# How do you tell sensors from intuitors?



## ChrisC99 (Aug 3, 2011)

That's still really unclear to me. They say sensors think more about relating to past memories and intuitors more about future possibilities - but doesn't pretty much everyone think about both quite a lot?

Is an intuitor more someone who thinks about creative/imaginative possibilities, while sensors just look at things as they are? Or is it more that intuitors are more focused on ideas than what's all around them? It still seems like it would be hard to tell which of those a person is thinking about more.


----------



## Napkin (Nov 29, 2015)

Intuitives often offer much broader responses to even the most basic questions.

Sensors also tend to have an "it is what it is" mentality.


----------



## ChrisC99 (Aug 3, 2011)

Napkin said:


> Intuitives often offer much broader responses to even the most basic questions.
> 
> Sensors also tend to have an "it is what it is" mentality.


So intuitives 'explore' concepts more, read into them more deeply, while sensors are more straightforward?


----------



## cipherpixy (Jul 9, 2015)

It's all about natural, unrestrained orientation. Weigh in on how much the person gravitate more towards when uncheck.


----------



## Jordgubb (Oct 5, 2013)

I could give you a really boring example. 

My Sensing Sister said to me: I need to throw the items in this box away because I have no room for them. (Box was full of miscellaneous items from her childhood.)

Intuitive I said: Your renovating your house right now. When it's finished you'll have plenty of room for those items. Besides you want to have kids in a few years, some of the items could work as nursery decorations. Put them in storage and decide after the house is finished. No need to throw them away hastily. 

SS: Oh, thats a good idea. I'll save them.


----------



## sudo (Dec 8, 2015)

Based on personal experience, communication differences. I tend to get misunderstood a lot from sensors in my real life interactions.

"No, no I didn't mean that way... I was only trying to illustrate" 

"that's not the way I meant it"

I struggle communicating as it is, but yeah, communication.


----------



## Highway Nights (Nov 26, 2014)

ChrisC99 said:


> So intuitives 'explore' concepts more, read into them more deeply, while sensors are more straightforward?


Possibly. I'd say that NPs read into them more while NJs read into them more deeply. Meanwhile, as the stereotype goes, SJs focus on the past and SPs focus on the present. But the main thing separating N/S is abstraction. Generally, Ns are more abstract and S types are more concrete. That's the only real difference by definition, everything else is just baggage. 

There are also things about Ns being more "intellectual" or whatever. That seems to be the case more often than not, but isn't a 100% foolproof way of typing someone and just seems to lead to otherwise obvious sensors being typed as an N just because they were a scientist or an innovator or something.


----------



## sudo (Dec 8, 2015)

Rebelgoatalliance said:


> Possibly. I'd say that NPs read into them more while NJs read into them more deeply. Meanwhile, as the stereotype goes, SJs focus on the past and SPs focus on the present. But the main thing separating N/S is abstraction. Generally, Ns are more abstract and S types are more concrete. That's the only real difference by definition, everything else is just baggage.
> 
> *There are also things about Ns being more "intellectual" or whatever*. That seems to be the case more often than not, but isn't a 100% foolproof way of typing someone and just seems to lead to otherwise obvious sensors being typed as an N just because they were a scientist or an innovator or something.



I am an N type and I am no where near being an intellectual. I am actually uncomfortable around them. I never understood the stereotype. 

I think that applies to a lot of the NTs though. Many seem very intellectual.


----------



## shameless (Apr 21, 2014)

AllMyFriendsAreDead said:


> I could give you a really boring example.
> 
> My Sensing Sister said to me: I need to throw the items in this box away because I have no room for them. (Box was full of miscellaneous items from her childhood.)
> 
> ...


Sorry but a sensor can figure that out, my ENFP friend for example wouldnt think about what you just said. I would. So no, thats not what distinguishes the two apart. Hate to be a meany but just no. A sensor with stronger Si, Se, or Ni is likely to think about what you just said. So um no just no. Actually what you said sounds almost the reverse like you might be the sensor and your sister the intuitive.


