S intelligence vs. N intelligence

[Randomnity]

wait...are you responding to me?

if so, you must not have read all of my posts. and if you have, i really don't feel like explaining my viewpoint again. everyone here's jumping all over me.

yes, you need S functions to live. Si is necessary for intelligence. blah blah blah. i've made my point, and i've made it clearly. if you want to get all offended and put words/ideas in my mouth, have at it. honestly, half of what you're offended by, i never even said.

also:


isn't that the point of the functions? to break down thought processes into categories? wouldn't you say you NEED Se to take in sensations from the environment?

I'm not offended. Don't project.

I read your views in this thread and responded to them, as well as to the thread in general. I was debating your expressed perspective and not attacking you. My apologies if you were offended.

I said that you "need" all functions only on the most basic of levels. On such a basic level that pointing out that you need it is silly. That was my whole point.

I'm saddened that you are not willing to discuss it, but it is what it is.

Here we go again. What is this trend the last few days to try and induce all types being the same? I came here to learn. I might as well just quit reading if everyone is going to say, in one way or another, that all types are the same because they use some of the same function some of the time ... geez... give me a break. Feelers and Thinkers are the same. Faith and Logic is the same. "Ss" and "Ns" are the same... its crossing my eyes.

That is not at all what I said. I did not say or imply that all types are the same. I'm sorry that I was not more clear.

 

[Ivy]

i never said intuitives were more intelligent than sensors. i just said the actual functions Ne and/or Ni are necessary for intelligence. everyone uses them. i know plenty of Ns who use them too much, even.

and i don't KNOW you very well, but my gut tells me that you're an ENFP. i've read a lot of your posts. this is just my opinion anyway.



that's not the reason. it's because i see Ne. don't assume you know what my motives are. i'm just putting my thoughts out there.



ugh, these are the kind of posts that just get me angry. no substance at all; just jumping on board as the PC police. and Ivy's assumptions are wrong anyways.

you must be an S! sorry, couldn't resist that joke there.

You assume I was just talking about you. I wasn't. It happens all the time when a sensor seems subdued and intelligent. It happens more on INTPC, which is where this forum came from, which may be why it happens a significant amount here as well.

It was because of this that when pure_mercury signed up, I made a little silent bet with myself to see how long it would be before someone questioned his S-ness.

 

[Seanan]

You assume I was just talking about you. I wasn't. It happens all the time when a sensor seems subdued and intelligent. It happens more on INTPC, which is where this forum came from, which may be why it happens a significant amount here as well.

It was because of this that when pure_mercury signed up, I made a little silent bet with myself to see how long it would be before someone questioned his S-ness.

You mean this isn't... coulda fooled me since yesterday morning. I left over there and was really enjoying the more positive environment but I hardly see the difference now... well its not all the way there yet... but certainly headed in that direction.

 

[redacted]

I'm not offended. Don't project.

I read your views in this thread and responded to them, as well as to the thread in general. I was debating your expressed perspective and not attacking you. My apologies if you were offended.

i WAS offended because it's clear to me that either you didn't read my posts thoroughly or you didn't understand my points. in either case, your response completely missed. i barely even disagree with anything you said, but you assumed i did for some reason.

I said that you "need" all functions only on the most basic of levels. On such a basic level that pointing out that you need it is silly. That was my whole point.

that's my whole point too. get it now?

I'm saddened that you are not willing to discuss it, but it is what it is.

i AM willing to discuss it. i just don't want to feel like i'm banging my head against a wall. here's what i didn't like in your post:

I just found it very ironic that you're arguing that your Ni is the ideal "thinking out of the box" function... and you're arguing that from your position firmly inside the box of the MBTI framework.

"out of the box" is just an expression. you obviously need a framework to make any point at all. and yes, philosophically, humans are always stuck in the box of human cognition. that's not how i was using "the box". "thinking outside the box" to me is making analogies, widening your frame of reference, trying to infer different ways to coming to conclusions, etc.

and i never said one word about Ni. Ni and Ne both think outside the box. the only term i've used in this discussion is "N functions". i literally didn't say Ni once, to my memory.

another thing is that i wasn't arguing about type. at all. i was arguing about FUNCTIONS. i probably said that 10x. i never made the claim that any type is smarter than any other type.

 

[Randomnity]

I read your posts and responded as I understood them. I was not assuming you disagreed. I "got" your point from the beginning, but thank you for asking. In my post I was only questioning why you felt the need to point out such a thing when it essentially means nothing....and since you did only mention the value of the N functions in intelligence, I wanted to be clear that you understood the necessity of all of the functions. I would hate to assume the beliefs of someone without them explicitly stating them.

I generally think of "out of the box" thinking as being creative, unconventional, thinking outside of accepted norms, etc. A quick look-up on wikipedia yielded "looking at problems from new perspectives....creative, wacky, smart ideas". I believe that fits the normal description of it. As such, given that we are on an MBTI forum, I guess it struck me as ironic to be discussing "out of the box" thinking from such a conventional, boxed-in point of view. Again I did not mean offense by pointing this out and I was not attacking you.

You mentioned Ni when you said:

huh? how does Se think outside the box? how does Ni NOT think outside the box?

Not that it is relevant at all, but I thought I'd refresh your memory since you couldn't remember.

I didn't mention type (edit: beyond my very basic example of an INFJ which was drawn from you mentioning Ni), nor did I accuse you of arguing about type, or of claiming any type was smarter than any other. I would appreciate it if you would respond to my post rather than the inferences you wrongly draw from it, please.

