Personality Cafe banner

1 - 20 of 32 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
268 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I've been thinking about intelligence and I've started to think that there's a big misconception about intelligence. The way we view intelligence is rigged in favor of intuitive types. That's why intuitive types are thought of as being more intelligent than sensing types, but of course intelligence tests give better results to intuitive types too. Intelligence tests give high points to very intuitive people, especially INTPs and INTJs, who might lack "intelligence" in other areas in life and there's a patch for that called emotional intelligence, and this shows us that intelligence testing and our conception of intelligence is kind of broken. Intelligence might not be so simple and Keirsey thinks every type has their own kind of intelligence, in other words every type is especially good at something. INTPs and INTJs are both especially good at research.

Unless intuitive types really are more intelligent than sensing types. But intelligence in form of abstractions and theories does not help, if a lion eats you or you step on a rusty nail. Intuitive types are better with abstract things and sensing types are better with concrete things. Intuitive types might not be realistic or attentive to the concrete reality around them, and that's a big drawback. Language is an abstraction and therefore intuitive types grasp language better. Theories are abstract and therefore sensing types have problems with those. Society has developed to a point where we have lots of science, technology, law, processes, systems, government etc. These things have been developed by NT types and therefore they are best at understanding, developing and improving everything complex that their like have invented.

We live in a NT world. Everything that has furthened humankind has been developed by NTs. Science such as mathematics, physics and chemistry. Technology such as clocks, cars, computers, elevators, electric motors, phones and electricity. The constitution and corporate forms. Modern management and industrial processes. The people who our society praises, such as scientists and inventors, have all been NTs. All the other types are just workers and consumers in our NT world that prizes specific kinds of intelligence that only NTs possess. Today NTs are heads of corporations, professors and technological experts. The other types don't know how the NT created world works and therefore they are like mechanical parts of some kinds of systems like corporations or states that make NT crafted systems or processes work.

The modern world favors NTs who represent only less than 10 percent of the population. They are the experts of science, technology, management, industry, finance and government. NTs are the leaders in every field and all the other temperaments and types are just workers in an "organized society" of a "developed country".
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
444 Posts
Wrong. Many of the 'greats' of history have been NFs. People just throw the NT label on them because "they're smart, so they must be NTs!"

This is also why INTPs and INTJs seem to score the highest on intelligence tests. They don't spend time with people, so they must be introverts, and they're smart, so they must be thinkers!

Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. The methods we use to determine E/I and T/F are archaic and unreliable. E is about an outward focus, not being a "people person". T is about naturally placing little importance on emotions, not about being intelligent or suppressing your emotions.

On the other hand, it's true that sensors don't accomplish things which seem great in and of themselves, outside of the arts. The lack of the broad, future focus of intuition prevents them from having such an obviously profound impact. However, they are responsible for maintaining the world of the present. They are responsible for implementing the groundwork of the future. They are every bit as vital to the success of modern society as the intuitives.

The social dominance of the intuitives over the sensors is a great injustice of the world, perpetuated by deliberate manipulation. Each group relies on the other, yet many intuitives continue to abuse their directorial power. It is, perhaps, the natural outcome, but it is deplorable injustice nonetheless.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,775 Posts
While I agree with much of what you have said here, there are a few logical blunders.

First off we don't live in an NT world at all. It just so happens by coincindence that the products that are future-useful are produced by NTs. Look at how much money gets pumped into movies and sports, this is the world of sensory stimulation. Actually, just look at money in general. Completely sensory. We have been a world of sensory-centrism since the beginning of man, largely for the reason you indicated - sensors are generally far better at day to day survival. This is why the witch trials happened, and why the middle age catholic church stifled technology. The key poimt here being that NT traits were not always valued and in fact were shunned. It was only through keen application and even a bit of manipulation that NT ideas were ever implemented.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,022 Posts
It comes down to types of intelligence. Sensors tend to be higher in practical intelligence. When I'm with my STJ best friend we constantly have moments where I'm the one proverbially glad that it wasn't a snake or it would have bit me, but when we talk about things that require depth and abstract understanding he's usually left with a "is that what you learned in school"-type response due to not having anything to offer of significance. In a nutshell of course.

And lol @ considering society intuitive-oriented. Ever wonder why so many of the scientists and geniuses we praise have been fairly reclusive/misanthropic? I don't.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Inure Penumbra

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,198 Posts
On the other hand, it's true that sensors don't accomplish things which seem great in and of themselves, outside of the arts. The lack of the broad, future focus of intuition prevents them from having such an obviously profound impact.
...wow. You're aware that everyone uses both sensing and intuition, right? You assumption that sensors aren't capable of anything great but art seems to be, frankly, really typist.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
444 Posts
@aconite: If you're going to misinterpret and/or misrepresent my posts, there's no room for discussion, so I won't bother responding again.

Sensors aren't famous world leaders, inventors, or philosophers, though. That's how it is.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,583 Posts
Sensors aren't famous world leaders, inventors, or philosophers, though. That's how it is.
Do you actually know this or are you just assuming so? Because George Washington was supposedly an ISTJ, and Queen Elizabeth II an ISFJ.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
444 Posts
Do you actually know this or are you just assuming so? Because George Washington was supposedly an ESFJ, and Queen Elizabeth II an ISTJ.
George Washington was famous as a military commander. Queen Elizabeth II is a celebrity by birthright and nothing more. Furthermore, even if you provided two counterexamples, would they not be the exceptions to prove the rule?

