[MBTI General] NFs and Romanticized views of their intellingce...

[jtanSis1]

T personalities are more into the mechanics of word usage than its meaning that F's like. N means were about word ideas instead of how it's used for S's. NT's are about intelligence as their strength. For NF's who want to know, we are about wisdom. We are actually very smart, but the IQ tests are orientated toward purely intelligence. Think of other areas where you have skills that others don't and you will see you are quite smart, just a different emphasis on how you apply it.

 

[Jack Flak]

T personalities are more into the mechanics of word usage than its meaning that F's like. N means were about word ideas instead of how it's used for S's. NT's are about intelligence as their strength. For NF's who want to know, we are about wisdom. We are actually very smart, but the IQ tests are orientated toward purely intelligence. Think of other areas where you have skills that others don't and you will see you are quite smart, just a different emphasis on how you apply it.

You're misusing the word wisdom a slight bit, but I think I know what you're trying to say.

I have come to appreciate wisdom more than intelligence in myself, because I had one but not the other many years ago, and it was nothing but trouble.

 

[jtanSis1]

Wisdom is a concept of personal gaining of knowledge, understanding, experience, discretion, and intuitive understanding, along with a capacity to apply these qualities well towards finding solutions to problems. It is the judicious and purposeful application of knowledge that is valued in society. Got this from wikipedia, but is kind of what I meant about wisdom. I had a similar deal where I tried to find an answer about my life, and went through many self-help, religion, spirituality, metaphysics, psychology, and relationships etc., but until I could apply it, it was only knowledge.

 

[Jack Flak]

You are right of course, but NFs have more than NTs? I demand satisfaction. *throws down the gauntlet*

 

[Mitzy]

yea i guess i pride myself in being smart when i know there are a lot more smarter people than me..even in my own social circle

then again it could only be just my pride

but i dont find myself as "smart" i think im more intellectual and wise
im not about the facts and the figures and the books
its about the big picture for me

most people dont see that
which is why i say theyre all dumb

 

[GZA]

I used to be kind of a smartass. Maybe I stll am, but not as much, I don't know. It's no longer important to me to be smart. Winning a debate, knowin more facts, having more abstract ideas... I used to try to do all of that, but then I realized I was just being a dick. Being intelligent doesn't matter to me now because intelligence does not earn you anything. You have to do work and make things happen, which I'm finding is different from my idea of intelligence I was chasing before. So I guess I used to romanticize it and my own intelligence a lot but now I'm finding it's all irelevant anyway.

 

[jtanSis1]

NF's don't have more wisdom, they just are more inclined to that way of thinking. We look for knowledge with the intent to find meaning in an answer.

 

[Jack Flak]

NF's don't have more wisdom, they just are more inclined to that way of thinking. We look for knowledge with the intent to find meaning in an answer.

Perhaps the type of meaning is different, but that statement itself is still just as true for NTs....

 

[Into It]

NF's romanticize everything. Their intelligence shouldn't be any different. I think the answer to your question is a resounding "yes!" we do, even though the more careful of us try to look at this topic as realistically as possible. But what I don't like about this thread is that we are having a conversation about intelligence, but our meanings of "intelligence" are not well defined. There are people in here separating the word "intelligent" from "creative" and so on. Lucky for me and my argument which I haven't presented yet, people on an MBTI forum are familiar with how differently people think.
We are all given this dominant function which governs our thought processes, or isour thought process, and some are very different than others. Comparing Extraverted Judgement with introverted intuition- it's just apples and oranges. These IQ numbers as a basis for intelligence make me very uncomfortable. They are an accurate measure of one facet of intelligence- but others are more difficult to measure with paper. Maybe intelligence and creativity should be thought of as one in the same, as a mathematically proficient man who cannot think outside of the box- cannot come up with new ideas himself- is obviously lacking intellectually. Perhaps intelligence should mean the proficiency with which one can use the function he is most comfortable with. That way we cannot dismiss the intelligence needed to create some of the works of art that most of us would never be capable of. It may be that the advancement of societies or other practical applications of knowledge have become so important to us in measuring intelligence that more abstract manifestations of intelligence have been forgotten or viewed as 'lower' or 'lesser'. Math and English skills are just so easy to measure! Take into consideration both the minds who have constructed these tests ad the minds who uphold the institutions that administer them. There should not be this separation between abstract and concrete intelligence; they are both equally valid. In my opinion, any of the greatest artists or performers should be considered alongside any of our greatest physicists.

