[MBTI General] the 'S'tupid stereotype

[avaxtskyr]

Regarding the following...

Sensors:

• Not creative; unimaginative
• Don't see the 'big picture'
• Have significantly lower IQs than N-types
• Incapable of making connections

What are your thoughts?
Do you have any to add?

 

[miss fortune]

as has been gone over many times on here... someone stating something like that is just revealing their ignorance

fuck 'em

 

[BluRoses]

Regarding the following...

Sensors:

• Not creative; unimaginative
• Don't see the 'big picture'
• Have significantly lower IQs than N-types
• Incapable of making connections

What are your thoughts?
Do you have any to add?

Just because sensors are different in some ways from iNtuitive does NOT mean they are inferior.

Also, some of these things you said are just false. Not all N's are creative and not all S's suck at creativity.

I would like to see a dialogue with some real meat to it and not just stereotypes.

Sensors are good at living in the moment and (usually) INtuitives are not. How can N's learn this from them?

 

[miss fortune]

Just because sensors are different in some ways from iNtuitive does NOT mean they are inferior.

Also, some of these things you said are just false. Not all N's are creative and not all S's suck at creativity.

I would like to see a dialogue with some real meat to it and not just stereotypes.

Sensors are good at living in the moment and (usually) INtuitives are not. How can N's learn this from them?

every time a nice sensor tries to go over a few ways to be more aware of one's environment and in tune with one's surroundings some N who thinks that claiming to be 100% N and 0% S is both realistic and makes them special will chime in and say "I can't!"

I can see the big picture just fine... and you can see your surroundings quite well as well (you meaning any N, not just you)

 

[avaxtskyr]

whatever, I imagine you've seen this topic so much that it's just to the point where a simple 'fuck it' summarizes the absurdity of these
common misconceptions...

Why are they perpetuated?
What are the sources of this nonsense?

 

[avaxtskyr]

"Suck at creativity"

*yawns*

Not impressed.

NEXT?

 

[miss fortune]

whatever, I imagine you've seen this topic so much that it's just to the point where a simple 'fuck it' summarizes the absurdity of these
common misconceptions...

Why are they perpetuated?
What are the sources of this nonsense?

as one of the originators of complaints about those stereotypes on this board (is an original sensor as cool as an OG? ) I've seen it a few times

mostly it seems to be because someone feels disenfranchised in real life and put upon because they are "different" so they decide to hate whatever represents the enemy... often they'll take some online test with something like 20 questions, they'll conclude that they're an Intuitive (and most material online will tell them then that they are rare) and they'll decide that everyone who stands against them is a Sensor... most of these people are young whippersnappers and don't know all about the wonders of the world and it's many, many, many people yet

for a fun point on online tests, I test as an intuitive but don't identify as one... I'm a woman of action

 

[BluRoses]

every time a nice sensor tries to go over a few ways to be more aware of one's environment and in tune with one's surroundings some N who thinks that claiming to be 100% N and 0% S is both realistic and makes them special will chime in and say "I can't!"

I can see the big picture just fine... and you can see your surroundings quite well as well (you meaning any N, not just you)

I am still fairly new here and would like to hear sensor's point of view. I'm still trying to figure out why I feel like there is a mental wall there when I talk deeply with a sensor.

One of my close friends is a XSTJ, and she is a smart and lovely person. I feel bad for her at times because our group has so many N's and the guys like to tease her. She doesn't always get their dry humor.

 

[avaxtskyr]

*yawns again*

Anybody have any feedback that is a bit more objective?

 

[miss fortune]

I am still fairly new here and would like to hear sensor's point of view. I'm still trying to figure out why I feel like there is a mental wall there when I talk deeply with a sensor.

One of my close friends is a XSTJ, and she is a smart and lovely person. I feel bad for her at times because our group has so many N's and the guys like to tease her. She doesn't always get their dry humor.

that's an individual thing, not a sensor thing... my household's sense of humor is generally drier than the Atacama and we're both sensors (and my MOM gets all sarcastic with me even... no sympathy from her )

I always advocate talking to a sensor just like you'd talk to anyone else... same rules apply

biggest difference I've experienced is that I'm really quite good at streaming and analyzing my environment simultaneously so that I know what's going on without having to actively figure it out most of the time... but then again, there are a lot of sensors who can't do that either... that's something I picked up

 

[miss fortune]

*yawns again*

Anybody have any feedback that is a bit more objective?

well, until we're allowed to kidnap people and force them to admit to their deep seated reasons for prejudices there won't be objective data out there... people don't like to admit why they are such tools

 

[avaxtskyr]

Ditto, whatever, also test as N type here. Identify as Sensor.

The online tests are very biased to making the 'S' questions equivalent to "do you eat paint chips?" vs. the 'N' big picture, float on clouds or hold the world in the palm of your hand type of questions. *cheesy smile*

Likely causing mistyping.

 

[miss fortune]

Ditto, whatever, also test as N type here. Identify as Sensor. The online tests are very biased to making the 'S' response equivalent to "do you eat paint chips?"

Likely causing mistyping.

plus... a test can't really figure out your true motivations for your actions or any of that... it's just a surface assessment (provided we have any true assessment ability of ourselves)

what is usually left out is that yeah, I may sense a lot but that just DRIVES my curiosity about the world around me... the more I learn and experience the more ravenous I am for more and more

more books, more places and foods and different ways in which people think and what they believe... it all adds texture to the world and makes it a place worth being

I'll admit to being in love with the universe

nobody brings that up on tests... sensors should be accountants or mechanics

 

[great_bay]

I think this thread was meant to be spiteful instead of adding discussions. However, I was thinking about this question hours before. Intelligence resides in the abstract so I'd think N are smarter than S. However, every strength comes at a weakness. N's have poor form of details as the result of mastery of the abstract world. N's when leaving the bathroom leave toilet paper stuck on their shoe because of poor form of the detail world.

