What caused this odd communication breakdown?

[Athenian200]

One of the strangest things I ever observed in what I think was a Sensing type, was when he was trying to build something out of copper tubing, and he wanted to put sand into it so it would bend without "kinking" or something. He purchased sand with rocks in it, and I told him "Why don't you filter the rocks out?" He said he didn't have time to do that. So he tries to force the sand, with the rocks, into the tube with a wooden stick. So a couple moments later, after trying to figure out in my head why it wouldn't work and not finding any reason, I say, "I still don't see why you don't just use that mosquito net over there, put a bowl under it, and pour the sand on top of it?" He slapped himself on the forehead and said, "Why didn't you tell me that sooner?" I said, "I thought I did. I just assumed you had already run through the idea, and dismissed it because it wouldn't work." He said, "No, I just didn't see what you meant."

The thing is, this person was always working with tools, and I assumed he'd understand things like that easily. But I still had to point this out to him, and it was obvious to me, even though I'm terrible at using tools. Why did it work out that way, especially since I've found that Sensing types are usually better at dealing with practical problems? The whole thing really seems strange, now that I think about it.

 

[Zergling]

It could be more that, for the first time, he either assumed you wouldn't know what you were talking about and/or wasn't paying attention fully because he was already thinking about what to do next. He than paid attention the second time because it wasn't working and he didn't know what to do, so was able/more willing to fully listen to and consider advice from somewhere else.

 

[ptgatsby]

The thing is, this person was always working with tools, and I assumed he'd understand things like that easily. But I still had to point this out to him, and it was obvious to me, even though I'm terrible at using tools. Why did it work out that way, especially since I've found that Sensing types are usually better at dealing with practical problems? The whole thing really seems strange, now that I think about it.

Speaking from my own... uhhh... lack of listening...

He didn't see the need to do it before, but did after... that's all it is. He thought it would work regardless of if he did it, so the extra step didn't make any sense at first. And of course, he was most likely concentrating on the task at hand, which means it didn't even register.

 

[cafe]

Sometimes I'll say something and my mind will follow the thread of thoughts related to what I said, then I'll say something else and it will appear unrelated to whoever I'm talking to leaving them puzzled if not bewildered. I can almost always follow the thread back to where I started, but not everyone can follow with me and most don't bother.

The other thing I run into is thinking so much about saying or doing something that I think I actually did or said it when I did not.

And of course, I frequently assume that most people know more about what they are doing than I do and when I see them doing something that looks like a mistake to me, I figure they must have already thought of that and dismissed it and then that turns out not to be the case.

I sometimes think I should say something, but then I worry about appearing rude or like a know it all, so I don't.

 

[Randomnity]

He thought it would work regardless of if he did it, so the extra step didn't make any sense at first. And of course, he was most likely concentrating on the task at hand, which means it didn't even register.

This rings true.

And also for me, if I'm absorbed in something, I get irritated by people offering help before I've worked through it as far as I can on my own. If I get stuck, that's when I want advice, and anything offered before that will more than likely get an absentminded "mmmhmm" and be prompty forgotten as I focus on working through the problem myself.

 

[Usehername]

This rings true.

And also for me, if I'm absorbed in something, I get irritated by people offering help before I've worked through it as far as I can on my own. If I get stuck, that's when I want advice, and anything offered before that will more than likely get an absentminded "mmmhmm" and be prompty forgotten as I focus on working through the problem myself.

I think this post wins transcends-all-types-and-is-universal-to-the-male-gender truth award!

 

[Randomnity]

I think this post wins transcends-all-types-and-is-universal-to-the-male-gender truth award!

I'd love to accept your award, but sadly I'm not male.

 

[Biker Dude]

One of the strangest things I ever observed in what I think was a Sensing type, was when he was trying to build something out of copper tubing, and he wanted to put sand into it so it would bend without "kinking" or something.

Would have been even easier with the proper tools...

 

[Usehername]

I'd love to accept your award, but sadly I'm not male.

dang!

but i still think it's a universal to males. Just not universal to females (although there are some).

