Forum Statistics - % Of MBTI Types

[Totenkindly]

Yes, this is something I've noticed. I've recently taken a real interest in Se (and SPs in general) and felt the lack of "loving" descriptions to the point that I've thought about starting a thread on the function (and I rarely start threads). However, I felt discouraged by the thought that others would not reciprocate, and that it might a waste of time.

It just seems ridiculous that certain types or functions are made to seem more "cool" than others. I just feel that if more effort was made to outline the amazing and mystical qualities of Se and Si, we wouldn't have such a heavy bias toward N.

To be honest, my perspective is that N types (who end up writing many of these online descriptions) are generous with the subjects they know... iNtuition. They don't really grasp Sensing very well, so you don't really see a lot of great descriptions of it. So I wouldn't say it's necessarily purposeful diminishing of Sensing behavior and motivation, it's just a form of cluelessness about how such a thing works.

I know we tried to encourage more Sensors to write their own type descriptions, or maybe Sensors and Intuitives work together on this site to create descriptions for all the types and/or functions, but I'm not sure how much progress was really made in that area.

 

[highlander]

To be honest, my perspective is that N types (who end up writing many of these online descriptions) are generous with the subjects they know... iNtuition. They don't really grasp Sensing very well, so you don't really see a lot of great descriptions of it. So I wouldn't say it's necessarily purposeful diminishing of Sensing behavior and motivation, it's just a form of cluelessness about how such a thing works.

I know we tried to encourage more Sensors to write their own type descriptions, or maybe Sensors and Intuitives work together on this site to create descriptions for all the types and/or functions, but I'm not sure how much progress was really made in that area.

I have always thought the sensing descriptions were no worse or better than the intuitive descriptions. ISTJs sound quite accomplished for examples. ISFJ descriptions seem dead on for those I know. ESTP is pretty impressive. A lot of the INTJ descriptions don't sound so flattering. INTJ - The "Scientist"? I'm no scientist. INTP - the absent minded professor? Not the ones I know.

 

[rav3n]

I hate the mysticism associated with functions. So much b/s, particularly surrounding Ni. While it's a fun and useful function, it's not magical. There's just a lot going on in the unconscious mind, regardless if it's a conscious use function.

So please, please don't try to romanticise Se or Si. Se is crazy fun and impulsive. It's unbelievably useful in the pragmatic world. But it's neither magical or mystical.

 

[Orangey]

ISFJ

Please, give me a break.

Anybody here who reads the following (or, actually, anybody who does not identify as an old lady) will be turned off by these lines alone:

They value security and kindness, and respect traditions and laws. They tend to believe that existing systems are there because they work. Therefore, they're not likely to buy into doing things in a new way, unless they're shown in a concrete way why its better than the established method.

ISFJs learn best by doing, rather than by reading about something in a book, or applying theory. For this reason, they are not likely to be found in fields which require a lot of conceptual analysis or theory. They value practical application. Traditional methods of higher education, which require a lot of theorizing and abstraction, are likely to be a chore for the ISFJ. The ISFJ learns a task best by being shown its practical application. Once the task is learned, and its practical importance is understood, the ISFJ will faithfully and tirelessly carry through the task to completion. The ISFJ is extremely dependable.

It makes them sound like some old crusty lady who absolutely will not think or do anything different unless someone holds them by the hand and shows them that it's better. It also makes it seem as though they do not like learning or school. This is not my experience of ISFJs at all.

 

[Randomnity]

I have always thought the sensing descriptions were no worse or better than the intuitive descriptions. ISTJs sound quite accomplished for examples. ISFJ descriptions seem dead on for those I know. ESTP is pretty impressive. A lot of the INTJ descriptions don't sound so flattering. INTJ - The "Scientist"? I'm no scientist. INTP - the absent minded professor? Not the ones I know.

You're telling me that being called a scientist is no more positive to most people than being called a mechanic? Really?