 

[Venom]

It is ironical that when you get to do actual work, it goes back to Si/Te

all that shit about showing your work comes back!? AHHHH!!!! :steam:

common theme in this thread I am noticing: maybe the reason high IQ does not equal success, is because the real world is more Te than Ni/Ne (i realize comparing judging to perceiving is like apples to oranges)

It's no longer important to me to be smart. Winning a debate, knowin more facts, having more abstract ideas... I used to try to do all of that, but then I realized I was just being a dick. Being intelligent doesn't matter to me now because intelligence does not earn you anything. You have to do work and make things happen, which I'm finding is different from my idea of intelligence I was chasing before. So I guess I used to romanticize it and my own intelligence a lot but now I'm finding it's all irelevant anyway.

common theme:
1. real world work can often be more Te than any form of Ne/Ni (high intelligence)

2. I actually think you are proving my point: "Winning a debate, knowin more facts, having more abstract ideas... I used to try to do all of that, but then I realized I was just being a dick. " what does that sound like? It sounds like an NF who thinks they are smarter than they really are and goes around trying to prove it! (i am NOT attacking you , I admit that I do this too and I think its an NF thing. hence this thread)

NF's romanticize everything. Their intelligence shouldn't be any different. I think the answer to your question is a resounding "yes!" we do, even though the more careful of us try to look at this topic as realistically as possible. But what I don't like about this thread is that we are having a conversation about intelligence, but our meanings of "intelligence" are not well defined. There are people in here separating the word "intelligent" from "creative" and so on. Lucky for me and my argument which I haven't presented yet, people on an MBTI forum are familiar with how differently people think.
We are all given this dominant function which governs our thought processes, or isour thought process, and some are very different than others. Comparing Extraverted Judgement with introverted intuition- it's just apples and oranges. These IQ numbers as a basis for intelligence make me very uncomfortable. They are an accurate measure of one facet of intelligence- but others are more difficult to measure with paper. Maybe intelligence and creativity should be thought of as one in the same, as a mathematically proficient man who cannot think outside of the box- cannot come up with new ideas himself- is obviously lacking intellectually. Perhaps intelligence should mean the proficiency with which one can use the function he is most comfortable with. That way we cannot dismiss the intelligence needed to create some of the works of art that most of us would never be capable of. It may be that the advancement of societies or other practical applications of knowledge have become so important to us in measuring intelligence that more abstract manifestations of intelligence have been forgotten or viewed as 'lower' or 'lesser'. Math and English skills are just so easy to measure! Take into consideration both the minds who have constructed these tests ad the minds who uphold the institutions that administer them. There should not be this separation between abstract and concrete intelligence; they are both equally valid. In my opinion, any of the greatest artists or performers should be considered alongside any of our greatest physicists.

I agree with a lot of it...except:
You are supporting the view that is exactly what Im trying to show is maybe wrong. NFs always like to go on and on about how their intelligence is just, different. You list many areas where this differentness is claimed as a crutch for NFs.

being intellectual, reflective, and liking abstract ideas does not inherently make you intelligent or smart. There is nothing wrong with being those things. those interests are what often separate NFs from being the more superficial SF (not saying EVERY SF is superficial). there is a huge difference between liking those things and actually being very intelligent. All I am asserting, is that many NFs make the extrapolation from "being intellectual, reflective, and liking abstract ideas" to their view of their actual inherent intelligence. This is reflective of the NF ability to romanticize everything, to the point that their world view really does not reflect the true realty.

I am not attacking NFs. I AM an NF.

 

[Into It]

All I am asserting, is that many NFs make the extrapolation from "being intellectual, reflective, and liking abstract ideas" to their view of their actual inherent intelligence. This is reflective of the NF ability to romanticize everything, to the point that their world view really does not reflect the true realty.
QUOTE]
Right, we're guilty of this somewhat, and I'm asserting that each person's intellect should be judged according to their interests, so this inference may be valid, and it's our measure of intelligence that is not. I'm just being clear on my position. No music or aesthetics were involved when I took an IQ test. This idea of "EQ" has emerged though, so maybe that fills in some gaps, but I don't know anything about it.