----------



## shameless (Apr 21, 2014)

A sensor can see what is not there people, and use imagination. (I do all the time). Are none of you people aware of SPs the artisans (artists & creators) clearly that is imagination. It just is often the concrete imagination. As in taking from reality to create rather then creating from abstract.


----------



## shameless (Apr 21, 2014)

You tell sensors based on if their functions correlate with an mbti letter stacking that is of a sensors order.


----------



## reckful (Jun 19, 2012)

SensationalCinnamon said:


> A sensor can see what is not there people, and use imagination. (I do all the time). Are none of you people aware of SPs the artisans (artists & creators) clearly that is imagination. It just is often the concrete imagination. As in taking from reality to create rather then creating from abstract.


The "ISFP as artist" notion came from David Keirsey, and I think Keirsey had quite a few insightful things to say, but the ISFP=artist thing was probably his biggest mistake. For more, see this post and this post.

Fifty years of studies (MBTI and Big Five both) have pretty clearly established that creativity/imagination and artistic interests are quite strongly correlated with an N preference, and this is consistent with both Jung's and Myers's takes on the types, and it applies whether the materials the artist/creator is working with are abstract or concrete (e.g., photographers and painters).

The Big Five factor that corresponds to an MBTI N preference is called Openness to Experience. The most well-established version of the Big Five is McCrae & Costa's NEO-PI-R, which breaks down each of the five factors into six "facets." The Openness to Experience facets include the following (with quoted descriptions from McCrae & Costa):


*Fantasy:* "Individuals who are open to fantasy have a vivid imagination and an active fantasy life. ... They elaborate and develop their fantasies and believe that imagination contributes to a rich and creative life."

*Aesthetics:* "High scorers on this scale have a deep appreciation for art and beauty. ... They need not have artistic talent. ... However, for many of them, interest in the arts will lead them to develop a wider knowledge and appreciation than the average individual."
In my experience, it's not that uncommon to find MBTI forumites who are somewhat confused on this issue because they think of themselves as fairly imaginative/creative/artistic _and_ they tend to type N on respectable dichotomy-based MBTI tests, but they've mistakenly concluded that they're S's based on bogus cognitive-function-based analysis.

Just in case that sounds at all familiar. :tongue:


----------



## with water (Aug 13, 2014)

I dunno, you can just kinda tell...

*ba dumm tss*


----------



## Stickman (Sep 30, 2012)

Metaphors.

While sensors generally have no trouble understanding them, they generally have the tendency not to use them.

Intuitives on the other hand, generally use them quite often to illustrate or clarify their thoughts.


----------



## IncoherentBabbler (Oct 21, 2013)

SensationalCinnamon said:


> Sorry but a sensor can figure that out, my ENFP friend for example wouldnt think about what you just said. I would. So no, thats not what distinguishes the two apart. Hate to be a meany but just no. A sensor with stronger Si, Se, or Ni is likely to think about what you just said. So um no just no. Actually what you said sounds almost the reverse like you might be the sensor and your sister the intuitive.


Rather than a sensor / intuitive example, I think it was more of a Judger / Perciever one. The judger seeks a conclusion while the perciever is looking at possibilities. Neither have much to do with being abstract, concrete, or anything else related to sensation(?) and intuition that I can see.


----------



## MuChApArAdOx (Jan 24, 2011)

Communication breakdowns is the first sign, I don't have breakdowns in communication with Intuitives, our communication pattern flows with ease. My ex is a walking ESTP and we had a difficult time communicating. When I see myself going over the same thing during conversation having to explain my thoughts, I know I am dealing with a sensor. Sensors are often confused by my line of thinking, I'm often confused with their thoughts because for me much of what they say is obvious and doesn't need to be pointed out. I've noticed when in company of 2 sensors, they are never confused with one another, however I'm left until they catch up with my thoughts because it often takes them longer to get to where my thoughts are headed.


My thoughts often come from an abstract place, their thoughts are concrete, and although it may not seem like a big deal, it is when trying to have a conversation.


----------



## Jordgubb (Oct 5, 2013)

SensationalCinnamon said:


> Sorry but a sensor can figure that out, my ENFP friend for example wouldnt think about what you just said. I would. So no, thats not what distinguishes the two apart. Hate to be a meany but just no. A sensor with stronger Si, Se, or Ni is likely to think about what you just said. So um no just no. Actually what you said sounds almost the reverse like you might be the sensor and your sister the intuitive.


