[ISTP] Is ISTP the Most Intuitive of All the sensors?

[Ginkgo]

They might tie with ISFPs who also have tertiary Ni. Otherwise, yes the ISPs are the most intuitive I would vote.

+1

Going to have to say ISFPs take home the gold here, though. Ti can be literal as a motherfucker.

 

[Ginkgo]

It's a fairly common mistype, and I've witnessed it in several people I know.
ISTP's Se can simulate a pseudo-Te in the Ti-Se mechanism, meaning that they might appear heavy Te when it is actually Se in overdrive. The difference is that the ISTP will be much more aggressive and will make sense of the data they are provided and decide on what is rationalized internally. Usually the asshole-ish people that seem like INTJ can sometimes be ISTPs with a better grip on Ni, and in Socionics, the ISTj Hidden Agenda Ni will sometimes inflate Ni to a power much like the Dominant function. (Though, it is often called the 'Pathetic' Hidden Agenda, so usually it is seen as amusing by Ego block Ni users)

I've heard before that ISTPs are the most intuitive sensor, but honestly, I think the ISFP is much more intuitive-inclined by nature, especially when the ISFP is a Type 9 (one of its more common enneatypes), which completely stifles and confuses aux. Se, meaning that the Fi-Ni mechanism will develop and kick into place as a crutch for the ambivalent, hesitant Type 9 Se. I am also of the opinion that certain individuals in a type may be more intuitive than others, meaning that there could be an ESTP with exceptional introverted intuition compared to that of a poorly developed ENTJ, for instance.

[MENTION=13147]senza tema[/MENTION], does this sound like you?

 

[Elfboy]

imo, it's a tie between ISFP and ISTP. ISTPs are more intellectual, but ISFPs are more likely to trust their intuition

 

[Kingu Kurimuzon]

imo, it's a tie between ISFP and ISTP. ISTPs are more intellectual, but ISFPs are more likely to trust their intuition

I think you summed it up.

 

[011235813]

[MENTION=13147]senza tema[/MENTION], does this sound like you?

I think I said somewhere else that this resonated very well with me and my personal experience, yeah.

 

[FemMecha]

+1

Going to have to say ISFPs take home the gold here, though. Ti can be literal as a motherfucker.

T can feel almost concrete and linear at times when it attempts to define and control a sense of reality. N is such a nebulous function that it is a curiosity to consider the NT brain which can be something of a paradox.

I'm close to someone who could actually be either ISFP or INFJ and it is quite trippy that I can't tell which. The person outwardly feels ISFP and has a little more handle on the concrete world than most INFJs, but when talking to him about the abstract, ethereal realm, it is clear that is his conceptual home. When an ISFP is in a Fi-Ni loop, it can be very ethereal and intangible. My mother is an ISFP and she is very intuitive in the traditional sense of the word, but also has a drive to understand the nature of reality, which for her involve a religious context. Regarding my friend, he comes across as though if anyone on earth is an intuitive, if must be him, and yet there are still aspects of ISFP to him because he is extremely laid back and describes his personality as "simple and straightforward", which isn't terribly INFJ-ish, but could be when the person is detached enough. My socialization is very simple because even though my emotional framework is woefully complex, I'm detached enough from it so it almost doesn't matter. I always respond the same very laid-back way to people irl until I'm pushed over the edge, then I blow-up and disappear like a supernova.

 

[Ginkgo]

T can feel almost concrete and linear at times when it attempts to define and control a sense of reality. N is such a nebulous function that it is a curiosity to consider the NT brain which can be something of a paradox.

I'm close to someone who could actually be either ISFP or INFJ and it is quite trippy that I can't tell which. The person outwardly feels ISFP and has a little more handle on the concrete world than most INFJs, but when talking to him about the abstract, ethereal realm, it is clear that is his conceptual home. When an ISFP is in a Fi-Ni loop, it can be very ethereal and intangible. My mother is an ISFP and she is very intuitive in the traditional sense of the word, but also has a drive to understand the nature of reality, which for her involve a religious context. Regarding my friend, he comes across as though if anyone on earth is an intuitive, if must be him, and yet there are still aspects of ISFP to him because he is extremely laid back and describes his personality as "simple and straightforward", which isn't terribly INFJ-ish, but could be when the person is detached enough. My socialization is very simple because even though my emotional framework is woefully complex, I'm detached enough from it so it almost doesn't matter. I always respond the same very laid-back way to people irl until I'm pushed over the edge, then I blow-up and disappear like a supernova.