 

[redacted]

stuff that makes sense

k no problem with that.

You mentioned Ni when you said:

oh yeah. but i was responding to INTJmom saying that P is thinking outside the box, not N.

done.

 

[MacGuffin]

On average, iNtuitives are more intelligent than Sensors. So what?

That's interesting.
That throws my whole thinking into a tizzy.
You SAID you were an ESTP, but now you're saying you're really an ENTP?
So this whole time I thought I was interacting with an ESTP (and constantly having to re-think what I thought I knew about ESTPs) now it turns out, I haven't learned a doggone thing about ESTPs after all.
That's very frustrating.
Now I have to unlearn what I learned if only I could separate it out from all the other stuff.

This post is awesome/hilarious on so many levels I don't know which to focus on!

So maybe some or many of us iNtuitive types rightly or wrongly see this and other similar forums as a refuge from the larger world, as a place where we can grouse or vent about life "out there" or just enjoy the company of others like us. The majority of types I come into contact on a daily basis IRL (yes I'm guesstimating) are Sensors; so this is a refreshing break from that.

For those of you who are old enough to remember what life was like for iNtuitives *before* the internet, you can appreciate as I do what it has to offer. Indeed, I have a theory that, while it may not have been intended to be, the internet has become a godsend for Introverted Intuitives. It fits us like a glove and has given us our very own alternate, but no less real, world of our own. But that's another topic.

This drives a lot of the reason for INTPc for example.

 

[Nocapszy]

On average, iNtuitives are more intelligent than Sensors. So what?

There are significantly fewer intelligent people on the planet.

There are also significantly fewer intuitives on the planet.

It leaves a pretty small smart sensor window and they're getting all pissy about it.

Sorry kids.

But I'm not being biased. I'm an IIII anyway.

 

[heart]

How many people are ACTUALLY stupid?! Give me a break.
You don't have enough respect for other people.

Well, there is a difference between actually being stupid and refusing to use what one is given.

 

[MacGuffin]

There are significantly fewer intelligent people on the planet.

There are also significantly fewer intuitives on the planet.

It leaves a pretty small smart sensor window and they're getting all pissy about it.

Sorry kids.

But I'm not being biased. I'm an IIII anyway.

There are more extremely intelligent men than women.

There are more extremely stupid men than women.

 

[Nocapszy]

There are more extremely intelligent men than women.

There are more extremely stupid men than women.

Understood.

I wasn't saying they were right to be upset, just explaining why they were. They're not intelligent enough to do it for themselves.

 

[CzeCze]

There are more extremely intelligent men than women.
There are more extremely stupid men than women.

Nice, thanks for the example of logical fallacy.

I think it was lost on NoCap though.

 

[Carebear]

Nice, thanks for the example of logical fallacy.

I think it was lost on NoCap though.

It's not a logical fallacy. There can exist a scenario where both statements are true. It would mean that men gravitated to the extremes while women balanced more in the middle somewhere.

 

[Splittet]

Nice, thanks for the example of logical fallacy.

I think it was lost on NoCap though.

It's not a logical fallacy. The spread is larger among men. Does this tell you anything? Image:Normal distribution pdf.png - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (Blue is large spread (men), red is small spread (women))

 

[proteanmix]

Another intuitive buzz phrase: "reading between the lines"

You know a good, but unscientific way of finding out real world signs of intelligence people are looking for is by reading job descriptions. Most of them seem to be very Se, Si, and Ne as far as information gathering processes are concerned, not much use for Ni. Maybe that moves us one step closer to finding out what and where the box is. I'll post some later when I have more time.

 

[The Ü™]

Another intuitive buzz phrase: "reading between the lines"

You know a good, but unscientific way of finding out real world signs of intelligence people are looking for is by reading job descriptions. Most of them seem to be very Se, Si, and Ne as far as information gathering processes are concerned, not much use for Ni. Maybe that moves us one step closer to finding out what and where the box is. I'll post some later when I have more time.

Actually, I always tended to like remedial and repetitive jobs that required very little thought because then my Ni could drift off into its own world while my physical body set itself on auto pilot. This strategy always made it easier for me to dream up new music and new scenes for movies that I made up in my mind. Unfortunately, when I was taken out of that repetition as occasionally required by the job, I pretty much threw a fit, which was among the reasons that led to my dismissal.

 

[prplchknz]

Here's my take on whose smarter whose not. Who cares even if Ns are smarter (which I doubt) it really doesn't matter. I'm no genius yet some how I've made it this far in life, When I'm dead no one's going to remember me because of my IQ or my MBTI type their going to remember how I contributed to the world or how I shaped people's lives. I do enjoy MBTI and IQ but I don't think it really matters in the long run.

 

["?"]

On average, iNtuitives are more intelligent than Sensors. So what?

I expect that from others, but we have discussed things over the years (formerly known as INTrPosr) so I would expect more Mac. You know (or should know) that MBTI does not measure intelligence or emotions.

 

[Ivy]

I expect that from others, but we have discussed things over the years (formerly known as INTrPosr) so I would expect more Mac. You know (or should know) that MBTI does not measure intelligence or emotions.

I don't think Mac was saying that it does. Gender doesn't either. But a wider range of intelligence is associated with the male gender- that doesn't mean smart guys are smart because they are guys. Same with MBTI. (If I understand correctly, being both a dumb lady and a possible sensor.)

DISCLAIMER: I keed!

 

[Seanan]

(If I understand correctly, being both a dumb lady and a possible sensor.)
DISCLAIMER: I keed!

But if you're Oriental.. cancel all that.