Oh so serious... Your sorry seems empty.


----------



## Lunaena (Nov 16, 2013)

passcode said:


> Based on personal experience, communication differences. I tend to get misunderstood a lot from sensors in my real life interactions.
> 
> "No, no I didn't mean that way... I was only trying to illustrate"
> 
> ...


As an INFP, I struggle with communicating with my boss. She is most likely an ESFJ. Being a sensor, she is very grounded in her Si and the way she remembers how things is done. My way of explaining something, and her way of explaining something, is so different from each other that we always have misunderstandings. I relate to what you just wrote about how something may just be an illustration, while my boss will take it literal.


----------



## Saturnian Devil (Jan 29, 2013)

On a basic scale, intuitives tend to read into what sensors say while sensors take things literally. For the most part, anyway. There are exceptions. That being said, I personally think Enneagram can influence this a whole lot.


----------



## niss (Apr 25, 2010)

It never changes...


----------



## shameless (Apr 21, 2014)

AllMyFriendsAreDead said:


> Oh so serious... Your sorry seems empty.


Ok my delivery and tone originally was meant with a gentle 'correction' to my view. 

But now, haha you do provoke me to lmao :laughing: 

You seriously quoted me just to be butt hurt about if I was sorry or not. I was sorry to seem like I was trying to contradict you in a mean way. Not sorry to tell you what you distinguish as sensor or intuitive is wrong. 

I see your untyped let me help you, Fi is a dom or aux for you.


----------



## shameless (Apr 21, 2014)

MuChApArAdOx said:


> My ex is a walking ESTP and we had a difficult time communicating. When I see myself going over the same thing during conversation having to explain my thoughts, I know I am dealing with a sensor.


Yeah when my ENFP ex kept speaking down to me repeating himself in a condscending way mistaking his Ne as know all, I knew when I read mbti he was an intuitive. Lol no seriously I dont type like that just felt like putting that into perspective. Altho he did repeat the same things as if I needed it. (Just because I dont agree or subsricbe to what 'your' repeating does not mean I do not grasp it.-Was often a sentiment I would say). Anyways I typed him based off his cognitive functions I knew he was Ne, Fi. You appear to just assume someone who is not on your boat you need to repeat things to and then chalk them up as sensors (sounds bullet proof).



IncoherentBabbler said:


> Rather than a sensor / intuitive example, I think it was more of a Judger / Perciever one. The judger seeks a conclusion while the perciever is looking at possibilities. Neither have much to do with being abstract, concrete, or anything else related to sensation(?) and intuition that I can see.


I was responding tho to another user who used a specific example of sensor and intuitive. (It was her example, not mine).


----------



## Jordgubb (Oct 5, 2013)

SensationalCinnamon said:


> Ok my delivery and tone originally was meant with a gentle 'correction' to my view.
> 
> But now, haha you do provoke me to lmao :laughing:
> 
> ...


Am I supposed to cry now? :crying: 
Lets hug it out bro! 

I'm not sorry, that your not sorry, for your fake sorry.


----------



## shameless (Apr 21, 2014)

AllMyFriendsAreDead said:


> Am I supposed to cry now? :crying:
> Lets hug it out bro!
> 
> I'm not sorry, that your not sorry, for your fake sorry.


Fuck remind me not to use the word sorry incidentally ever in my response so as to avoid a silly rebuttal from a butt hurt Fi user. 

Trust me I am fucking sorry that I ever used the sorry. To have this silly exchange so a female Ne dom could feel witty and spunky. Blah save it for the boys sweety. I am gagging.


----------



## Jordgubb (Oct 5, 2013)

SensationalCinnamon said:


> Fuck remind me not to use the word sorry incidentally ever in my response so as to avoid a silly rebuttal from a butt hurt Fi user.
> 
> Trust me I am fucking sorry that I ever used the sorry. To have this silly exchange so a female Ne dom could feel witty and spunky. Blah save it for the boys sweety. I am gagging.