I know an ISFP who is similar in the respect that he views himself as intuitive; part of me wanted to type him as INFJ, but only in light of the thoughts he shares on the internet. In real life, his attitude seems more devil-may-care. I think part of why he seems so intuitive, according to the colloquial sense of the word, is just the fact that his intuitions are so deeply housed in who he is. They're simple, discrete, and they serve his own purposes; when I visualize how his mind works, it appears compact, yet efficient. He has a level of certainty that sharply contrasts with the typical INXX tendency to over-analyze. From this perspective, it seems like iNtuitives ironically impede themselves with their dominant/auxiliary functions.

Ti bears qualities that abstract information, but its level of tedious precision adds weight to the argument that ISTPs are less "intuitive", overall. Meanwhile, Fi (while exercising its own level of precision) seems less honed in on the objective world (objectivity being a strength of sensing). So, if we're to assume that each function, while different, holds aspects of equal measure, then Fi starts to look more "intuitive" when compared to Ti.

 

[jixmixfix]

imo, it's a tie between ISFP and ISTP. ISTPs are more intellectual, but ISFPs are more likely to trust their intuition

None of them are really "intuitive" both are actually very sensing oriented they just appear that way because of ter Ni.

 

[Dragonfly]

None of them are really "intuitive" both are actually very sensing oriented they just appear that way because of ter Ni.

How astoundingly wise you must be, to think that a sensor can't use intuition. "And since you can't see, i should probably tell you I'm rolling my eyes."

You sound like a rather underdeveloped fellow ISTP i know personally. Mayhaps you should have looked at the title more closely, where it says "What is the most intuitive of the sensors." You should know that any of the 4 cognitive functions of his/her type can be used by a well developed person. This discussion is about who uses their intuitive function most out of all the Sensing types. And that would be either the ISTP, who can have intuitive thoughts but doesn't trust them as much as the ISFP.

It would do you good to read through this thread, hopefully you will learn enough to not give a simple black-or-white analysis of the topic, and construct a thoughtful and well-informed resposne to contribute and not some one line blanket statement, which uses the assumption that a preference (i.e Sensing over Intuition) is absolute and not changeable. Good day.

 

[jixmixfix]

How astoundingly wise you must be, to think that a sensor can't use intuition. "And since you can't see, i should probably tell you I'm rolling my eyes."

You sound like a rather underdeveloped fellow ISTP i know personally. Mayhaps you should have looked at the title more closely, where it says "What is the most intuitive of the sensors." You should know that any of the 4 cognitive functions of his/her type can be used by a well developed person. This discussion is about who uses their intuitive function most out of all the Sensing types. And that would be either the ISTP, who can have intuitive thoughts but doesn't trust them as much as the ISFP.

It would do you good to read through this thread, hopefully you will learn enough to not give a simple black-or-white analysis of the topic, and construct a thoughtful and well-informed resposne to contribute and not some one line blanket statement, which uses the assumption that a preference (i.e Sensing over Intuition) is absolute and not changeable. Good day.

I never said a sensor can't use intuition can you even comprehend properly? my point was that the introverted sensors appear to use more intuition than the extroverted sensors because they are essentially introverted and not intuitive. So what you have is the appearance of intuition vs the actual use of intuition. Many ESTPs use their Ni just as much as ISTPs they just don't "appear" to use them compared to istps because they are not introverted. You sound like you are butt hurt over the fact that you are a sensor I pity your insecurities. Take care.

 

[entropie]

*burb*

 

[Kingu Kurimuzon]

jesus h. christ that escalated quickly

 

[entropie]

jesus h. christ that escalated quickly

 

[Kingu Kurimuzon]

 

[Kingu Kurimuzon]

 

[infinite]

My opinion: yeah ISTP can look the most NT-like and I relate to that... I don't know from experience if ISFP can look NF-like just as much but by definition yes it would. As the Ni is in the same place. Talking generally of course, not of individual cases.

I'd like to add a few comments especially on what I think Ti is like or not like, compared to Ni etc.

I'd say ISFPs tend to be. ISTPs can have really brilliant flashes of intuitive insight but I think the more linear nature of Ti somewhat restricts the operation of non-linear Ni, whereas F is more mutable.

I don't experience Ti as linear logic. Though I bet it's not as non-linear as Ni, alright

I do not think they are the most habitually intuition engaging. That award would maybe go to ESFP or some other SF. I do think they and ESTP's are the most efficient of the entire spectrum at utilizing intuition, between mental and physical tasks.

Can you elaborate on why and how you think ESTP's are that efficient at utilizing intuition in either mental or physical tasks? Not questioning, I'm just curious.

