[silikone]

I often hear that if you are a sensor, you take things literally, and literal thinking is the opposite of abstract thinking. I have always been objecting to this notion. To me, literal thinking can often be attributed to a lack of social/emotional awareness, or a lack of vocabulary. Concrete thinking on the other hand is about what is real, specific, and tangible. One can think in abstract concepts, but still be literal. Simultaneously, you can have figurative speech, but still be concrete.
Sensors definitely think concretely. The focus is on the real world and its details, but do they also think literally, or could this be attributed to a different function?

 

[jcal]

I often hear that if you are a sensor, you take things literally, and literal thinking is the opposite of abstract thinking. I have always been objecting to this notion. To me, literal thinking can often be attributed to a lack of social/emotional awareness, or a lack of vocabulary. Concrete thinking on the other hand is about what is real, specific, and tangible. One can think in abstract concepts, but still be literal. Simultaneously, you can have figurative speech, but still be concrete.
Sensors definitely think concretely. The focus is on the real world and its details, but do they also think literally, or could this be attributed to a different function?

Aren't you conflating thinking with communicating? "Concrete" describes the thinking process while "literal" describes the communication process. They are quite independent of each other, just as you stated about using figurative speech while being concrete. As an ISTJ, I would cop to both being a concrete thinker and a literal communicator, but they are quite independent of one another. The literal communications is not an extension of the concrete thinking but, at least for me, comes from a desire to leave absolutely no room for interpretation by others in what I communicate to them (which really tends to piss off an ISTJ, because it actually takes great effort to make make sure that we ARE communicating literally at all times).

I would also say that it has nothing at all to do with lack of vocabulary... if anything, it requires a larger vocabulary to be as specific/literal as we're driven to be. Lack of social/emotional awareness is a different story... I think that does play a large part in our need for literal communications, although it probably has more to do with how much we TRUST our interpretations of those cues rather than being unaware that they exist. Even though my tentative interpretations of those cues more often than not turn out to be correct, I still can never trust them enough to use them as real-time input, so the preference/expectation is to receive communications in as literal a way as is possible so that I'm not put in a position where I need to trust any perceptions of non-literal cues. Like anyone else, I/we tend to make our outbound communication in the same manner in which we prefer/expect to receive it from others.

 

[silikone]

Aren't you conflating thinking with communicating?

Yeah, I meant to say that it's related to communication, but the term "literal thinking" gets thrown around a lot. I guess it's technically true if you think before you talk.

 

[The Exception]

I'm an intuitive who is quite literal but not particularly concrete.

 

[emphatic]

Pretty sure we all have the capacity for intuitive/abstract reasoning. An inferior function of intuition doesn't mean you're incapable of it. It just means you prefer to not make decisions based on it; however, as you get older, you obviously learn how to integrate and utilize information from subjective or objective intuitive processes.

 

[shameless]

I do not think all sensors are literal

Why do I think this?
Because I am actually myself very literal.
I would guess an estp is pretty damn literal.
Which is precisely why I can confidently say no all sensors are not literal. In fact some are very subtle, beat around the bush, in direct (which why the hell is my thinking alot of people covert everything as my having a lack of social perception far from estps are said to be pretty high up there on social perception, probably so much so one could say it could be a curse depending on the situation and the person). Yes in my head my gut can sum things up quick I do not need to dress everything up or talk in passive aggressive secret language. That said I am fully aware that while I sum things up simple most people over complicate things.

There are plenty of sensors who are not literal tho.

Why I think an estp can be literal well dom Se and well inferior Ni.

See I am very aware most people are not literal then I can get into some fucked up over Analysing mindset with Ti where where I start to use poor use of Ni and conjur up things that do not exist or are fabricated because I am aware that most people are not literal.

Anyways I am fully aware the general publics nuances is not literal. So being socially perceptive enough I have learned very young to not take everything at face value. BUT sometimes I still catch myself usually when I did not take time to evaluate info answering too quick and mistaking context because I battled with either the contradiction of over reading a context or under reading.

But yeah I for example know plenty of SFJs who are not always literal. They can be in some ways where I would say I actually am not but in other ways I would say they can be more complex. My Esfj brother is better at for example instantly catching my Entp stepdads hidden joke but he also has Ne in his top functions.

Anyways thats where I was going with this even further. Is actually I think my esfj brother is better at ad lib with my entp stepdad then My Ni Intj mother is. Going further then that most Ne users I know whether Entp or Enfp or Infp or Intp are better at ad libbing I would say even their sensor counter parts are better at it when they have Ne in their Si/Ne axis. At least how I view all that seems more likely that its not sensor vs intuitive as much as Ne/Si axis vs Ni/Se axis. Most Ni dom or auxs have strong enough Ni they can play on it but even they seem to want to shoot it down quicker then an Ne Axis sensor.

So no its not a sensor thing imo. Its an Ne thing to ad lib
When I say ad lib I mean the context of playing to pleasure or with a coded meaning.
Ni/Se wants to get to the point and sum things up much quicker then Ne/Si axis.

 

[tfife1]

Aren't you conflating thinking with communicating? "Concrete" describes the thinking process while "literal" describes the communication process. They are quite independent of each other, just as you stated about using figurative speech while being concrete. As an ISTJ, I would cop to both being a concrete thinker and a literal communicator, but they are quite independent of one another. The literal communications is not an extension of the concrete thinking but, at least for me, comes from a desire to leave absolutely no room for interpretation by others in what I communicate to them (which really tends to piss off an ISTJ, because it actually takes great effort to make make sure that we ARE communicating literally at all times).

I would also say that it has nothing at all to do with lack of vocabulary... if anything, it requires a larger vocabulary to be as specific/literal as we're driven to be. Lack of social/emotional awareness is a different story... I think that does play a large part in our need for literal communications, although it probably has more to do with how much we TRUST our interpretations of those cues rather than being unaware that they exist. Even though my tentative interpretations of those cues more often than not turn out to be correct, I still can never trust them enough to use them as real-time input, so the preference/expectation is to receive communications in as literal a way as is possible so that I'm not put in a position where I need to trust any perceptions of non-literal cues. Like anyone else, I/we tend to make our outbound communication in the same manner in which we prefer/expect to receive it from others.

 

[tfife1]

Agreed!

 

[tfife1]

Thank you!