You haven't offend me, rather given me a good laugh at your one shot opinion. I think you're the butt-hurt Fi. No gooey insides hurt here. I'll leave you alone since I seem to offend you.


----------



## Saturnian Devil (Jan 29, 2013)

*shares popcorn with other members*


----------



## huhh (Apr 15, 2015)

A sensor will in general talk about facts, how it is.

An intuitive will generally talk about ideas, why it is

The S can just as well see opportunitys and create something new, but it mostly has to be grounded in some way while N can spin of af

N and S can very much meet "half way" but it won't be the same connection as two people of the same orientation would ideally have.

The easiest way to discern them is that you:
1. Know your own orientation
2. See if the person follow your train of tought easily or not

btw, someone with inferior Ti/Te will probably become very butthurt when their reasoning is attacked since the inferior function is both the most insecure function (and it's connected to the devilfunction which further facilitates this) but it's also the "life purpose" function and the focal point of the psyche.


----------



## Sybok (Mar 9, 2012)

sensors have different eyes. moving eyes. scanning eyes. direct contact.

intuitive people dont need eyes.


sadly, Sensors are more right (usually).


----------



## Bunny (Jul 11, 2015)

People confuse me for an N often and heck some people on here will argue that I am an N.
Just because of the way I think and because I have befriended a lot of N types.
I can follow an N's train of thought just fine.

_
Any _ Sensor who is in touch with their Ni/Ne can be just as abstract and intuitive as an N.

Look at Steve Jobs who is an ISTP but one that had a strong Tertiary Ni.
No way my Ni is as strong as Steve's XD but it's a good example of someone who can tap into their N as a Sensor just as good as an actual N can.


----------



## Convex (Jan 5, 2015)

@SensationalCinnamon

You reek of somebody who is in desperate need of control, everybody who merely walked in the direction of this thread can smell it.


----------



## PaladinX (Feb 20, 2013)

niss said:


> It never changes...


I thought that was an SJ trait?


----------



## shameless (Apr 21, 2014)

Convex said:


> @SensationalCinnamon
> 
> You reek of somebody who is in desperate need of control, everybody who merely walked in the direction of this thread can smell it.


I very rarely am combative in Per C, usually generally speaking... about the only place you find me getting irritable is listening to self typed intuitives give flamboyant distinctions of how they decipher intuitives and sensors. Its usually passive aggressive comments to dumb down sensors and unicorn themselves (and half the time the people are likely fricken sensors themselves). If you would like to deflect onto me with suggestions I have control issues to divert away from some of the baseless distinctions used to distinguish sensors from intuitives well you go ahead. As I said I very rarely take a combative role in Per C threads, even in threads most people get heated like debate and critical thinking sections. Your claim I am desperate for control is irrelevant to the thread.


----------



## PaladinX (Feb 20, 2013)

SensationalCinnamon said:


> I very rarely am combative in Per C, usually generally speaking... about the only place you find me getting irritable is listening to self typed intuitives give flamboyant distinctions of how they decipher intuitives and sensors. Its usually passive aggressive comments to dumb down sensors and unicorn themselves (and half the time the people are likely fricken sensors themselves). If you would like to deflect onto me with suggestions I have control issues to divert away from some of the baseless distinctions used to distinguish sensors from intuitives well you go ahead. As I said I very rarely take a combative role in Per C threads, even in threads most people get heated like debate and critical thinking sections. Your claim I am desperate for control is irrelevant to the thread.


Care to offer your own take on the difference between sensors and intuitors?


----------



## niss (Apr 25, 2010)

PaladinX said:


> I thought that was an SJ trait?


Touche. Made this SJ LOL.


----------



## Convex (Jan 5, 2015)

SensationalCinnamon said:


> I very rarely am combative in Per C, usually generally speaking... about the only place you find me getting irritable is listening to self typed intuitives give flamboyant distinctions of how they decipher intuitives and sensors. Its usually passive aggressive comments to dumb down sensors and unicorn themselves (and half the time the people are likely fricken sensors themselves). If you would like to deflect onto me with suggestions I have control issues to divert away from some of the baseless distinctions used to distinguish sensors from intuitives well you go ahead. As I said I very rarely take a combative role in Per C threads, even in threads most people get heated like debate and critical thinking sections. Your claim I am desperate for control is irrelevant to the thread.


