[PUG] Intuitives contrasted to Sensors

[Quinlan]

Se is like Ni in that it views the planet from the inside...it lives on it. Unlike Ni, it doesn't spend its time viewing other planets in a telescope, because, lets face it, this planet ROCKS! Just check out all the pretty flowers, hot deserts, lush forests, and all the people that live here! Isn't this great!?

Then whoosh...Se is unexpectedly warped to another planet to try the new experiences there. This is fine by Se, because it is so in the moment that it sometimes doesn't even know that it switched planets (and certainly didn't do it deliberately)! Pretty adaptable really.



Si owns a spaceship like the Ne's do. However, Si will find a corner of the galaxy that it really likes...the star formations really make it comfortable here. Instead of exploring the rest, it starts to build up a little star empire in this corner. Before it knows it, it has quite the star empire and it wakes up to realize, "Well, my empire is way off in the corner here, but it's a well built, comfortable empire. I'm satisfied."

When not running its star empire, the Si takes time to revisit planets that it has been to in the past. They had such great information and experiences on those planets, even if I didn't know it at the time!

Oh I think I understand, Si = evil galatic empire. I think so too!

 

[IndigoSensor]

Si is really useful though, and can be nice...!

...succumb to the power of the dark side!

 

[NeverAmI]

LOL Si is close to the weakests if not THE weakest of my functions.

 

[Trifoilum]

Hmm, about the bad side of Sensors; would there be any chance most bad opinions are experience-based? It'd else be known as Sturgeon's Law : 90 percent of everything is crud.

So with LOTS and LOTS of Sensors around us, there would be more of them who's, you know, crud, and a lot of us would give / judge them in a kinda uglier light due to that?

Just a guess. :|

 

[Duty]

Hmm, about the bad side of Sensors; would there be any chance most bad opinions are experience-based? It'd else be known as Sturgeon's Law : 90 percent of everything is crud.

So with LOTS and LOTS of Sensors around us, there would be more of them who's, you know, crud, and a lot of us would give / judge them in a kinda uglier light due to that?

Just a guess. :|

You're pretty much correct. Most people are thoughtless, take whatever society feeds them, and are remarkably unremarkable. It's difficult to get most people to see beyond themselves and transcend their awareness to a much more global level...both intuitives and sensors.

Sensors are obviously the population majority.

So there is a correlation that we, as MBTI-aware people, see daily. There are a lot of automatons and there are a lot of sensors. However, correlation does not imply causation. There could be a link there, sure, but there just as easily could not. It could be just the math works out this way.

So you're correct in this explanation.

 

[ENTroP]

Se= look at that.
Si= whoa, that is amazing.

That's my take on it anyway. Si dominants are highly impacted by their physical and aesthetic environment. Se types tend to be really active in adapting their environment to suit their needs. Si types are more in tune with how taste, touch and sound relate to them, while Se types are better at just being aware of their environment.

Don't quote me, that's just my understanding.

 

[NeverAmI]

You're pretty much correct. Most people are thoughtless, take whatever society feeds them, and are remarkably unremarkable. It's difficult to get most people to see beyond themselves and transcend their awareness to a much more global level...both intuitives and sensors.

Sensors are obviously the population majority.

So there is a correlation that we, as MBTI-aware people, see daily. There are a lot of automatons and there are a lot of sensors. However, correlation does not imply causation. There could be a link there, sure, but there just as easily could not. It could be just the math works out this way.

So you're correct in this explanation.

Yes, there is no debate in that sense, and arguing someone seeing in a "global" perspective is completely subjective in my opinon. Seeing *your* "Big picture" is subjective as well. Just because someone doesn't agree with your opinion doesn't mean they don't see a "Big picture."

Now I understand being frustrated with someone that doesn't ask why, and has no interest in asking why. I don't like that, and I can understand frustration directed towards that, I am the same way.

I think there is a big distinction between not wanting to ask why on anything and having a different perspective.

I commonly see an intuitive argue that someone is a sensor or short sighted simply because they don't agree with the perspective shown, which has no logical bearing. Please note that this isn't directed towards anyone in particular. I think the stereotypical sensor wouldn't have engaged in the conversation in the first place in most cases.

Overall though, I still believe that maturity, in terms of rounding out your weaknesses and moving away from any cognitive extremes, trumps any initial cognitive function.


Ignorance and arrogance both seem likely factors in someone not accepting or looking into someone elses perspective, and I can certainly see that on people regardless of their MBTI.