 

[miss fortune]

I think this thread was meant to be spiteful instead of adding discussions. However, I was thinking about this question hours before. Intelligence resides in the abstract so I'd think N are smarter than S. However, every strength comes at a weakness. N's have poor form of details as the result of mastery of the abstract world. N's when leaving the bathroom leave toilet paper stuck on their shoe because of poor form of the detail world.

I think that you're wrong

after all, is there only one way in which a person can be intelligent?

and a thread is what we make of it

 

[avaxtskyr]

Abstract thinking comes from the frontal lobe.

So are you insinuating that Sensors, "being more athletic"-- suffer traumatic brain injuries at a higher rate than N types...

Lol.

 

[great_bay]

I think that you're wrong

after all, is there only one way in which a person can be intelligent?

and a thread is what we make of it

Intelligence at it's highest form resides in the abstract world. That's just how I see it.

 

[Cygnus]

I think that you're wrong

after all, is there only one way in which a person can be intelligent?

and a thread is what we make of it

Based on everything anyone has ever told me about intelligence, my best guess is that the true "general intelligence factor" is one's ability to adapt their behaviors or skillsets into patterns that match their surroundings to consciously produce the highest-quality result.
Try to fit the wrong function, or form of intelligence, into a scenario or procedure that directly contradicts it, and you'll likely fail -- making you "stupid."



On another note, a lot of writings about Extroverted Sensing seem to imply that Se's quality of "determination" is so strong that it'll find a way to master any task it "wants" to eventually, resulting in a "creativity" often attributed to Intuitives -- but I'll stop there since that's all I got.

 

[EJCC]

Going to quote myself -- sorry, but it saves me a lot of time.

1) Overall intelligence is not type related.
2) Everyone is biased for and against particular types of intelligence, looking down on some and looking up to others. If someone is highly intelligent in particular areas, then someone else may still look down on them as "stupid" in other areas.
3) There are some correlations between MBTI types and types of intelligence.
4) See below:
http://www.typologycentral.com/forums/the-sj-guardhouse/23599-sjs-smart-intelligent-4.html
https://www.wpi.edu/Pubs/E-project/Available/E-project-021508-211201/unrestricted/IQP_JMW.pdf
http://www.indiana.edu/~jobtalk/Articles/develop/mbti.pdf
Why Myers-Briggs is Not an Effective Screening Tool :: Plum Blog

Gerald D. Tharp has found that students with higher grades were usually of the I and J types while student with lower grades were of the E and P types. This relation is not a new finding but additional support for Melear’s earlier finding that, “the EP students not only achieve the lowest, but are twice as likely to be the lowest
achievers. 20”

Tharp also found that the SJ types were the students who had the highest grades followed by the ST types. The last two types in terms of grade average were the IN and IS.

Yet, studies conducted by psychologists, K. T. Schurr and V. Ruble (1988) indicate that students of the IN personality type are usually better prepared for college than the ES types. According to their analysis, the combination of the E-I and S-N indicators were most significantly related to SAT scores and High School Grade Percentiles. By contrast, the combination of the E-I and J-P dimensions produced 19 (Tharp, Gerald D., 1992) 20 (Tharp, Gerald D., 1992)

indicators were more significantly related to achievement by any measure other than the SAT. Moreover, the “J-P scale is indicative of the personality characteristic that is most uniquely associated with college instructor’s evaluation of achievement.

” Based on these three findings, they concluded that college is much better suited for students of the J, N and I preferences while the students with the P, S, and E preferences do significantly worse on the academic side of college life, thought they may excel in non academic pursuits or have unusual success later in life.

As the degree to which a test measures what it is supposed to measure, validity is a difficult property to evaluate in a test. Consider tests of intelligence. Many people are skeptical of the results of these tests. Some people are concerned that the tests measure only "book learning" and do not test "common sense." Other people feel that intelligence tests have cultural, racial, and gender biases. Therefore, to conclude that a test is a valid measure of intelligence, it must be shown that the test measures intelligence independent of the testee's education, culture, race, and sex.

Myers-Briggs was created in World War II and was designed to determine where women, who were just entering the workforce, would be ‘most comfortable and effective’.

While comfort is important, post hire, it is not the most important screening aspect for hiring. Comfort and effectiveness are important when securing the employment duration and happiness of employees. However, when screening applicants, studies have shown that in addition to industriousness, intelligence is the only other predictor of job performance. Without that additional cognitive ability screening measure, employers will place comfortable workers, but not necessarily ones that will be productive. An employer could hire the most outgoing salesman, however, but without the ability to handle complex situations, this salesman’s performance record could show that he is able to talk, but not able to communicate, understand the client, develop a strategy and all of the other steps needed to sell.

Googling "MBTI and intelligence" will provide you with two things:
1) Articles like the above, and
2) Posts by N types on internet forums about how Sensors are stupid.

 

[EJCC]

Ditto, whatever, also test as N type here. Identify as Sensor.

The online tests are very biased to making the 'S' questions equivalent to "do you eat paint chips?" vs. the 'N' big picture, float on clouds or hold the world in the palm of your hand type of questions. *cheesy smile*

Likely causing mistyping.

For sure. I know two ISTJs who mistyped as INTJs because of this. (I also know an ISFJ who was so disgusted with her Keirsey description that she swore off the MBTI forever.)