And the trumpets they go.


----------



## Saturnian Devil (Jan 29, 2013)

*makes more popcorn*

We've ran out. Caramel or buttery? At your service.


----------



## Bunny (Jul 11, 2015)

Caramel please.


----------



## shameless (Apr 21, 2014)

PaladinX said:


> Care to offer your own take on the difference between sensors and intuitors?


I will try but as YOU specifically know from being actually certified in the study of mbti, you know my being ESTP its far easier for me to get my take off of situations then to re verbalize it (generally speaking). 

Ne Fi Doms usually seem most innovative with group interplay (A strong finesse with people) They often seem extremely enthusiastic with others. Their sister type Fi Ne dom is in simplest terms an introverted version of this (except the Fi lead can seem to from observation play or contribute into depressive states in some). Ne Fi doms seem more innovative in ideals what would be better in a dream like romantic state (that is not entirely all meant as an insult-this disposition serves as a reminder often in inspiring the softer side of people-think romance novelists). They can inspire humanity alot. 

Ne Ti Doms usually seem most innovative with ideas and theory and putting it into reality. While their brother type the introvert sees more into the theory discussion aspect rather then implementing (generally speaking) Like their extroverted brothers. 

Se Fi doms can usually be spotted fairly easy because of their enormous energy with the combo of their Se & Fi they frequently have the most in someones face energy in a room. Se Fi doms usually can make shift and shape their environment accordingly and effect their environment based off their emotional state. They often are giving the most energy or sucking the most energy (depending on the persons state). They consume the most often because they deplete the most as well with their Se Fi combo Fi Se doms are much harder to spot because they preserve this energy internal. They usually have a very stoic appearance of human vulnerability. 

Se Ti doms are often fast and proficient in energy. The energy they are putting out is more in strategy then their ESFP cousins. An Se dom is often fast in motion and reaction and simultaneously in their head and outter environment. Their brother type is very similar except that they do spend more time using their Ti and reacting after consideration. An Se Ti dom is likely to react first think later and have to re evaluate after the fact. A Ti dom is evaluating first and reacting after consideration. 

A way to decipher Se Ti, Ne Ti from Se Fi, Ne Fi is that the Ti is often questioning the data. While the Ne or Se Fi will often cite sources to back up their values and use words like morals more frequent. 

I will post this and then finish the last half now....
Can ya notice so far tho how my examples didnt include silly things like...
" I know someone is an intuitive if they are so oblivious to everything around them they could walk off a bridge" (You know some underhanded shit where its clear as day I would be so obviously snowflaking myself while simultaneously putting 8 personality types down) Ok now proceeding with Ni & Si

Ok now adding on...

Ni Te dom aux is usually easiest distinguished in their 4 steps ahead strategy vs Si Te tendency to cite the handbook. Ni Te are more likely to be thinking strategy ahead. While Si Te seem to make more reference to what has worked. (Generally speaking). 

Ni Fe dom aux tends to use their Ni to strategize harmony. While Si Fe for example tends to often reference values and morals as were taught or handed down. I am not saying they are always conventionalists tho. Thats not what it means. Its how the Si Fe user decides to subjectively breakdown their world. But they still use platforms like this as reference for their thoughts alot more. Then Ni Fe users who seem far more interested in connecting mysticism, patterns, and harmony all together often.


----------



## PaladinX (Feb 20, 2013)

SensationalCinnamon said:


> I will try but as YOU specifically know from being actually certified in the study of mbti, you know my being ESTP its far easier for me to get my take off of situations then to re verbalize it (generally speaking).
> 
> Ne Fi Doms usually seem most innovative with group interplay (A strong finesse with people) They often seem extremely enthusiastic with others. Their sister type Fi Ne dom is in simplest terms an introverted version of this (except the Fi lead can seem to from observation play or contribute into depressive states in some). Ne Fi doms seem more innovative in ideals what would be better in a dream like romantic state (that is not entirely all meant as an insult-this disposition serves as a reminder often in inspiring the softer side of people-think romance novelists). They can inspire humanity alot.
> 
> ...



