The ESFP "stupid" myth.

[Lex Talionis]

A. you canceled out your first statement with those following it

B. so I can't use the "raw cognitive power" which I posess?

C. You still fail to take into account the fact that personality tests have a self reporting bias and that people who are intellectually arrogant are more likely to answer questions in a manner that they consider to be more like the manners of higher education, whether this is true or not. A set of 4 little letters might describe the manners in which a person feels more comfortable interacting and expressing themselves and processing things, but it has NOTHING to do with someone's level of intelligence in any way, shape or form :rolli:

You use the MBTI much in the same manner in which the Nazis tended to use genetics for goodness sake, only MBTI is signifigantly less scientific.

You're what... 20 years old? Have you actually left school and experienced what being a grown up is about yet? Your perspectives are very narrow and not particularly well educated... I'm going to take a wild guess that you aren't studying stats or survey design either, or you'd see that the system on which you're basing your "logic" is very flawed. Of course you're going to consistantly test as an INTJ because you consider yourself to be intelligent and consider INTJs to be the most intelligent- whether it's done intentionally or subconsciously...

People are pretty dumb, people who don't see obvious flaws and then go around putting others down because of it are especially dumb :rolli:

now there, you just got lectured by a former National Merit Scholar who speaks like a valley girl and reads social science journals for fun

Actually, I love probability theory and statistics, and have just recently completed college courses on both subjects. It would not be too difficult to compile a statistical model of personality type and IQ. If you would care to point out and explain the errors in my methodology, I would be more than willing to know them. Also, I tested as an INTJ from the very beginning, before I knew what the different types were, and when I read the type description, was amazed by how well it described me.

I am not truly "putting down" anybody, unless "putting down" is your method of stating "revealing the unpleasant truth."

As for Nazis and genetics, it should be noted that modern genetics stems almost entirely from Nazi theories on eugenics.

 

[miss fortune]

the ends don't always justify the means...

and are you taking into account the biases that the test results are given based on the fact that most of the tests available are done by those who beleive themselves to be Intuitive, that people then choose the answer that they find most flattering to their self image and that people are mostly a bunch of lying bastards who care more about feeling good about themselves than honesty?

a basic opinion poll has a rather large margin of error and that's opinions on something IMPERSONAL... if we're talking about something personal then a person is much more likely to lie to make themselves appear as they would prefer to (i,e, wishful thinking) whether they do this consciously or unconsciously)... which really tends to skew statistics... for instance, someone who watches too many indy movies will probably want to score as an N, someone who plays sports will probably view themselves as an SP and someone who wants to be a good mother, father or boss may view themselves as an SJ... and this is all based on the descriptions that are given of types, which are not particularly accurate and tend to stereotype negatively for some types

If your going to base whether someone tests as something and whether they are smart on what tests say, then you're basing your argument on faulty research... the type that couldn't pass the test to get into one of the big journals... it wouldn't even have gotten into the journal that I edited for goodness sake! :horor:

This is so wrong! Stereotypically speaking, I should NOT have to lecture an NT on seeing the big picture and being more accurate about research

take off your blinders of desire and look at it like any other stats research- riddled with selection bias and reporting bias, and who knows how many other biases

 

[Aleksei]

Actually, I love probability theory and statistics, and have just recently completed college courses on both subjects. It would not be too difficult to compile a statistical model of personality type and IQ.

It exists already.

 

[Lex Talionis]

the ends don't always justify the means...

and are you taking into account the biases that the test results are given based on the fact that most of the tests available are done by those who beleive themselves to be Intuitive, that people then choose the answer that they find most flattering to their self image and that people are mostly a bunch of lying bastards who care more about feeling good about themselves than honesty?

a basic opinion poll has a rather large margin of error and that's opinions on something IMPERSONAL... if we're talking about something personal then a person is much more likely to lie to make themselves appear as they would prefer to (i,e, wishful thinking) whether they do this consciously or unconsciously)... which really tends to skew statistics... for instance, someone who watches too many indy movies will probably want to score as an N, someone who plays sports will probably view themselves as an SP and someone who wants to be a good mother, father or boss may view themselves as an SJ... and this is all based on the descriptions that are given of types, which are not particularly accurate and tend to stereotype negatively for some types