From personalitypage, one of the most popular MBTI websites:


ISTJ - The Duty Fulfillers
ESTJ - The Guardians
ISFJ - The Nurturers
ESFJ - The Caregivers
ISTP - The Mechanics
ESTP - The Doers
ESFP - The Performers
ISFP - The Artists
ENTJ - The Executives
INTJ - The Scientists
ENTP - The Visionaries
INTP - The Thinkers
ENFJ - The Givers
INFJ - The Protectors
ENFP - The Inspirers
INFP - The Idealists

Not a single. one. of the N titles is negative. The S titles are a mixed bag - I'll give you nurturers and caregivers, but "duty fulfillers"? "doers"? freaking "mechanics"?

You really don't think it's insulting to be slapped in the face with "Ns are brilliant visionaries (oh look, ENTP) who design everything; you Ss are too dumb for that, but you can do all the grunt work of building and fixing stuff. Oh we could do that too, of course, but we don't want to anyway"?

 

[PeaceBaby]

So please, please don't try to romanticise Se or Si. Se is crazy fun and impulsive. It's unbelievably useful in the pragmatic world. But it's neither magical or mystical.

Yet so, so rich too. A quick anecdote: my son is ESFP, he loves electronic music. He played one of his favorite songs for me last month, and in the build-ups and additions of layers, he outlined for me what his vision was of the song - that it chronicled a whole relationship, from beginning to end, and he told me when the male voice was arguing or pleading, and when the female voice was arguing back and crying, and when the tensions started to resolve, that their relationship was over, but it was a bittersweet end. He had this entire narrative of experience captured in 6 minutes of music.

Impressive as heck!
And put my imagination to shame!

So, yes, I do hear what you are saying, but maybe what doesn't come out in descriptions is how that primary function (in his case Se) leads and intermingles with the rest of them in this sophisticated harmony too, as vibrant, maybe even moreso in ways, as anyone else's experience.

 

[PeaceBaby]

You're telling me that being called a scientist is no more positive to most people than being called a mechanic? Really?

From personalitypage, one of the most popular MBTI websites:


ISTJ - The Duty Fulfillers
ESTJ - The Guardians
ISFJ - The Nurturers
ESFJ - The Caregivers
ISTP - The Mechanics
ESTP - The Doers
ESFP - The Performers
ISFP - The Artists
ENTJ - The Executives
INTJ - The Scientists
ENTP - The Visionaries
INTP - The Thinkers
ENFJ - The Givers
INFJ - The Protectors
ENFP - The Inspirers
INFP - The Idealists

Not a single. one. of the N titles is negative. The S titles are a mixed bag - I'll give you nurturers and caregivers, but "duty fulfillers"? "doers"? freaking "mechanics"?

You really don't think it's insulting to be slapped in the face with "Ns are brilliant visionaries (oh look, ENTP) who design everything; you Ss are too dumb for that, but you can do all the grunt work of building and fixing stuff. Oh we could do that too, of course, but we don't want to anyway"?

I hear you - ha, us INFP's don't do anything though apparently, we just sit around being ideal or something ... my point only is, we can all likely kvetch at some aspect of the descriptions that we feel is inadequate or just plain wrong.

But I think I hear your point and I agree you're right - it's that imprecision where the system starts to break down, trying to capture something too finite for words to do justice to.

My ESTJ hubs likes being a "guardian", my ISTJ sis-in-law identifies fully with the "duty-fulfiller" and is darn proud of it.

It'll be a point of personal reference for each individual no doubt and where they fall within their preference strength too - perhaps you being close in score between S and N gives you more awareness that neither fits you quite right.

 

[highlander]

You're telling me that being called a scientist is no more positive to most people than being called a mechanic? Really?

Yes - I do admit that ISTP is the one type where I have had a problem with some of the descriptions. I almost said that in the last post.

Please, give me a break.

Anybody here who reads the following (or, actually, anybody who does not identify as an old lady) will be turned off by these lines alone:

They value security and kindness, and respect traditions and laws. They tend to believe that existing systems are there because they work. Therefore, they're not likely to buy into doing things in a new way, unless they're shown in a concrete way why its better than the established method.

ISFJs learn best by doing, rather than by reading about something in a book, or applying theory. For this reason, they are not likely to be found in fields which require a lot of conceptual analysis or theory. They value practical application. Traditional methods of higher education, which require a lot of theorizing and abstraction, are likely to be a chore for the ISFJ. The ISFJ learns a task best by being shown its practical application. Once the task is learned, and its practical importance is understood, the ISFJ will faithfully and tirelessly carry through the task to completion. The ISFJ is extremely dependable.

