quantified on a numerical scale.

Typical Te: If you can't stick it in a test tube and quantify it, it's not real.

The only real reason is that we've been taught to think that way...which the INTJs should know better than anyone is never a good enough reason to believe something.

Unless Zarathustra's an alternate profile of yours, and I think a few posters on this board would be more than a little upset if that were the case, I'd prefer if you let him answer the question first. He's owed that level of respect, right?

 

[simulatedworld]

Unless Zarathustra's an alternate profile of yours, and I think a few posters on this board would be more than a little upset if that were the case, I'd prefer if you let him answer the question first. He's owed that level of respect, right?

I don't think my answer prevents him from sharing his own take on the issue. It's not as if my post's earlier number in the thread affects its validity.

That said, no disrespect intended to Z. I'm interested in hearing his response too.

 

[onemoretime]

I don't think my answer prevents him from sharing his own take on the issue. It's not as if my post's earlier number in the thread affects its validity.

Yeah it does. It's saying that you think your ideas on the subject are more important than even the person whom the question was asked of. That's a little obnoxious, wouldn't you say?

 

[miss fortune]

well, I refuse to be an NT just because I score well on NT intelligence tests *grumbles*

still, Sim's right

 

[Thalassa]

I'm an NF, and IRL people tell me that I'm smart all of the time. In fact, usually the people who tell me I'm not smart are NTs on the Intertubez.

I've also known smart people of all types. Like Sim says, there are different kinds of intelligence, for shizzle.

 

[simulatedworld]

Yeah it does. It's saying that you think your ideas on the subject are more important than even the person whom the question was asked of. That's a little obnoxious, wouldn't you say?

Well, no. If this were a live conversation between several people I'd see your point--you ask him a question and I cut him off to answer it myself, sure that'd be obnoxious. This, however, is an online situation where numerous people can answer the same question simultaneously without interrupting each other.

Since this is an internet forum, though, and Z isn't even logged in right now, there's no way that my answer in any way prevents him from sharing his thoughts once he logs in again and sees the thread.

Given that we don't have to deal with the "only one person can talk at a time" problem generated by live conversation, no, I don't see how making my own response to your question in any way inhibits Z's ability to respond when he wants to.

By posting your question in a public thread on a public forum where you know numerous people are free to respond to it, you open yourself up to responses from numerous people. If you only wanted Z's answer here, why didn't you PM him your question instead of posting it publicly?

 

[sculpting]

what qualifies as high IQ here? I tested pretty high a couple of years back and my enfp 14 year old tested at 145 when in second grade. (and a -3SD on attentional capacity I might add. Poor kid is out to lunch)

I'd suggest N of any flavor gives an advantage on IQ tests due to abstract reasoning but I dont think it always gives real life advantages.

Also my ISTP ex scored exceptionally high on IQ tests in high school. His ISTP grandad was a nasa engineer and enfp grandmom a mensa member. who knows.

 

[Jaguar]

Sim-

The only NT you have a right to speak for, is yourself.
When will your NT generalizations end? Knock it off.

 

[onemoretime]

Well, no. If this were a live conversation between several people I'd see your point--you ask him a question and I cut him off to answer it myself, sure that'd be obnoxious. This, however, is an online situation where numerous people can answer the same question simultaneously without interrupting each other.

Since this is an internet forum, though, and Z isn't even logged in right now, there's no way that my answer in any way prevents him from sharing his thoughts once he logs in again and sees the thread.

Given that we don't have to deal with the "only one person can talk at a time" problem generated by live conversation, no, I don't see how making my own response to your question in any way inhibits Z's ability to respond when he wants to.

By posting your question in a public thread on a public forum where you know numerous people are free to respond to it, you open yourself up to responses from numerous people. If you only wanted Z's answer here, why didn't you PM him your question instead of posting it publicly?

Why not write it down elsewhere, and afford Z the courtesy of replying to his own question first? You might not think it's rude, but I promise you, others do. I find it interesting that you see affording everyone their turn in a conversation something that you have to "deal with" IRL.

Maybe I asked him in the public forum, because I wanted everyone to have the opportunity to read and comment on his response? I didn't understand what he meant, and maybe some other people didn't either. That's why it's called contributing to a thread - trying to improve it by your being there.

The thing is, the thread isn't automatically better just by your being there. You're not that special; no one is. Coming into a thread and making it all about what you want is the height of selfishness and arrogance. I know this, because I've been repeatedly guilty of this since I joined up on this board.

Adults don't just ask questions to get attention, you know. That's what six-year-olds do.

 

[simulatedworld]

Why not write it down elsewhere, and afford Z the courtesy of replying to his own question first? You might not think it's rude, but I promise you, others do. I find it interesting that you see affording everyone their turn in a conversation something that you have to "deal with" IRL.

Maybe I asked him in the public forum, because I wanted everyone to have the opportunity to read and comment on his response? I didn't understand what he meant, and maybe some other people didn't either. That's why it's called contributing to a thread - trying to improve it by your being there.

The thing is, the thread isn't automatically better just by your being there. You're not that special; no one is. Coming into a thread and making it all about what you want is the height of selfishness and arrogance. I know this, because I've been repeatedly guilty of this since I joined up on this board.

Adults don't just ask questions to get attention, you know. That's what six-year-olds do.

Keep it up, the off topic whining is really convincing.

My response was perfectly on topic--that's why it's in this thread and not another one. It's not "rude" to respond to a publicly posted question in a public thread, and in no way does it prevent Z from also responding when he wants to.

If you don't want to read my posts, you have an ignore button for a reason. If you feel that they're off topic, please feel free to report them to mods. I'm sure that if your concerns have merit, my supposedly inappropriate posts will be moved or deleted.

 

[Spamtar]

I like SW generalizations. They might totally be off target but there fun to read . Like horoscopes.

Keep up the good fight SW

 

[simulatedworld]

^ You don't think NTs tend to pride themselves on intellect?

 

[Spamtar]

I know I do...what the good it does me.

I was just busting your balls with the horoscope comment. Keep on keeping on.

Cheers

 

[simulatedworld]

Your SW Horoscope™ for today says you are likely to be eaten by a grue.