This is great, though--this insistence that the realm of intuitives is more valuable, against all reason... This sort of thinking will see the oppression continue forevermore.
 
  • Like
Reactions: niki

·
Iron Fist
Joined
·
3,684 Posts
Ok where is it even mentioned that Ns are smarter than Ss?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,198 Posts
@aconite: If you're going to misinterpret and/or misrepresent my posts, there's no room for discussion, so I won't bother responding again.

Sensors aren't famous world leaders, inventors, or philosophers, though. That's how it is.
If you're going to stick to your ridiculous and biased opinion, then yes, don't bother. I take it you don't have evidence to prove your point, do you?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Inguz

·
Registered
Joined
·
152 Posts
I agreed with the whole part about intelligence - there are so many different kinds of intelligence and while a person might have a lot of mathematical intelligence, say, they might be severely lacking in emotional intelligence. IQ scores mean a lot less than the seem to mean.
However, I don't think we do live in an 'NT World' at all. Particularly in society itself I think a lot of NTs have difficulty integrating or feeling welcome. Many NTs might do very well in their careers or scientific persuits or whatever but when it comes to socialisation and fitting in, it could be more difficult, because there are so few NTs in comparison to other types, and it's difficult finding somebody who they feel they can communicate their ideas and thoughts to...

But anyway - like some other posters have said - it's really not necessary to type the people behind great ideas and successful inventions, and it's even less necessary to come to conclusions based from such typings.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,583 Posts
Is there a reason we have to categorize intelligence by MBTI dichotomies, anyway? You don't have to define these great people, they just are. Everyone's going to have a different view on intelligence and/or greatness in the end. That's what makes this a biased opinion.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
444 Posts
If you're going to stick to your ridiculous and biased opinion, then yes, don't bother. I take it you don't have evidence to prove your point, do you?
It's ridiculous and biased to assert that people with different cognitive functions do different things? That's a new one.

My evidence will be this forum. Check the number of members of each type. If you find those numbers closely reflect the general population, I'll concede.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
450 Posts
  • Like
Reactions: starri

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,005 Posts
The social dominance of the intuitives over the sensors is a great injustice of the world, perpetuated by deliberate manipulation. Each group relies on the other, yet many intuitives continue to abuse their directorial power. It is, perhaps, the natural outcome, but it is deplorable injustice nonetheless.
Sensors aren't famous world leaders, inventors, or philosophers, though. That's how it is.
... do you even know what point you're trying to make?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,198 Posts
It's ridiculous and biased to assert that people with different cognitive functions do different things? That's a new one.
No, it's ridiculous and biased to assert that sensors aren't capable of greatness.

My evidence will be this forum. Check the number of members of each type. If you find those numbers closely reflect the general population, I'll concede.
It is your assumption, and gathering evidence is up to you. Do your research yourself.

by the way:
Carl Jung said:
As a natural scientist, thinking and sensation were uppermost in me and intuition and feeling were in the unconscious and contaminated by the collective unconscious. You cannot get directly to the inferior function from the superior, it must always be via the auxiliary function. It is as though the unconscious were in such antagonism to the superior function that it allowed no direct attack. The process of working through auxiliary functions goes on somewhat as follows: Suppose you have sensation strongly developed but are not fanatical about it. Then you can admit about every situation a certain aura of possibilities; that is to say, you permit an intuitive element to come in. Sensation as an auxiliary function would allow intuition to exist. But inasmuch as sensation (in the example) is a partisan of the intellect, intuition sides with the feeling, here the inferior function. Therefore the intellect will not agree with intuition, in this case, and will vote for its exclusion. Intellect will not hold together sensation and intuition, rather it will separate them. Such a destructive attempt will be checked by feeling, which backs up intuition.

Looking at it the other way around, if you are an intuitive type, you can't get to your sensations directly. They are full of monsters, and so you have to go by way of your intellect or feeling, whichever is the auxiliary in the conscious. it needs very cool reasoning for such a man to keep himself down to reality. To sum up then, the way is from the superior to the auxiliary, from the latter to the function opposite to the auxiliary. Usually this first conflict that is aroused between the auxiliary function in the conscious and its opposite function in the unconscious is the fight that takes place in analysis. This may be called the preliminary conflict. The knock-down battle between the superior and inferior functions only takes place in life. In the example of the intellectual sensation type, I suggested the preliminary conflict would be between sensation and intuition, and the final fight between intellect and feeling.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,005 Posts
I have already provided sufficient evidence, and I'm not entirely sure what is confusing you about my point.
My evidence will be this forum.


You initially say that Sensors don't achieve greatness outside of the arts, tell people that the examples provided are exceptions to the rule (even though a quick Google search will reveal that a good number of world leaders, especially, have been typed as Sensors), then change your position to "different MBTI types do different things," and then back it up with the existence of this forum. But then you acknowledge that this forum is not representative of broader society, thus invalidating your own point.
 
1 - 20 of 32 Posts
Top