If your going to base whether someone tests as something and whether they are smart on what tests say, then you're basing your argument on faulty research... the type that couldn't pass the test to get into one of the big journals... it wouldn't even have gotten into the journal that I edited for goodness sake! :horor:

This is so wrong! Stereotypically speaking, I should NOT have to lecture an NT on seeing the big picture and being more accurate about research

take off your blinders of desire and look at it like any other stats research- riddled with selection bias and reporting bias, and who knows how many other biases

You seem to be implying the same situation as the poster Evan, to whom I responded by stating that there is no reason to believe that the margin of error for the test is extremely high. Also, I have already mentioned that the test taker's dishonesty in no way invalidates the concept I am propounding. The true ESFP will exhibit traits considered "stupid." To expound on that, it should also be noted that reading the descriptions of the respective types is crucial to understanding one's own type, and is in actuality more important than the test results themselves. It would be very difficult for an ESFP to "pretend" to be an INTJ for extended periods of time, or an ESFJ an INTP, or any other type combination, with the probability of a mistaken identity increasing as one approaches one's own type.

Of course, response bias will always be an issue, but this can be addressed by improving testing techniques. Regardless, testing is hardly the issue we're discussing, as I am referring to concrete personality types and not preferences. If you claim to be a type online, I will be inclined to believe you, and will only question you if your behavior does not seem to match your proclaimed type. There is little point in deluding yourself, and personality tests are designed to type you for who you are, which makes lying a self-defeating endeavour.

 

[Robopop]

I guess this means INTPs probably come in second place according to you Lex, I mean, I'm so close... just one letter off. How can a lowly INTP like myself even think to compare to your highly supreme intellect.

 

[Robopop]

....But I don't want to be in second place, I want to be a self-deluding INTJ like yourself.
Lex, how can I become a judger so I can have the super INTJ intellect complete with self-serving magical fruity loops thinking?

 

[Tamske]

Well, I've already stated it, but in my not so humble opinion, ESFP "intelligence" is not intelligence. Interpersonal relationship skills may be objectively acquired, as is evident by the "mask of sanity" adopted by psychopathic serial killers, who understand social mores, understand proper social etiquette, but have no, or little, empathy. Therefore, having "people skills" is not necessarily a sign of intelligence, only concern.

If you wish to point out certain character traits you find desirable in an ESFP, that is a different matter, but don't conflate interpersonal skills with intelligence.

I'm still of the opinion any type can be stupid or smart, but I think Lex has made a point here. Call the things like they are. Intelligence is one thing and interpersonal skills is another. Personally, I think intelligence is overrated, and that's why everybody wants to be "intelligent". If they can't be intelligent, people will invent things like "emotional intelligence" and such rubbish.

Interpersonal skills, perseverance, loyalty, creativity, flexibility... are all great talents and worthy to be a talent on their own, instead of being lumped all together in "emotional intelligence". I would place intelligence among them, as one of a great many talens.

There are lots of answers in this thread in the sense of "ESFPs are not 'intelligent' in your narrow NT meaning of the word, but..." Well to me, intelligence has that narrow meaning. And I do value people who aren't intelligent in that narrow meaning but who have other talents.

And ESFPs can be intelligent in the narrow NT meaning of the word. Just like we ENTPs can be kind in the narrow F meaning of the word.

 

[Lex Talionis]

....But I don't want to be in second place, I want to be a self-deluding INTJ like yourself.
Lex, how can I become a judger so I can have the super INTJ intellect complete with self-serving magical fruity loops thinking?

Unless you are born an INTJ, or at the very least born to be predisposed to INTJ thinking, it is an impossibility, I'm afraid. You will forever be relegated to your second-rate position.

 

[Lex Talionis]

I'm still of the opinion any type can be stupid or smart, but I think Lex has made a point here. Call the things like they are. Intelligence is one thing and interpersonal skills is another. Personally, I think intelligence is overrated, and that's why everybody wants to be "intelligent". If they can't be intelligent, people will invent things like "emotional intelligence" and such rubbish.

