I used to have a blog where I'd write personality descriptions. I hope to get back into that again. Here's my opening remarks.
I've been studying MBTI for a while, and I don't claim to be an expert.
I've had many a year to soak up the information I've found on the Internet, and I've observed a lot of interactions between people who may or may not be typed correctly, bagging on each other because of perceived inadequacy, fault, or stupidity.
If you've been around any MBTI circle for even a week or two, one of the first things you'll encounter is "sensor bias."
It's an odd thing to have happen. Sensors supposedly make up what, 80% of the world's population? And yet we have this somehow large minority of intuitives populating the MBTI world jumping on innocent sensors for living in a different, perhaps more adaptive way than them.
I've often asked myself where this comes from. Are intuitives so different that they can't understand how a sensor functions? After all, we all have all eight functions, just in different orders/preferences. And from all these (highly) complimentary descriptions I read regarding intuitives, I'd expect them to "get" sensors more than sensors could "get" intuitives, or that sensors could "get" themselves, because apparently personality theories are too far-flung for them.
My conclusion here is not only that the literature we're being fed for MBTI/Socionics is a bit misleading, but perhaps if we have some true intuitives in the room, they've got some severe cognitive bias going on--probably stemming from how they were raised, or just personal personality quirks.
Not all N people hold S people in low regard, and actually seem to enjoy what they can of a sensor's observations of the world around them. They appreciate that their role in society, and their role in life. They understand that there is a reason there are these two distinct types of people in the world, and further, those sub-divided into sixteen. They aren't bigots.
And that's wonderful to see, because all of us balance out later in life. We all learn to make up for the skills we lack, and become more well-rounded. There is no evolutionary reason to be staunchly in favor of statements like these:
"I just don't understand sensors and I never will. They don't 'get' me, and don't try to. So why should I try to 'get' them?"
"My thinking is too complex for an average sensor's mind. They just can't process as fast as I can with the amount of detail and nuance. I'm always ten steps ahead, and they're engaging in hedonism and just a general lack of forethought. It disgusts me, but what can I say? I was just built different."
What doesn't make sense to me here is this: if you all are so good at finding out the true meaning behind actions, understanding others' intent, and reading feelings... why don't you try to figure out the complexity inherent to even the people you look down upon, the people you deride as simple?
We are all built to work with each other. An ENTP can't express his love of systems without realizing that the only reason systems exist is because people need them, built them, work with them, and live within them. His purpose is to, therefore, help those people through his analytical mind.
An INFJ is tied through Fe and Ni to the greater good of humanity, and uses her rationale to better it. She can't stay wrapped up in a blanket watching cat videos until kingdom come because no one understands her abstract desires. Her entire personality (type) is predicated on the idea that she will build understanding through her skills; and if she does that, people have a higher chance of understanding her unique point of view, and thus her.
People will not understand you unless you make yourself understood. Communication is key.
But people, most times, I've noticed--they don't want to communicate. Their ideas, their sense of self, their way of being is so precious to them that it cannot be shared. And this makes me think that they themselves are not very secure in any of those, because a true person, when they like themselves and are confident, can be giving of themselves. Most people who take on the intuitive label--that I've encountered--are not.
Some say arrogance is inherent to you if you are smart or can predict other people's moves, but even if it is... arrogance is just another type of insecurity.
Thus, this makes me wonder if we need a "safe space" for sensors. They are the most numerous, so you're probably asking how this could be done.
All I'm asking of you is you respect the laws of reality. (I'm talking to you, even if you're an ESFP.) Sensors live in it. Reality is a part of you. And if you can't accept it, you can't accept yourself.
And well, we all live in a supposed shared reality... so let us have this grand reality we share be our safe space. Because it all affects us, just some more visibly than others. And those are the people we should respect, because they're the ones that are the most capable of protecting the dreams of those who dare to more bravely than others.
The very fabric of the personality framework you're studying demands it, for Christ's sake, even though its basis is in theory.
Get with it, or get sucked up in it.
--
This is not meant to be an attack. Rather, it's merely commentary. To be read in a spirited, "go-get-'em" tone.
