None.
It would be the reason why they do that hobby that splits them apart.

 

"Splits them apart" what do you refer to in that matter? Please do share details.

 

Two people may enjoy the same hobby, but their reasons for why they enjoy that hobby may be different. And, that difference may be found in their cognitive functions.

For example, some people enjoy art. Here's some reasons;

• They enjoy the process; they find it calming and relaxing
• They enjoy mastering a skill and being competent at it
• They enjoy adding meaning and purpose and want to share these ideas with others
• They enjoy making things that look aesthetically pleasing
• They enjoy it because of the social aspect; sharing ideas and art with others and talking about it
• They do several of the above
• They do none of the above and do it for other reasons

As you can see, there are many reasons as to why someone does a particular hobby, and that was just one example.
It's not about what you do, but why you do it that's important.

 

My hobbies are reading, drawing, painting, knitting, singing, dancing, playing guitar, clay-work, crochet, etc.

 

When it comes to hobbies, look to people's tertiary function. It's their relief function for the dom/aux pairing aka daily driver/support to the daily driver.

 

While the reason a person chooses to do a particular hobby gives better evidence of someone being S or N, there are still vague preferences in hobbies between the types. Useful to evaluate people this way when getting to know someone is inconvenient.

This was a good thread, but only for Ne:

All things Ne

Just wanted to start a thread on Ne characters, Ne characteristics, just anything extroverted intuitive.

www.personalitycafe.com

Just have a look around all the subforums, different types tend to like different things. ISFP, cars. INTPs, coding. INFP, poetry.

 

Hobbies are not the best indication of personality type and are a vague proxy at best. Both Ns and Ss can be artistic, for example.

The main difference I've noticed is that Sensors tend to have more physical hobbies than Intuitives do. So a Sensor might prefer ballet dancing or painting to composing music or writing a novel.

 

It's more about the ''why'' and how people approach a hobby that gives clues as whether they are S or N, not so much the hobby itself

 

Writing for a intuitive can be a no. 1 hobby. Playing a particular sport competitively can be the no. 1 hobby for a sensor. No. 1 hobbies are usually vocational activities; our gifts we bring to the world, and perhaps that's the biggest divider between N and S. But even considering, you may see an N-type in love with playing their sport, or an S-Type enjoying the process of writing a publication; there's likely going to be outliers. For me, I'm an N type who's no.1 vocational activities are writing, in various forms, and illustrating.

 

Two people may enjoy the same hobby, but their reasons for why they enjoy that hobby may be different.

Dionne Obeso tries to answer a different question:

Most of the highly intelligent people I know they have multiple hobbies that tend to revolve around applied learning and flexible/creative thinking. Another thing I've noticed in myself and many of my most intelligent friends: we tend to prefer to teach ourselves things vs. taking a class. For example:

• Knitting! I taught myself to knit. It's a relaxing way to keep my hands busy when my mind works, but it's also very stimulating if you want it to be. There's plenty of math if you care to apply it, complicated stitch patterns to learn if you enjoy them, and always something new to learn or apply or to twist in your own way. The most intelligent knitters I know rarely follow patterns exactly (we tend to "improve" them or customize them on the fly) and rarely make the same thing more than once or twice.
• My cousin, who is also extremely intelligent, taught himself woodworking and starting building all his own furniture. He saved money on rent by making custom cabinets and installing them in his (rental's) kitchen. His landlord and wife both approve!
• Gaming. Online, board games, logic puzzles, RPGs, whatever. Most of the highly intelligent people I know love games and puzzles in some form or other. I do Sudoku while on conference calls to keep from falling asleep and play strategy games with my family for fun.
• I'm an unfaithful student, but I've taught myself fragments of a handful of languages and started to learn several instruments before getting distracted. I also spent one summer when I was about 12 teaching myself flute from the old flute and beginner's book I found in my mom's closet. I'm not the only highly intelligent person I know who's pursued such interests without formal education.
• Reading. Most of the most intelligent people I know are frequent readers. I read about 150 books a year (roughly 190 this year, sometimes more, sometimes fewer) plus short stories, articles, etc. I read a broad mix of genres in both fiction and non-fiction. My cousin reads mostly non-fiction and technical information. My husband reads articles and tends to dive deep instead of broad in pursuit of topics like philosophy.
• Rock climbing is my favorite physical activity. It combines the satisfaction of physical exertion with the mental puzzle of solving routes, balance problems, and angles. My best friend describes it as playing chess with your whole body.
• Creative outlets. Surely not all highly intelligent people are creative, but most of the ones I know are. I am a writer, my husband designs board games, my cousin (above) is a coder and likes to build things, another highly intelligent cousin downplays his brains but could build you a car engine from scratch and restores vehicles in his spare time, and a good friend of mine is an architect who also designs knitting patterns. Many other highly intelligent people I know enjoy hobbies as diverse as stained glass design, theater set design, playing in an orchestra or band, drawing, photography, building bicycles, and a gardening hobby so intense that I can only describe it as landscape architecture.
• Learning for its own sake. I may not have stick with any of the many languages or instruments I've started to pick up (not because they were too challenging but because I lost interest), but I do have a broad range of general interests and I'm constantly learning. I read articles and blogs, research random tangents that appeal to me, listen to a variety of educational podcasts and subscribe to some educational YouTube channels, read non-fiction books that catch my eye, and otherwise pursue random thoughts and interests.