Interpersonal skills, perseverance, loyalty, creativity, flexibility... are all great talents and worthy to be a talent on their own, instead of being lumped all together in "emotional intelligence". I would place intelligence among them, as one of a great many talens.

There are lots of answers in this thread in the sense of "ESFPs are not 'intelligent' in your narrow NT meaning of the word, but..." Well to me, intelligence has that narrow meaning. And I do value people who aren't intelligent in that narrow meaning but who have other talents.

And ESFPs can be intelligent in the narrow NT meaning of the word. Just like we ENTPs can be kind in the narrow F meaning of the word.

Thank ye for clarifyin' it for the wee folk.

 

[Robopop]

NO, NOT SECOND PLACE..... NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO! Why God, Why P on me?
I must become a self-deluding fruit nut INTJ like yourself.

 

[Robopop]

Wait, if I believe I can become a INTJ, but in reality it is impossible, that means I'm already a self-deluding fruit nut like you, only thing that's missing is the idiot iNdigent thinking jack-off.
How you like them NUTS.

 

[Lex Talionis]

Wait, if I believe I can become a INTJ, but in reality it is impossible, that means I'm already a self-deluding fruit nut like you, only thing that's missing is the idiot indigent thinking jack-offer.
How you like them NUTS.

What is a "fruit nut"? What is an "indigent thinking jack offer"? What are you on about?

 

[Arthur Schopenhauer]

Wait, if I believe I can become a INTJ, but in reality it is impossible, that means I'm already a self-deluding fruit nut like you, only thing that's missing is the internally idiot thinking jack-offer.

No, if you deluded yourself into believing that you were in fact an INTJ, that would just be the wishful thinking of an INTP with some sort of mental handicap.

How do you like them NUTS?

....

 

[Arthur Schopenhauer]

What is a "fruit nut"? What is an "indigent thinking jack offer"? What are you on about?

It is making no sense.

 

[Robopop]

What is a fruit nut? Lex is a fruit nut.

 

[Arthur Schopenhauer]

What is a fruit nut? Lex is a fruit nut.

Lex, I do hope that you have fun toying with this thing, that is, if you're going to waste the energy on it.

I would join in, but I doubt the thing would stimulate me.

 

[Lex Talionis]

Lex, I do hope that you have fun toying with this thing, that is, if you're going to waste the energy on it.

I would join in, but I doubt the thing would stimulate me.

It is quite alright, mein Kamerad.

I will depart for the night, leaving them with the following quote:

"How long, ye simple ones, will ye love simplicity? and the scorners delight in their scorning, and fools hate knowledge?"

 

[Robopop]

Fruit nut is a name I reserve for crazy self-deluding people like Lex. Lex is not representative of an intelligent, well informed person.
Instead, he is clearly biased and thinks some 4 letter code makes him intelligent, that is total crap.

 

[Ming]

There are probably as many definitions of intelligence as there are experts who study it. Simply put, however, intelligence is the ability to learn about, learn from, understand, and interact with one’s environment. This general ability consists of a number of specific abilities, which include these specific abilities:

* Adaptability to a new environment or to changes in the current environment
* Capacity for knowledge and the ability to acquire it
* Capacity for reason and abstract thought
* Ability to comprehend relationships
* Ability to evaluate and judge
* Capacity for original and productive thought

I think we should get this clear with a DEFINITION of intelligence.

Intelligence derives from the latin word, intellegere, which means to 'understand'.

It seems to be that INTJs are the ones 'not understanding' here.

 

[Ming]

I don't understand why there is so much support for ESFPs on this thread.

It's a hideous type.

Logic used to defend ESFPs: "lolz mah bes frrand is n ESFP n she beez smurtz."

All ESFPs I've known have been stupid, be it in terms of sheer intelligence or their actions.

^ Invalid argument. What's the difference from saying that all ESFPs I have known are smart? You're being hypocritical.