 

[indigo2020]

my two cents on this. I have a very close ISTP friend and we talk about the differences in the S/N dynamic quite a bit.

what i have discovered is that (IMO) an N will say "why don't you take out the rocks" (and they may or may not know specificially at that exact moment how to do it but will then think about it) whereas an S may need to be told exactly how to remove the rocks to "see" what the N is talking about. So, I think that is what happened. Once you said, take the net and filter them out he "saw" what you meant. Sensors are literal. Sensors are concrete. Sensors see, hear, taste, smell and feel. N's interpret and take things figuratively. N's connect one event to another (and it would not seem connected to an S) and S's take things literally.

 

[sassafrassquatch]

I think the problem is that the guy in question is a moron.

I looked up bending copper pipe with the sand method and it has to be a fine sand. Using the sand with rocks it in wouldn't have worked at all. This has nothing to do with S/N.

my two cents on this. I have a very close ISTP friend and we talk about the differences in the S/N dynamic quite a bit.

what i have discovered is that (IMO) an N will say "why don't you take out the rocks" (and they may or may not know specificially at that exact moment how to do it but will then think about it) whereas an S may need to be told exactly how to remove the rocks to "see" what the N is talking about. So, I think that is what happened. Once you said, take the net and filter them out he "saw" what you meant. Sensors are literal. Sensors are concrete. Sensors see, hear, taste, smell and feel. N's interpret and take things figuratively. N's connect one event to another (and it would not seem connected to an S) and S's take things literally.

Do you really think Sensors are that stupid?

Dur, take out teh rokz? I dun no wut u meen. You don't have to have an N's godlike intelligence to know what a fucking sifter is.

I'd better get back to picking my nose and eating glue cause this intarweb thing is just too complicated for my tiny S brain.

 

[The Ü™]

I don't think interpreting things literally is an S or N thing -- at least not in the way most people see it.

What they mean by the S taking things literally is taking their observations as what they really are and noticing details. The N will see the same object but looks to be inspired by their observation -- noticing possibilities.

S is deductive in perception -- it observes and analyzes details in the environment. N is inductive -- it looks for possibilities via imagination.

Understanding meaning in one's words is more of a T or F thing, it's what endows the S or N function with common sense.

Interpreting language is something either an S or N can have trouble with, particularly if there is cultural bias.

I do in fact think it is the N who will ask "What do you mean?" when asked to take out the rocks, because perhaps the N sees "Take out the rocks" to mean a great number of things that aren't obvious. The S will take out the rocks if s(he) interprets the command to mean "Take out the rocks."

 

[Athenian200]

I think the problem is that the guy in question is a moron.

I looked up bending copper pipe with the sand method and it has to be a fine sand. Using the sand with rocks it in wouldn't have worked at all. This has nothing to do with S/N.

You're right. I knew the large rocks/grains would create too much friction, and he didn't want to listen.

Do you really think Sensors are that stupid?

Dur, take out teh rokz? I dun no wut u meen. You don't have to have an N's godlike intelligence to know what a fucking sifter is.

I'd better get back to picking my nose and eating glue cause this intarweb thing is just too complicated for my tiny S brain.

I don't claim that Sensors are stupid. I claim that that an individual who might have been a sensor was lacking an insight at a particular time. He wasn't into reading, and he liked tools. Sensors are the ones who like tools, and prefer hands-on experiences to books (he actually stated this explicitly at one point). You can read that in any book on the MBTI. I grant that he might have been an unusually thick person.

Also, it wasn't just a sifter, I was trying to get him to realize that the mosquito net could be used as a sifter, but did a bad job of communicating my point.

You have to remember that you are probably more thoughtful than many people. You were smart enough to seek instructions, but he just wanted to rush into it, assuming he knew what he was doing. It doesn't matter what type you are, you're intelligent. I think you're a bit hostile towards intuitives, but your arguments are well-reasoned.

Also, about us being Godlike:

You dare mock us? Blasphemy! *throws lightening bolt at sassafrassquatch*
*he descends to Hades, near Charon's boat at Acheron*
*he doesn't have fare to cross Acheron*
*he has to walk along the banks for a century*

 

[The Ü™]

For what it's worth, society is more likely to look at Sensors as more intelligent, because they possess a way of thinking shared by a majority.

Intuitives, on the other hand, are looked upon in society as misunderstood, and at worst, crackpots. And so the MBTI was created so that the Intuitive could feel special and not so stupid.

