Personality Cafe banner

Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 20 of 134 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
722 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
First off I want you to check out this link >>> Frequency of Personality Types by Population & Gender

So why do you guys think that us intellectuals and really intuitive types in general are so rare in comparison to Sensing types?

This whole thing is supposedly routed in genetics so why do you think that the genes that make us more reliant on intuition are so rare?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,174 Posts
Survival of the fittest.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
998 Posts
There are more of them and they like rules. That's why you commonly find them in middle management positions. SJs don't generally get to the top though, from what I've heard at least. Their lack of open-mindedness means that they're not willing to think out of the box, which is what you need to become a CEO, or start a company.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
424 Posts
First off I want you to check out this link >>> Frequency of Personality Types by Population & Gender

So why do you guys think that us intellectuals and really intuitive types in general are so rare in comparison to Sensing types?

This whole thing is supposedly routed in genetics so why do you think that the genes that make us more reliant on intuition are so rare?
I would like to think that it is lottery based. You see SJs type parents being able to have a child type that is different than theirs. NT parents being able to have SJs, NFs, and SPs. Or in other words, a parent of a certain type does not have to have a child of their type.

Perhaps the argument that nurture can also come into play on personality. Nature, being genetics, only provide the blueprint of the function whether actively expressing it is another story.

______________

As for why NTs don't rule the world, it probably has to do with the individual. This may be evidence as to why not all NTs are domineering in all aspects as much as they don't want to admit it. While they have the logic and reasoning, it does not mean that they are self sufficient to dominate everything.

Also, our world has grown so large (~6.7 x 10^9), where 1 individual (1 x 10^0) has to face 9 orders of magnitude of the amount of people. To dominate the world, that would require an infinite amount of power (for an individual). To visualize the monumental difference between 9 orders of magnitude: picture yourself walking vs. the speed of light, size of an atom vs. a tenth of a meter). One person dealing with 6.6 billion people's matters seems silly.

Having that said, to rule the world requires a group with similar ideals. As much as you can see in history, a lot of political unrest starts out with a group willing to work for the difference, which most importantly that group consists of all people part of the MBTI spectrum. We just all do it for many reasons.

Ruling is probably not domination-based but rather "group effort and unity"-based where the true power really rests in between individuals (their relationship bond). Considering on the grand scale of things, most people just don't want to bother being around another person or obeying or listening to them. This is what I experience in my everyday life (probably myself included), giving the riches and powerful more power because they're organized and the general population isn't.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,174 Posts
I would like to think that it is lottery based. You see SJs type parents being able to have a child type that is different than theirs. NT parents being able to have SJs, NFs, and SPs. Or in other words, a parent of a certain type does not have to have a child of their type.
I'm not so sure this is true, I'm starting to think that maybe SJ's can only have SJ's but perhaps and SP sneaks in
boffs mr SJ's wife without his knowledge and viola the cycle continues.

Maybe the types that adhere to rules routinely get screwed by types who don't?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
160 Posts
First off I want you to check out this link >>> Frequency of Personality Types by Population & Gender

So why do you guys think that us intellectuals and really intuitive types in general are so rare in comparison to Sensing types?

This whole thing is supposedly routed in genetics so why do you think that the genes that make us more reliant on intuition are so rare?
Not only is traditionalism encouraged, but it is easier to go with the flock than to not. The outcast children-including unusual sensors- go against the survival of the fittest idea. I think personality preference is developed from conditioning and nurturing, not from genetics. I think that intuitive parents are more likely to have intuitive children. That is nearly impossible to prove because of a lack of research. Why would a traditionalist parent allow a child to act irregularly?

This makes me wonder how ENTJs fit in as children. Do any of you have any experience as being a leader even as a child?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
815 Posts
I'm not so sure this is true, I'm starting to think that maybe SJ's can only have SJ's but perhaps and SP sneaks in
boffs mr SJ's wife without his knowledge and viola the cycle continues.

Maybe the types that adhere to rules routinely get screwed by types who don't?
Both my parents are SJ's yet I'm an NT :confused:

I've been trying to come up with a good explanation to the OP's question but I can't. I guess I just don't know why we are the minority... It's an interesting question though.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
160 Posts
I'm not so sure this is true, I'm starting to think that maybe SJ's can only have SJ's but perhaps and SP sneaks in
boffs mr SJ's wife without his knowledge and viola the cycle continues.

Maybe the types that adhere to rules routinely get screwed by types who don't?
It must be possible for a parent of any given temperment to have a child who is of another temperament. There is no research I know of that shows this to be true or not. However, I still believe that temperment is inherited through nurture.