 

[Raccoon Love]

Yes, there is no debate in that sense, and arguing someone seeing in a "global" perspective is completely subjective in my opinon. Seeing *your* "Big picture" is subjective as well. Just because someone doesn't agree with your opinion doesn't mean they don't see a "Big picture."

Now I understand being frustrated with someone that doesn't ask why, and has no interest in asking why. I don't like that, and I can understand frustration directed towards that, I am the same way.

I think there is a big distinction between not wanting to ask why on anything and having a different perspective.

I commonly see an intuitive argue that someone is a sensor or short sighted simply because they don't agree with the perspective shown, which has no logical bearing.

Overall though, I still believe that maturity, in terms of rounding out your weaknesses and moving away from any cognitive extremes, trumps any initial cognitive function.

Not only is the question of not asking why? sensors tend to focus a lot on superficial details which are not really of main importance, this can tell you this small details over and over which can be pretty annoying, they might not grasp the main idea of things instead they can constantly attack you with the slightest of things they see as ''wrong'' which can turn into an argument from both sides. Another thing that some intuitives might find annoyng is that a lot of sensors like to ''live in the present'', they are happy the way they are, in their world, they enjoy the current pleasures of life which may annoy an intuitive who has a futuristic goal and might argue that things right now are of peripheral importance, yet this does not apply to all sensors, you are right maturity is a key role on both S and N types.

 

[NeverAmI]

sensors tend to focus a lot on superficial details which are not really of main importance,

Importance is subjective, but I should also mention that I have been pleasantly surprised sometimes when someone keeps pointing out a small detail in something and turns out to be right. Don't let this become a bias.

this can tell you this small details over and over which can be pretty annoying,

I thought judging was primarily focused with minute details and accuracy? Si can compare to past experiences, but which would be more inclined, a J or someone with Si?

they might not grasp the main idea of things instead they can constantly attack you with the slightest of things they see as ''wrong'' which can turn into an argument from both sides.

Again, subjective. Your main idea may not match someone else's main idea. Attacking someone else's premise is the focus of debate. Intelligence can come into play, but that is out of scope.

Another thing that some intuitives might find annoyng is that a lot of sensors like to ''live in the present'', they are happy the way they are, in their world, they enjoy the current pleasures of life which may annoy an intuitive who has a futuristic goal and might argue that things right now are of peripheral importance, yet this does not apply to all sensors, you are right maturity is a key role on both S and N types.

This I can understand, that sensors would rather be hedonistic than ask questions or ponder why. I think ultimately a lot of the bias against sensors in general is unfounded and unhealthy.

One point I want to make is that you shouldn't judge a book by its cover, nor should you judge a person by their MBTI.

I just dislike the idea that intuitives are better than sensors or that sensors get more done than intuitives. The entire debate is completely subjective, everyone has their strengths and weaknesses.

To assume every sensor is an automoton or has no insight seems incredibly closed-minded to me and it is a bias that will do more harm than good in the long run.

This discussion has helped me a great deal, I am again questioning my ideas of Sensors vs Intuitives.


The MBTI is a tool to help understand people and encourage growth, not the opposite.

I appreciate all your comments and I encourage more!

 

[Duty]

Yes, there is no debate in that sense, and arguing someone seeing in a "global" perspective is completely subjective in my opinon. Seeing *your* "Big picture" is subjective as well. Just because someone doesn't agree with your opinion doesn't mean they don't see a "Big picture."

Check out the Graves model of Spiral Dynamics. It's good stuff.

The more developed intuitives, once they hit about stage 5 in spiral dynamics, start to understand the subjectivity of big pictures. But it is a mistake to just throw that out and say "it's subjective and therefore useless or irrelevant." Instead, what you have to learn to do is match up the right big picture to the right situation.

Intuitives are masters at manipulating the big picture...as we gain experience with it we realize more and more just how arbitrary human thought really is. Still, there is value in those thought processes in developing one's own perspective on matter (you don't want to just take the perspective that is fed to you!). An opinion informed of other opinions is better then one that isn't.

Now I understand being frustrated with someone that doesn't ask why, and has no interest in asking why. I don't like that, and I can understand frustration directed towards that, I am the same way.

I think there is a big distinction between not wanting to ask why on anything and having a different perspective.