Anyone in a minority group feels different, and so needs to lean onto something that will make them feel special. This is why the MBTI is such an attraction to Intuitives, who make up the minority percentage.

 

[proteanmix]

I don't claim that Sensors are stupid. I claim that that an individual who might have been a sensor was lacking an insight at a particular time. He wasn't into reading, and he liked tools. Sensors are the ones who like tools, and prefer hands-on experiences to books (he actually stated this explicitly at one point). You can read that in any book on the MBTI. I grant that he might have been an unusually thick person.

Athenian, I'm not trying to harp on you but when you first mentioned the problem and said what type you think the person is, you automatically set up associations within people's minds (or maybe just my mind but evidently sassafrassquatch made the association also) that one of the person's problems with not accepting your advice was that h/she was a sensor unable to take your reasonable advice.

You have to remember that you are probably more thoughtful than many people. You were smart enough to seek instructions, but he just wanted to rush into it, assuming he knew what he was doing. It doesn't matter what type you are, you're intelligent. I think you're a bit hostile towards intuitives, but your arguments are well-reasoned.

I don't think he's being hostile he's making a very salient point. If being a sensor or an intuitive has nothing to do with this miscommunication why bring it up? Did you think it was important to mention that this person might be a sensor? It's like saying the person was wearing a blue shirt, just to say it. And just as an aside, I've seen some hostility on your part towards SPs.

 

[sassafrassquatch]

I think you're a bit hostile towards intuitives

I don't have anything against Intuitives, I have a problem with libeling a person's intelligence based on function preferences.

I don't claim that Sensors are stupid.

I didn't say you did, I was replying to indigo2020.

my two cents on this. I have a very close ISTP friend and we talk about the differences in the S/N dynamic quite a bit.

what i have discovered is that (IMO) an N will say "why don't you take out the rocks" (and they may or may not know specificially at that exact moment how to do it but will then think about it) whereas an S may need to be told exactly how to remove the rocks to "see" what the N is talking about. So, I think that is what happened. Once you said, take the net and filter them out he "saw" what you meant. Sensors are literal. Sensors are concrete. Sensors see, hear, taste, smell and feel. N's interpret and take things figuratively. N's connect one event to another (and it would not seem connected to an S) and S's take things literally.

 

[Athenian200]

Athenian, I'm not trying to harp on you but when you first mentioned the problem and said what type you think the person is, you automatically set up associations within people's minds (or maybe just my mind but evidently sassafrassquatch made the association also) that one of the person's problems with not accepting your advice was that h/she was a sensor unable to take your reasonable advice.

I must admit that I did make that inference. I didn't mean to express it, however. I realize it was an unfair, subjective conjecture. What I actually believed was that he was an extreme case, and was probably just using Se with little regard to a Judging function. Of course, now that I think about he, he might well have been an unusually thick Ne dominant. He wasn't a very nice person.

I don't think he's being hostile he's making a very salient point. If being a sensor or an intuitive has nothing to do with this miscommunication why bring it up? Did you think it was important to mention that this person might be a sensor? It's like saying the person was wearing a blue shirt, just to say it. And just as an aside, I've seen some hostility on your part towards SPs.

I conceded that his point was valid. Yes, I probably do display subtle hostility towards SP's, but it isn't intentional. They often make me feel threatened and agitated, even though I know they don't mean to. I probably tend to unreasonably dump a lot of negativity onto Se's because they represent my underdeveloped shadow side. It's all psychological.

 

[Wolf]

I think this post wins transcends-all-types-and-is-universal-to-the-male-gender truth award!

dang!

but i still think it's a universal to males. Just not universal to females (although there are some).

SEXIST!

Yes, I'm offended.


Response to the OP: Many sensors are somewhat blind to intuition. It happens to me all the time because I foolishly assuming people are intelligent and capable of seeing simple processes that lead to the solution I propose. Granted there are always those that may need help.

 

[Usehername]

SEXIST!

Yes, I'm offended.


Response to the OP: Many sensors are somewhat blind to intuition. It happens to me all the time because I foolishly assuming people are intelligent and capable of seeing simple processes that lead to the solution I propose. Granted there are always those that may need help.

but wolf, you know there's truth in this

 

[Wolf]

but wolf, you know there's truth in this

I disagree. More like currently-accepted sexism, because nobody is out there protesting it.

See this thread