Caitlin Ducate writes:

High IQ exists in such a variety of personalities (and is such a funny measure anyway) that I'd argue it is near impossible to pin down what activities most engage smart people. I could lob off some true but stereotypical options (e.g. chess, recreational math, computer programming, reading), but that's hardly comprehensive or enlightening.

In my experience, what really sets apart highly intelligent people's hobbies from the hobbies of everyone else is the depth at which they engage with them. They don't do many things casually. An extreme example is my little cousin, who has been obsessed with garage doors since he was 2 and at age 5 can tell you a fair amount about which ones are the best and why. He's also on an intellectual fast track in school and is overall a really smart cookie. Learning about garage doors may not seem like a "smart people" hobby, and it's certainly weird, but what is telling is his level of engagement with the subject.

Another example is myself, who is apparently "highly intelligent." I have a variety of interests, but my most "anti-intellectual" one is my love of television. The stereotype seems to be that smart people are "above" watching television; that it's too simplistic for them. And that may be true for a variety of people and a variety of shows. I have a friend who can't watch more than half an hour of TV before needing something more intellectually stimulating, and personally, I'd rather pass a kidney stone that have to suffer through most reality television shows. But I also can't deny that I'm a television fanatic and could easily binge-watch an entire Netflix series in a day or two.

But what I've observed makes my viewing different is that I analyze every inch of whatever show I watch. I'll know all of the trivia (e.g. actors, directors, composers), pinpoint key acting moments and unique cinematography, recognize homages to past works, analyze running themes and motifs, and so on. I'll also read analyses and reviews and write my own (I once wrote 17,000 words about the show Hannibal one summer while procrastinating writing my 15,000-word MSc dissertation). Keep in mind, I watch a lot of television, but this is how I engage with each and every show (minus the 17,000 words). From experience, I've learned that this is a very abnormal level of engagement; most people are happy to zonk out in front of the TV for hours but forget what they've watched as soon as they've watched it.

All that to say that, if you're smart and bored, delve into whatever you find most interesting, no matter what it's reputation among the stereotypical "smart people hobbies". It doesn't matter if your hobby is in the arts or the sciences, if it is building robots or watching movies. Heck, you could spend all of your free time learning about window frames or soap; anything is fair game. What really matters is how deeply you delve into them.

What kind of hobbies do highly intelligent, i.e., those with intelligence levels beyond the exceptional, people have? - Quora

 

How is it best to tell an intuitive person apart from a sensor user with just their hobbies? (Not all may apply, but I'm curious to see)

Would listening to music go to the sensory side?

To be exact, is it any important what hobbies a person has, can it even be classified as "you are a sensor or you are intuitive" based off what they do? Or is that too subjective.

Sensors are more likely to be sporty than intuitives. I think any type can enjoy listening to music though. For me, it really inspires my Ne.