I've been studying MBTI for a while, and I don't claim to be an expert.
I've had many a year to soak up the information I've found on the Internet, and I've observed a lot of interactions between people who may or may not be typed correctly, bagging on each other because of perceived inadequacy, fault, or stupidity.
If you've been around any MBTI circle for even a week or two, one of the first things you'll encounter is "sensor bias."
It's an odd thing to have happen. Sensors supposedly make up what, 80% of the world's population? And yet we have this somehow large minority of intuitives populating the MBTI world jumping on innocent sensors for living in a different, perhaps more adaptive way than them.
I've often asked myself where this comes from. Are intuitives so different that they can't understand how a sensor functions? After all, we all have all eight functions, just in different orders/preferences. And from all these (highly) complimentary descriptions I read regarding intuitives, I'd expect them to "get" sensors more than sensors could "get" intuitives, or that sensors could "get" themselves, because apparently personality theories are too far-flung for them.
My conclusion here is not only that the literature we're being fed for MBTI/Socionics is a bit misleading, but perhaps if we have some true intuitives in the room, they've got some severe cognitive bias going on--probably stemming from how they were raised, or just personal personality quirks.
Not all N people hold S people in low regard, and actually seem to enjoy what they can of a sensor's observations of the world around them. They appreciate that their role in society, and their role in life. They understand that there is a reason there are these two distinct types of people in the world, and further, those sub-divided into sixteen. They aren't bigots.
And that's wonderful to see, because all of us balance out later in life. We all learn to make up for the skills we lack, and become more well-rounded. There is no evolutionary reason to be staunchly in favor of statements like these:
"I just don't understand sensors and I never will. They don't 'get' me, and don't try to. So why should I try to 'get' them?"
"My thinking is too complex for an average sensor's mind. They just can't process as fast as I can with the amount of detail and nuance. I'm always ten steps ahead, and they're engaging in hedonism and just a general lack of forethought. It disgusts me, but what can I say? I was just built different."
What doesn't make sense to me here is this: if you all are so good at finding out the true meaning behind actions, understanding others' intent, and reading feelings... why don't you try to figure out the complexity inherent to even the people you look down upon, the people you deride as simple?
We are all built to work with each other. An ENTP can't express his love of systems without realizing that the only reason systems exist is because people need them, built them, work with them, and live within them. His purpose is to, therefore, help those people through his analytical mind.
An INFJ is tied through Fe and Ni to the greater good of humanity, and uses her rationale to better it. She can't stay wrapped up in a blanket watching cat videos until kingdom come because no one understands her abstract desires. Her entire personality (type) is predicated on the idea that she will build understanding through her skills; and if she does that, people have a higher chance of understanding her unique point of view, and thus her.
People will not understand you unless you make yourself understood. Communication is key.
But people, most times, I've noticed--they don't want to communicate. Their ideas, their sense of self, their way of being is so precious to them that it cannot be shared. And this makes me think that they themselves are not very secure in any of those, because a true person, when they like themselves and are confident, can be giving of themselves. Most people who take on the intuitive label--that I've encountered--are not.
Some say arrogance is inherent to you if you are smart or can predict other people's moves, but even if it is... arrogance is just another type of insecurity.
Thus, this makes me wonder if we need a "safe space" for sensors. They are the most numerous, so you're probably asking how this could be done.
All I'm asking of you is you respect the laws of reality. (I'm talking to you, even if you're an ESFP.) Sensors live in it. Reality is a part of you. And if you can't accept it, you can't accept yourself.
And well, we all live in a supposed shared reality... so let us have this grand reality we share be our safe space. Because it all affects us, just some more visibly than others. And those are the people we should respect, because they're the ones that are the most capable of protecting the dreams of those who dare to more bravely than others.
The very fabric of the personality framework you're studying demands it, for Christ's sake, even though its basis is in theory.
Get with it, or get sucked up in it.
--
This is not meant to be an attack. Rather, it's merely commentary. To be read in a spirited, "go-get-'em" tone.