Keep in mind, ISTP's are famous for having the Ti/Ni loop, which as i have observed with myself brings them both into an even plane, probably why we often mistype as INTJ's.

Heh I sometimes can't tell where Ti ends and where Ni begins because the Ti stuff often just feels like I'm perceiving whatever inside my mind. It's an abstract intangible nonverbal thing but I sometimes even see something in a visual way and that can be symbolic. However all that perception is limited to logical constructs so I know it's still Ti. And of course, conclusions are made from the perceptions => Ti judging

Considering these distinctions, I don't see TiNi loop bringing Ni to an even plane with Ti. Most of the access to Ni is controlled through Ti. That is, I tend to only have insights in topics that I already made sense of.

Sure I have experienced more direct Ni too but that's rare. And I think the Ti is usually still there because it's still stuff that I've thought about with Ti before. That is, there was already some logical analysis based on my observation. Just maybe in these cases it's been a while since I last thought about the topic I got the insight about and so it's not noticeable to me that it's actually still Ti-related Ni.

The only really "Ti-less" Ni that I've seen about myself is linked to Fe stuff. Or some generic F stuff, anyway.. some of it's negative, like negative estimates about people's attitudes; but not all of the stuff is negative.

So... How about you? Is your Ni stronger than this? Less controlled by Ti when in TiNi loop?

ISTP's like ISFP's also possess tertiary Ni, however, they would not be the most Ni of the two ISP's because their Ti seems to rely on deductive reasoning, which I see as opposite/ greatly differing from Ni's inductive reasoning(at least this is how I somewhat think of Ni, but I could be wrong as I've also seen Te referred to as inductive reasoning), as well as being too much a straight line of reasoning, which isn't something I see intuition in either form as being.

I would like to say, my Ti isn't deductive much. I'm very inductive naturally. I only grudgingly use deduction. I see its use though. Now my problem, I never understand those people who try to link functions to other cognitive traits like this about induction vs deduction. It's useless trying to so strongly correlate functions with that. Well you can do that but it's no longer going to be the same concept as in the original system and that has consequences.

Also, I don't have a straight line of reasoning by default. I can do that, if I need to communicate my thoughts in that way. But even when I wrote papers at university where I did heavily utilize such way of putting my thoughts, the whole written paper was still seen as very holistic by me. (As much as I could make it with the limited resources in fleshing out an idea and exploring it in real experiments.) Overall, straight line of reasoning is too one-dimensional seriously. I have seen that associated with Te but I'm again not sure if it's such a good idea to link the two. Nothing in the core concept of either Ti or Te makes it necessary.

Both have tertiary Ni, but dominant Fi works better (more readily, less conflictedly) with Ni than does dominant Ti.

I would say this depends on the area of where the ISP tries to use Ni.

+1

Going to have to say ISFPs take home the gold here, though. Ti can be literal as a motherfucker.

That one's true about being literal. Good point

Though of course, it's just a good example of how traits of the mbti dichotomies aren't so neatly consistently linked with the dichotomies or the functions :/ E.g. here, being literal is an S trait supposedly but can be T trait too.

imo, it's a tie between ISFP and ISTP. ISTPs are more intellectual, but ISFPs are more likely to trust their intuition

I'm saying the same to you as to Zarathustra, it depends on the area of life, whether I trust intuition or not. Tbh when I wouldn't trust intuition, it - generation of insights - doesn't even get active so it's all cool that way as I know it wouldn't be working anyway. (Ti kicking Ni out pretty effectively I guess )

I know an ISFP who is similar in the respect that he views himself as intuitive; part of me wanted to type him as INFJ, but only in light of the thoughts he shares on the internet. In real life, his attitude seems more devil-may-care. I think part of why he seems so intuitive, according to the colloquial sense of the word, is just the fact that his intuitions are so deeply housed in who he is. They're simple, discrete, and they serve his own purposes; when I visualize how his mind works, it appears compact, yet efficient. He has a level of certainty that sharply contrasts with the typical INXX tendency to over-analyze. From this perspective, it seems like iNtuitives ironically impede themselves with their dominant/auxiliary functions.

As ISTP, I've actually been told I overanalyze. Because I try to explain my thoughts well enough (precision?). I don't actually overanalyze inside my own mind if it means overthinking things, it's usually analysis automatically done in the fraction of a second. Nonverbally of course. Putting it into words is much slower and more tedious. You actually mention it's a tedious process about trying to be precise about explanations hahaha. Though it does apply to gaining an understanding too, not just explaining it. That, gaining a precise understanding, can be a tedious process too but it's alright. That's also what can be seen as overanalyzing, I guess.