If I had children, being an NT, I don't see how they would become traditionalist. I support independant thought too much. I understand how that offends SJs, but that is never the intent of these discussions. Knowledge sharing is the point right?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Zic and Ray Mabry

·
Registered
Joined
·
722 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
I'm not so sure this is true, I'm starting to think that maybe SJ's can only have SJ's but perhaps and SP sneaks in
boffs mr SJ's wife without his knowledge and viola the cycle continues.

Maybe the types that adhere to rules routinely get screwed by types who don't?
Two of my friends are fraternal twins. One is ESTP and one is ISTJ.

I'm not sure how the whole genetics thing works when it comes to reproduction but, using them as an example alone, I wonder the focus of the cognitive function is determined by something else being that one is Se/Ti and the other is Si/Te.
 

·
The Doer King
Joined
·
13,680 Posts
I'm not so sure this is true, I'm starting to think that maybe SJ's can only have SJ's but perhaps and SP sneaks in
boffs mr SJ's wife without his knowledge and viola the cycle continues.
*cough* that never happens *cough*

:unsure:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,027 Posts
First off I want you to check out this link >>> Frequency of Personality Types by Population & Gender

So why do you guys think that us intellectuals and really intuitive types in general are so rare in comparison to Sensing types?

This whole thing is supposedly routed in genetics so why do you think that the genes that make us more reliant on intuition are so rare?
I really don't know.
Does it really have to do with genetics?
My mother and my father are SJ and I'm an INFP, so...
I suppose that happens because we're in a world
where fools can be kings
and where up is down :( and it's sad.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
160 Posts
I would like to think that it is lottery based. You see SJs type parents being able to have a child type that is different than theirs. NT parents being able to have SJs, NFs, and SPs. Or in other words, a parent of a certain type does not have to have a child of their type.

Perhaps the argument that nurture can also come into play on personality. Nature, being genetics, only provide the blueprint of the function whether actively expressing it is another story.

______________

As for why NTs don't rule the world, it probably has to do with the individual. This may be evidence as to why not all NTs are domineering in all aspects as much as they don't want to admit it. While they have the logic and reasoning, it does not mean that they are self sufficient to dominate everything.

Also, our world has grown so large (~6.7 x 10^9), where 1 individual (1 x 10^0) has to face 9 orders of magnitude of the amount of people. To dominate the world, that would require an infinite amount of power (for an individual). To visualize the monumental difference between 9 orders of magnitude: picture yourself walking vs. the speed of light, size of an atom vs. a tenth of a meter). One person dealing with 6.6 billion people's matters seems silly.

Having that said, to rule the world requires a group with similar ideals. As much as you can see in history, a lot of political unrest starts out with a group willing to work for the difference, which most importantly that group consists of all people part of the MBTI spectrum. We just all do it for many reasons.

Ruling is probably not domination-based but rather "group effort and unity"-based where the true power really rests in between individuals (their relationship bond). Considering on the grand scale of things, most people just don't want to bother being around another person or obeying or listening to them. This is what I experience in my everyday life (probably myself included), giving the riches and powerful more power because they're organized and the general population isn't.
I think the SJ majority in theory is better at collective action. You are right about the huge ratio that it would take to lead the whole as an independant person. I think that if the theory is correct, most of the catalysts for change are idealists and rationals.

To say the world is dominated by one type is hard to grasp. It implies that there are peons and that they have control. Perhaps they do by virtue of numbers, but are they really of similar personality type? I doubt that. There must be a simlar percentage within each type that is forced into the role of a follower or the middle class by default. Not all SPs can afford to be the best performer or artist. Not all idealists can be catalysts for change. Rationals hate mundane jobs, but they are still found in careers that they would not prefer, either because of laziness, or because of a lack of opportunity, or for many other reasons.

To say any type dominates society is a half truth. The SJ and SP may represent the majority of the population, but do they dominate society? I think that they have a huge role in public opinion and how that controls our government. However, to demonstrate who exactly dominates our society, we would need to know the MBTI of the CEOs and government officials who also have a strong role in society. Again, there is not much research to show their personalities. But the theory does state that many leaders are rationals.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
722 Posts
Discussion Starter #17
I really don't know.
Does it really have to do with genetics?
My mother and my father are SJ and I'm an INFP, so...
I suppose that happens because we're in a world
where fools can be kings
and where up is down :( and it's sad.
If you don't mind me asking what are their types and how did you find out their types?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,174 Posts
It must be possible for a parent of any given temperment to have a child who is of another temperament.
Prove it.
There is no research I know of that shows this to be true or not. However,
At this point I no longer put any value on research. Intellectuals have their own ways of being blind to the obvious.

I still believe that temperment is inherited through nurture.
Now THIS is nonsense.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ray Mabry

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,174 Posts
1 - 20 of 134 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top