 

[SillySapienne]

I have spent a lifetime underrating my intelligence.

 

[IEE623]

I used to be kind of a smartass. Maybe I stll am, but not as much, I don't know. It's no longer important to me to be smart. Winning a debate, knowin more facts, having more abstract ideas... I used to try to do all of that, but then I realized I was just being a dick. Being intelligent doesn't matter to me now because intelligence does not earn you anything. You have to do work and make things happen, which I'm finding is different from my idea of intelligence I was chasing before. So I guess I used to romanticize it and my own intelligence a lot but now I'm finding it's all irelevant anyway.

that statement of doing work and making things happen sounds like a demand from SJ surroundings.

 

[Orangey]

3. Beyond the deceptions I have mentioned in point 2, many NF stereotypical activities do require some form of skill and abstract thinking. Writing good poetry, fiction, and exercising tact in human relations all require a degree of skill. NTs can obviously be good at these things as well. however, for the sake of conversation I am working with the archetypal view of NT intelligence being more quantitative. The fundamental difference I see here then, is that most of these NF intelligences are not quantitative. This leaves a lot of wiggle room for believed intelligence to extrapolate its perceived weight into fields that it may not actually excel in.

4. I often experience the dangers of being an NF who feels smarter than they actually are based on incorrectly extrapolating intelligence in verbal and arts to areas that my intelligence really does not excel at.

5. I am curious if anyone else ever experiences this romanticized view of their intelligence? I wonder if its a NF thing or even just a N thing?

I think that you are mistakenly equating intelligence with "quantitative ability". I wasn't aware that this is the standard against which we are judging people's levels of intelligence, since standard IQ tests usually test verbal skills and memory as well.

 

[GZA]

common theme:
1. real world work can often be more Te than any form of Ne/Ni (high intelligence)

When I say work, I mean the effort it takes to make something happen, to create something (which doesn't neccesarily mean art, it can be anything that involves changing the situation or circumstance). but yes, I suppose "Te" describes this, although I no longer believe in the functions in any real way.

2. I actually think you are proving my point: "Winning a debate, knowin more facts, having more abstract ideas... I used to try to do all of that, but then I realized I was just being a dick. " what does that sound like? It sounds like an NF who thinks they are smarter than they really are and goes around trying to prove it! (i am NOT attacking you , I admit that I do this too and I think its an NF thing. hence this thread)

Thats exactly it though, thats what I'm saying. I'm saying I was trying to prove I was more intelligent then other people when really, as I was saying, I was just being a snotty asshole. I'm pretty sure I included it in my previous post (but I havn't double checked) but intelligence is no longer a characteristic I am hell-bent on having. Especially in relation to other people. I'm intelligent enough for whatever it is I want to do, so all I care about it making things happen and materialize now. Thats what I mean by doing work, I mean that no matter how many philosophies, theories, ideas, ect you come up with, you will stagnate without taking action to materialize these ideas into something useful. So the short of it is that I used to be an NF who was trying to be smarter then everyone, but now I am a person who is trying to make things happen in my life, with the realization that being intelligent does not earn you anything in itself.

IEE623 Said:
that statement of doing work and making things happen sounds like a demand from SJ surroundings.

It has nothing to do with SJ's. No one has demanded it of me except myself. It's about putting dreams into action to make them a reality. It's about dreams and ambition being put into action to become your life and your love. In typological terms, it is Fi on steroids working out on a Te machine designed by a hundred Chuck Norris monkeys

 

[Johnny23]

I'm not stoopid!!!!!!!!!!

 

[FemMecha]

I see intelligence as fluid based on context. My own mental skills are not consistently at the same level even given the same task on a different day. Also, the context of how intelligence rates amongst a peer group is variable. Intelligence is not a fixed attribute one can measure and point to like the length of one's nose. It plays out over time and in many contexts.

For some reason it is especially important to me to know where I stand intellectually and to accept the truth of it regardless of my initial assumptions about myself. The idea of romanticizing intelligence, especially if that means thinking more highly of one's skill than is truthful, is a specific turn-off in my mind. I suppose I have a fear that not knowing my limitations would be the ultimate form of stupidity. In the past I have gone to lengths to avoid it and end up second guessing myself often. The assumption that one already knows can be a barrier to learning. The only way I know to grow is to be able to diagnose most accurately what I don't know.