It makes them sound like some old crusty lady who absolutely will not think or do anything different unless someone holds them by the hand and shows them that it's better. It also makes it seem as though they do not like learning or school. This is not my experience of ISFJs at all.

I really don't see anything wrong with that description and in fact for the ISFJs I know, those things are all true. It doesn't say they don't like learning or school. It doesn't say they aren't intelligent. They don't like studying theory. They are about practical application and prefer to do things they know how to do and to do them well vs. theorizing about application of abstract concepts or having the stress of having to learn and do new things all the time. They are dependable.

 

[rav3n]

Yet so, so rich too. A quick anecdote: my son is ESFP, he loves electronic music. He played one of his favorite songs for me last month, and in the build-ups and additions of layers, he outlined for me what his vision was of the song - that it chronicled a whole relationship, from beginning to end, and he told me when the male voice was arguing or pleading, and when the female voice was arguing back and crying, and when the tensions started to resolve, that their relationship was over, but it was a bittersweet end. He had this entire narrative of experience captured in 6 minutes of music.

Impressive as heck!
And put my imagination to shame!

So, yes, I do hear what you are saying, but maybe what doesn't come out in descriptions is how that primary function (in his case Se) leads and intermingles with the rest of them in this sophisticated harmony too, as vibrant, maybe even moreso in ways, as anyone else's experience.

I hear you. Now this would be more apt than trying to infuse magic and mysticism.

But overall, should any descriptions be written to 'sell'? Rather than fluffing up the descriptions to make them appealing (which I blame on Kiersey and his book selling needs), wish they were all written 'as is'. I sincerely find the ENTJ descriptions to be repulsive and somewhat inaccurate. Caricatures.

 

[Orangey]

I hear you. Now this would be more apt than trying to infuse magic and mysticism.

But overall, should any descriptions be written to 'sell'? Rather than fluffing up the descriptions to make them appealing (which I blame on Kiersey and his book selling needs), wish they were all written 'as is'. I sincerely find the ENTJ descriptions to be repulsive and somewhat inaccurate. Caricatures.

Agreed.

Yes - I do admit that ISTP is the one type where I have had a problem with some of the descriptions. I almost said that in the last post.

I really don't see anything wrong with that description and in fact for the ISFJs I know, those things are all true. It doesn't say they don't like learning or school. It doesn't say they aren't intelligent. They don't like studying theory. They are about practical application and prefer to do things they know how to do and to do them well vs. theorizing about application of abstract concepts or having the stress of having to learn and do new things all the time. They are dependable.

ISFJs like to learn new things all the time, just like anybody with any ounce of curiosity about the world.

I see there is no point in arguing with you, though, as you will simply deny that there is anything wrong with the descriptions because, for whatever reason, you are motivated to do so.

 

[Salomé]

To be honest, my perspective is that N types (who end up writing many of these online descriptions) are generous with the subjects they know... iNtuition. They don't really grasp Sensing very well, so you don't really see a lot of great descriptions of it. So I wouldn't say it's necessarily purposeful diminishing of Sensing behavior and motivation, it's just a form of cluelessness about how such a thing works.

I know we tried to encourage more Sensors to write their own type descriptions, or maybe Sensors and Intuitives work together on this site to create descriptions for all the types and/or functions, but I'm not sure how much progress was really made in that area.

Definitely true.
The thing is, this is one of the few places that we can associate with people who see the world the way we do (other iNtuitives). Do we really have to sacrifice that too? The whole fucking world is Sensor dominant. Let us have our little corner of the interwebz!!

 

[EJCC]

What frustrates me about the quote that [MENTION=4490]Orangey[/MENTION] just posted, is that they don't make any differentiation between types of theory. As an SJ generally, learning about theory is fun if you know that the theory has a practical application. So, frankly, there's theory that has a practical application, and there's theory that doesn't.

Example: I have some ISFJ friends who are Political Science majors. There's so much goddamn theory in there -- but it makes an effort to explain the political world, and therefore the world in general, because the political world completely shapes how people live. But learning these things means understanding the problem, which means being better prepared to create a solution. These ISFJ friends study theory day and night, but their motivation is practical.

