[Ti Dominant]

This was posted in another thread, but wasn't given much attention.
It can generally tie into indoctrination, or specifically bad socialized viewpoints, such as racism or sexism.
I think it's a very valid inquiry, so I thought it fit to see what people honestly think.

1. They are more about common sense. This entails seeing things as things are naturally understood, rather than going against the grain. Thus, if an entire culture is racist towards various groups of people, a sensing type is less likely to deviate from the common social paradigm.

2. Sensors are universally more traditional than intuitives, by nature. They trust past experience (even past social experiences) and are more practical and simple. Thus, more reason to hold that if a social group culturally views the world one way (perhaps that people with blue eyes are better than people with brown eyes, for example), a sensing type is less likely to give it a thought, as they are more conventional than unconventional. If a sensing type is less inquisitive, and therefore, less likely to question things, then whether or not social discrimination is truly justified just won't be the first thing they think about on a daily basis, as they are probably too busy dealing with more down-to-earth, worldly matters, rather than such abstractions as whether or not race is justified.

3. Sensing types aren't often called visionaries, unlike intuitives, and I would think it rare that a sensing type is commonly called wise, as wise people like Yoda, Einstein, Buddha, or Gandhi just aren't usually viewed as a sensing types. Given that sensing types aren't very visionary, it would make more sense that intuitive types would be more prone to questioning the status quo, the way things have been done, the way things have been understood, and would be the true bringers of progression, socially. If this is the case, sensing types really wouldn't be the type less likely to be racist, as they would, for reasons 1 and 2, be limited primarily to common social views, rather than the questioning of them. And I would say it requires a bit of inquisitiveness and curiosity to really question something as common as racial distinction. Thus, sensors are probably more racist, as they are probably less prone to progression type behavior.

4. Sensing types learn by imitation and observation, according to the current establishment. If the current social trend involves seeing other racial groups as different, or inferior, a sensing type would seem more likely to simply pick up the behavior, as if they see people being prejudiced and judgmental, they're likely to view the world from a more prejudiced, judgmental position. In effect, what they see is what they are/become. If they see racism... -- you get the picture.

Intuitives, on the other hand, are imaginative (more like to see things from a new perspective, to think of the world as it could be, to imagine a world where racial distinctions simply do not exist). Intuitives are also creative and theoretical, which means they're more likely to think of different ways of viewing people, socially, rather than going along with the typical social paradigm. They're also inquisitive, visionary, curious, and searching for a new way. This is essentially the basic type that brings progress to society, in various ways: both socially and intellectually. Intuitives are also more future-based and idealistic, which means they're less likely to see the world as it has been, but more in terms of how it could be. If the world is currently full of racial discrimination, and the culture in which an intuitive is raised happens to be full of particular racial discrimination, than the intuitive is more likely to think how the world could be without such discrimination. Again, intuitives are the visionaries, like Martin Luther King Jr. We, essentially, think differently.

Feel free to critique away. If my reasons are invalid, please explain why you think so.
I'd love to know what people honestly think.

 

[SuperunknownVortex]

But then you have to differentiate between those who prefer Se (i.e., the SP's) and those who prefer Si (i.e., the SJ's). I'd have to say that theoretically your description would fit the SJ temperament as opposed to the SP temperament.

Not to mention that even the xNxP's also frequently use Si and that even the xNxJ's also frequently use Se.

It'd all depend.

 

[nevermore]

Well.

You present this as an honest inquiry into whether or not Sensors are prone to indoctrination. If you stuck with that, it would deserve a serious, analytical response and perhaps yield some real insight.

But it basically reads as a treatise into how much better N's are than S's. And I'm sure it was purposeful.

You remind me a bit of what my INTP brother used to do when we were growing up. He would say something to insult you, but would present it as a compliment even though his words were perfectly chosen to elicit a negative response. Despite the fact I'm INTP, I was/am a lot more sensitive than he was. I would explode, and I would get in trouble. Quite shrewd of him, but our parents knew well what he was doing.

And so does everyone else.

So why do you even bother?

PS. That's right! I'm not explaining why your reasons are invalid! That's because it's not your argument that's faulty. It's your attitude.

PPS. Yes, your attitiude is faulty. You don't need to call 3/4's of the human race "simple" and "unwise" and use examples like racism to make a point about indoctrination. This smacks of elitism.

PPPS. You also don't need to confuse the traditional Si with the in-the-moment Se (not that the former is bad; it's my tertiary function...and yours, if I am not mistaken). Nor do you need to make asinine general statements like "sensors are universally more traditional than intuitives, by nature". Try "SJ's tend to be more traditional than other types". You would have a point there.

PPPPS. Because ENP's and INJ's have "more N" than we do, are they better then we N-aux's? Just curious.:happy:

 

[teddy564339]

nevermore stated everything very beautifully and accurately, and both nevermore and SuperUnknownVortex made a great point that SJ's, due to their dominant or auxiliary Si, are more likely to use past experiences to guide their current understanding.


First off, as nevermore said, while overall your points are valid and make sense, this post is focusing basically on the strengths of intuition and the main weakness of sensing, Si to be more specific. It makes the post come across are more elitist rather than honest and balanced, even if your points are not faulty.


The other key thing to remember is that type just diagrams people's preferences, or preferred functions. Everyone has both sensing and intuitive capabilities, it's just one is going to come more naturally to each person. Sensors, even SJ's, aren't total sheep that just do everything they're told and follow every trend that comes along (I know you never said that they they, but the attitude of your post seems to imply it), even if their natural comfort is to go along with what they've known. Likewise, intuitives aren't just dreamers who never get anything done. Sensors can and do use intuition, and intuitives can and do use sensing.

Both sensing and intuition are important in life, and everyone should seek to strengthen their non-preferred function. The healthiest person of any type knows how to use their natural, preferred functions to their greatest strengths and also makes an effort to utilize their non-preferred ones. In addition, they recognize how other types have strengths in areas that they don't, and seek to learn from them.

 

[Promethea]

I closed the last thread that started the OPs post, and I'm closing this one too because I see it as generally a bad idea that will bring about lots of unfair remarks regarding Ss. Ti Dominant, I suggest you spend some time here getting to know the Ss before you make these claims, and stop bringing back topics from closed threads please.