I think the problem is (for me anyways, can't speak for everyone here) that most people don't know what they're talking about, yet feel qualified in giving their opinion anyways. This would be ok, but even when you gently show them that they don't have the whole picture, they get very upset as if you're saying their opinion is stupid...they make it personal.

Informed opinions are better than uninformed ones. I find it rare that people, with both informed opinions on the matter at hand, quarrel in the same way that people with informed opinions do with people that are uninformed. There is a group of psychological phenomena that explains this: Illusory Superiority, the Downing Effect and the Dunning-Krueger effect. The worse people are at something the most they overestimate their abilities and the better they are the more they underestimate.

I commonly see an intuitive argue that someone is a sensor or short sighted simply because they don't agree with the perspective shown, which has no logical bearing.

Agreed. I think there may be another force often at work here though. The sensor is usually a guardian (artisans irl generally just look at my intuitive-talk like, "Well, ok I guess...I don't see why you put it that way but saying something about it doesn't really matter), and SJs have this habit of rejecting something for the sole fact that it isn't what they have heard before. They usually aren't short sighted, just stubborn.

Please note that this isn't directed towards anyone in particular. I think the stereotypical sensor wouldn't have engaged in the conversation in the first place in most cases.

The Fe tendencies of the board are starting to wear on me. We're forced with almost every post to have these disclaimers. I guess, to me, it should be obvious that you're not trying to be offensive. Do feelers really need to take everything so personally?

 

[Duty]

Not only is the question of not asking why? sensors tend to focus a lot on superficial details which are not really of main importance, this can tell you this small details over and over which can be pretty annoying, they might not grasp the main idea of things instead they can constantly attack you with the slightest of things they see as ''wrong'' which can turn into an argument from both sides.

Yes! Well, this is true for SJs at least. They seem to have a very difficult time learning to filter out irrelevant detail and see the true scope of the matter at hand. As a Ti I get particularly annoyed by this (as Ti's main approach to things is focusing and defining the boundaries that are relevant).

It is almost like SJs, when they know something that sounds related to the topic, have an irresistible urge to let it out. Then they anchor themselves in that fact...it is what is known to them and so is the best place to start a "home base" in their mind. They never really consider that maybe their base is outside the relevant island.

I can tell stories about some of the job trainings I've had...they were awfully done because the person teaching me was an SJ that overloaded me with detail completely irrelevant to what I needed to know.

 

[NeverAmI]

Check out the Graves model of Spiral Dynamics. It's good stuff.

The more developed intuitives, once they hit about stage 5 in spiral dynamics, start to understand the subjectivity of big pictures. But it is a mistake to just throw that out and say "it's subjective and therefore useless or irrelevant." Instead, what you have to learn to do is match up the right big picture to the right situation.

Intuitives are masters at manipulating the big picture...as we gain experience with it we realize more and more just how arbitrary human thought really is. Still, there is value in those thought processes in developing one's own perspective on matter (you don't want to just take the perspective that is fed to you!). An opinion informed of other opinions is better then one that isn't.

Thank you for elaborating on this. This still states that a framework/theory is correct vs something else. You state that objectivity is more important than subjectivity, that seems out of scope for intuitives vs sensors. Somone might not care at all about this topic, even an intuitive, that doesn't make them a sensor.

I will study this framework, but not knowing the concept doesn't make me less or more intuitive. Now, if your argument is that intuitives would be more inclined to develop this framework/theory than a sensor, then I can agree with that.

I think the problem is (for me anyways, can't speak for everyone here) that most people don't know what they're talking about, yet feel qualified in giving their opinion anyways. This would be ok, but even when you gently show them that they don't have the whole picture, they get very upset as if you're saying their opinion is stupid...they make it personal.

Informed opinions are better than uninformed ones. I find it rare that people, with both informed opinions on the matter at hand, quarrel in the same way that people with informed opinions do with people that are uninformed. There is a group of psychological phenomena that explains this: Illusory Superiority, the Downing Effect and the Dunning-Krueger effect. The worse people are at something the most they overestimate their abilities and the better they are the more they underestimate.

This seems more an argue of ignorance/arrogance vs open-midedness/intellect to me, which I think has no relevance to sensor vs intuitive, there are correlations that intellect is more likely in an intuitive, but as you said, that doesn't mean causality. Like Trifoilum mentioned, sensors have a much bigger target here.

There are plenty of stupid/ignorant people in the world, but don't expect me to believe they are all sensors.