Ti bears qualities that abstract information, but its level of tedious precision adds weight to the argument that ISTPs are less "intuitive", overall. Meanwhile, Fi (while exercising its own level of precision) seems less honed in on the objective world (objectivity being a strength of sensing). So, if we're to assume that each function, while different, holds aspects of equal measure, then Fi starts to look more "intuitive" when compared to Ti.

As for Fi (or Ti) looking more intuitive, I still say this depends on in which area you apply Fi vs Ti.

How astoundingly wise you must be, to think that a sensor can't use intuition. "And since you can't see, i should probably tell you I'm rolling my eyes."

He didn't actually say that. He meant "intuitive" in the sense of having N preference over S preference. The wording was not the best though, yes.

You sound like a rather underdeveloped fellow ISTP i know personally.

Assumptions much? Without using actual data? Intuition?

and not some one line blanket statement, which uses the assumption that a preference (i.e Sensing over Intuition) is absolute and not changeable. Good day.

Actually, by definition, preference is absolute. Preference means more "use" of a function over another function overall. Though, if someone changes type then of course that means that - at least one - preference is changed.

 

[Elfboy]

+1
Going to have to say ISFPs take home the gold here, though. Ti can be literal as a motherfucker.

yup, even in NTPs (they take the grand prize for the "completely missing the fucking point award" )

 

[skylights]

I don't experience Ti as linear logic. Though I bet it's not as non-linear as Ni, alright

Interesting! Would you mind describing how you experience it? When my INTP dad and ISTP brother voice it, it sounds linear to me or at least like they see some kind of coherent, immutable logical background scheme that they are operating with. The way I experience Fi it is sort of hard to access and explain sometimes. I always perceived Ti to be more clear and structured. Maybe this is not the case.

 

[Kingu Kurimuzon]

Interesting! Would you mind describing how you experience it? When my INTP dad and ISTP brother voice it, it sounds linear to me or at least like they see some kind of coherent, immutable logical background scheme that they are operating with. The way I experience Fi it is sort of hard to access and explain sometimes. I always perceived Ti to be more clear and structured. Maybe this is not the case.

I think it varies from ISTP to INTP. For ISTPs, I think Ti backed by Se is more body-based, almost instinctual, whereas (I assume) it is more conceptual and concerned with endless theorizing when backed by Ne in the case of INTPs. In both Ti dom types, I think there is a strong potential for a natural mastery/understanding of spatial relationships and distances, although perhaps not in same way as might be seen in types with strong Te (not worse or better, just very different). I'm talking out my ass here and as a result am probably way off the mark.

About the spatial reasoning/intelligence--I struggled in most math classes yet easily aced geometry with little to no studying. I also excelled at geography whereas other students loathed the subject and struggled with it.

 

[Dragonfly]

Heh I sometimes can't tell where Ti ends and where Ni begins because the Ti stuff often just feels like I'm perceiving whatever inside my mind. It's an abstract intangible nonverbal thing but I sometimes even see something in a visual way and that can be symbolic. However all that perception is limited to logical constructs so I know it's still Ti. And of course, conclusions are made from the perceptions => Ti judging

Considering these distinctions, I don't see TiNi loop bringing Ni to an even plane with Ti. Most of the access to Ni is controlled through Ti. That is, I tend to only have insights in topics that I already made sense of.

Sure I have experienced more direct Ni too but that's rare. And I think the Ti is usually still there because it's still stuff that I've thought about with Ti before. That is, there was already some logical analysis based on my observation. Just maybe in these cases it's been a while since I last thought about the topic I got the insight about and so it's not noticeable to me that it's actually still Ti-related Ni.

The only really "Ti-less" Ni that I've seen about myself is linked to Fe stuff. Or some generic F stuff, anyway.. some of it's negative, like negative estimates about people's attitudes; but not all of the stuff is negative.

So... How about you? Is your Ni stronger than this? Less controlled by Ti when in TiNi loop?

My Ti/Ni loop is constant, because my Ni is better developed than my Se, and the only way to deal with it is to bring Se in deliberately. It's the reason why i can't get to sleep, and as i'm not taking in new info through Se while laying down at night, it gets very pronounced.

For me, it's usually just reprocessing information, to the point where i end up with very circular thought processes. What i meant by the loop bringing Ni and Ti to an even plane was that it blocks out Se. So, i do Ti first, rationalizing the information i had from Se, then Ni forming hypotheticals on it, the Ti, rationalizing the hypotheticals... and repeat. I actually have to actively try to get new information (Se) or else i literally drive myself insane, which has happened twice. I would actually describe it as my Ti reacting to my Ni process instead of my Se process like it should.