Because of the way that ISFJ excerpt was phrased, it sounded like ISFJs in general dislike abstract book learning, and that it doesn't come naturally to them. That is incorrect, and poorly phrased, and a perfect example of what Orangey and [MENTION=206]Randomnity[/MENTION] and I have been saying: SJ and ISTP type descriptions are misleading and poorly worded.

I know we tried to encourage more Sensors to write their own type descriptions, or maybe Sensors and Intuitives work together on this site to create descriptions for all the types and/or functions, but I'm not sure how much progress was really made in that area.

I remember when that was going around the forum. I ended up not writing an ESTJ description because I feel unqualified to write it. I feel like, if I wrote one, it would seem completely amateurish. I don't know what everyone else's motivation was, but that was mine.

 

[EJCC]

Definitely true.
The thing is, this is one of the few places that we can associate with people who see the world the way we do (other iNtuitives). Do we really have to sacrifice that too? The whole fucking world is Sensor dominant. Let us have our little corner of the interwebz!!

Houston, we've found the reason why there are no Sensors on TypeC.

We obviously aren't wanted.

 

[Salomé]

Houston, we've found the reason why there are no Sensors on TypeC.

We obviously aren't wanted.

Hey gurl, I'm not wanted either and it doesn't stop me.

 

[EJCC]

Hey gurl, I'm not wanted either and it doesn't stop me.

I'm sure it stops load of SJs, though.

I have no doubt of the hostile environment that would await me if I joined, for example, INTPc. When I'm courteous and civil to people here, they like me, but on INTPc, I would annoy people simply by existing. Kind of like all I have to do to annoy you, Salome, is to exist, and use my primary function. If there weren't people here who liked me anyway, I wouldn't stick around.

 

[rav3n]

I'm sure it stops load of SJs, though.

I have no doubt of the hostile environment that would await me if I joined, for example, INTPc. When I'm courteous and civil to people here, they like me, but on INTPc, I would annoy people simply by existing. Kind of like all I have to do to annoy you, Salome, is to exist, and use my primary function. If there weren't people here who liked me anyway, I wouldn't stick around.

Try INTJf. It's also pretty brutal but what's funny, is that much of the brutality comes not only from NTs but STs too.

 

[Randomnity]

Definitely true.
The thing is, this is one of the few places that we can associate with people who see the world the way we do (other iNtuitives). Do we really have to sacrifice that too? The whole fucking world is Sensor dominant. Let us have our little corner of the interwebz!!

Life is hard, huh?

Don't worry, there's always INTPc if you want to drown in a sea of people who "see the world the way you do".

 

[Salomé]

I'm sure it stops load of SJs, though.

I have no doubt of the hostile environment that would await me if I joined, for example, INTPc. When I'm courteous and civil to people here, they like me, but on INTPc, I would annoy people simply by existing. Kind of like all I have to do to annoy you, Salome, is to exist, and use my primary function. If there weren't people here who liked me anyway, I wouldn't stick around.

You're projecting.
You don't annoy me. I don't even read your threads. The only time I've noticed you do something annoying is when you voted in a thread for INTPs, on their behalf. If you can't figure out why that's offensive then, no, you wouldn't last long [MENTION=7595]INTP[/MENTION]c.

Myself and Spartacuss might have been the only people to comment on your faux pas, but I assure you you probably pissed off every INTP in that thread, as well as the OP.

Still, water under the bridge as far as I'm concerned. I know a lot of ppl are happy you're here.

 

[Salomé]

Life is hard, huh?

Don't worry, there's always INTPc if you want to drown in a sea of people who "see the world the way you do".

They're a bunch of fucking psychos.
What are you trying to say?

It's not so bad here. Just so long as we can keep the N/S balance roughly the same.

 

[Rasofy]

Myself and Spartacuss might have been the only people to comment on your faux pas, but I assure you you probably pissed off every INTP in that thread, as well as the OP.

She had misread it. Besides, a lot of people cast troll votes on similar threads and no one even bothers mentioning (mostly intuitives btw).

But by trying to explain why she had voted INFJ, she also made herself an easy target.

In general, I'm not a big fan of sensors, but the ones that stick around tend to be much more sophisticated than average.