Agreed. I think there may be another force often at work here though. The sensor is usually a guardian (artisans irl generally just look at my intuitive-talk like, "Well, ok I guess...I don't see why you put it that way but saying something about it doesn't really matter), and SJs have this habit of rejecting something for the sole fact that it isn't what they have heard before. They usually aren't short sighted, just stubborn.

Generalizations, everyone has different perspectives, not every intuitive would be inclined to agree with you either.

The Fe tendencies of the board are starting to wear on me. We're forced with almost every post to have these disclaimers. I guess, to me, it should be obvious that you're not trying to be offensive. Do feelers really need to take everything so personally?

I give the disclaimer because I care about the feelings of others and how I affect them.

 

[NeverAmI]

It is almost like SJs, when they know something that sounds related to the topic, have an irresistible urge to let it out. Then they anchor themselves in that fact...it is what is known to them and so is the best place to start a "home base" in their mind. They never really consider that maybe their base is outside the relevant island.

This sounds like an assumption on their part. No one is immune to making incorrect assumptions, perhaps you have encountered sj's that make a lot of assumptions that are incorrect, but that doesn't make it universally true.

I can tell stories about some of the job trainings I've had...they were awfully done because the person teaching me was an SJ that overloaded me with detail completely irrelevant to what I needed to know.

I have read that sometimes intuitives are more inclined to go off on tangents about thoughts that don't necessarily apply to the main issue. I think both sides may be equally inclined to miscommunications/misunderstandings.

 

[VH]

I tend to like Se users, especially STPs.

It's the Si users that can really clash with me, especially STJ. The majority of what Duty explained early in this thread would most specifically apply to SJs for me.

 

[Raccoon Love]

I tend to like Se users, especially STPs.

It's the Si users that can really clash with me, especially STJ. The majority of what Duty explained early in this thread would most specifically apply to SJs for me.

I really can get a long with all types, its immaturity the kills it for me, Si can have a lot of good uses if used and developed correctly, though coming to agreements might be harder to achieve between S and N types. I think it has to do with how we view the world, we might have different ways of applying it but it is in the end how we perceive the world and our ideals is what clashes, this making T and F relationships more workable than N with S.

 

[Blind Bandit]

I tend to like Se users, especially STPs.

It's the Si users that can really clash with me, especially STJ. The majority of what Duty explained early in this thread would most specifically apply to SJs for me.

Pretty much. When most people complain about Sensors there mostly complaining about SJ's.

I do fine with most Se based senors. We may not get each other but we can still have a great time and be close friends.

SJ's can work but its tougher going.

 

[Norton]

Last week I went skiing in Aspen Snowmass. I took a group lesson (four people + instructor), as I usually do, and the instructor was amazing. Definitely an "S," probably an ESTP or ESFP. The guy was incredible. He would watch each of us and tell us in great detail what we had done wrong and how to correct our form. He noticed every subtle nuance and knew exactly the right words to use to describe how each of us could improve. And, each of us was different with our own particular problems. This guy was a great example of a brilliant "S" personality. In the off season, he is a wildlife photographer.

I might mention that my brother is a brilliant ISTP Ph.D. in solid state physics working at the company that probably made the main IC in the computer you're reading this with. Who says "S's" are less intelligent than "N's?"

 

[acd]

Who says "S's" are less intelligent and "N's?"

Angsty teenagers.

 

[Travo7]

Yes, this is very true. I've very often, especially with my family, gotten from sensors that looking from an intuitive point of view is somehow even defective. It's very stressful, especially when you have the knowledge of where that thought of their's comes from, yet they won't give you the time of day in your explanations.

This is one of the reasons I got so much relief from discovering my type: to know I wasn't crazy, or useless, just different.

 

[xizzax]

This is one of the reasons I got so much relief from discovering my type: to know I wasn't crazy, or useless, just different.

again, it seems that these Sensors are probably SJs..

i think SPs will appreciate your craziness, even though they might not understand or what to know about your POV.
i seem to get that a lot from my SP friends... actually i have a theory about myself being an ISXP but i'm not gonna go into that right now.

i feel i should be fair because there are some highly intuitive SPs out there... I think it's also about the maturity level of a person... but naturally, N types are more theoretical and S types work more with the concrete. That's vastly different already. If an S type learns to accept the esoteric side of life, and N types learn to be more .. hands-on, action-oriented... well, i guess what I'm trying to say is that no one is better than the other.

I have noticed this bias though.