And what would be the common link in Sensing types? Intuitive types?


----------



## PaladinX (Feb 20, 2013)

FWIW, here is what the official documentation says (Introduction to Type by Isabel Briggs Myers):


*Sensing*

People who prefer Sensing like to take in information that is real and tangible--what is actually happening. They are observant about the specifics of what is going on around them and are especially attuned to practical realities.

_Characteristics associated with people who prefer Sensing:_

Oriented to present realities
Factual and concrete
Focus on what is real and actual
Observe and remember specifics
Build carefully and thoroughly towards conclusions
Understand ideas and theories through practical applications
Trust experience
*Intuition*

People who prefer Intuition like to take in information by seeing the big picture, focusing on the relationships and connections between facts. They want to grasp patterns and are especially attuned to seeing new possibilities.

_Characteristics associated with people who prefer Intuition:_

Oriented to future possibilities
Imaginative and verbally creative
Focus on the patterns and meanings in data
Remember specifics when they relate to a pattern
Move quickly conclusions, follow hunches
Want to clarify ideas and theories before putting them into practice
Trust inspiration


More here:
http://personalitycafe.com/myers-briggs-forum/273458-mbti-reference.html#post8367034


----------



## IENTP (Nov 13, 2015)

Think about perceiving as your database(Ni, Ne, Si, Se) and the other main function such as Ti, Te, Fi, Fe as how you filter out the data.

Si, Ni types have their database inside their head, i.e. subjective perceiving

Si-*stored* subjective/modified information about events, concrete facts, data, events, one has perceived during their lifetime, i.e interpreting the present based on facts, real events from the past but it's a 
Ni-*stored* subjective information about the abstract, imaginary, patterns, connections, possibilities perceived in one's lifetime, i.e predicting the future based on the abstract past.

Se, Ne types have the database outside of their head, it's the world around them, i.e objective real-time perceiving

Se-*real time* perception of concrete, facts, events, as it happens around yourself now, alertness with reality, living in the now as it is objectively.
Ne-*real time* perception of the abstract, imaginary, possible, connections and patterns, concentrating on what can be, predicting the future based on the abstract objective reality

Filtering functions are judging functions

Te, Fe -extraverted filtering functions used to narrow down/filter one's "database", which is objective, realistic, factual filtering
Ti, Fi - introverted filtering functions used to narrow down/filter one's "database" and is subjective, abstract, theoretical filtering


Everyone has one introverted and one extraverted function as their main two functions and your strongest preferences for them determines your type. 

Additionally I or E determines whether your dominant function is extraverted or introverted. J and P determine whether the extraverted function is a perceiving one (Ne, Se) or a judging one (Te, Fe). If one has a perceiving extraverted function, then their judging function is introverted (e.g. INTP - Ti, Ne). If one has a judging extraverted function, then their perceiving function is introverted (e.g. INTJ - Ni, Te)

And having said all that, keep in mind that's how I "perceive" what the types are. 

But to answer the original question, there's no downside to how one "perceives", whether Ni, Ne, Si, Se, as any perceiving function has its own function in this world. And it's the diversity that pushes the world forward, the contribution from all people, together as equals. No one can do anything on their own bar wipe their ass and some famous rulers couldn't even do that on their own.....


----------



## niss (Apr 25, 2010)

blue_moon said:


> But why not Ni? Introverted intuition which is visionary function, adapts information by zooming out (see the big picture - embracing issue as the whole) and next extracting the most relevant content.


No, it is about seeing the end of a decision or course of action, from the present. It is no more big picture than any other introverted function.


----------



## ae1905 (Jun 7, 2014)

intuition is to sensation as poetry is to prose


----------



## PaladinX (Feb 20, 2013)

niss said:


> No, it is about seeing the end of a decision or course of action, from the present. It is no more big picture than any other introverted function.


So the forest is the end of a tree?


----------



## ShadowsRunner (Apr 24, 2013)

N---more likely to be seen as a freak, crackpot, or weirdo. People are more likely to go "huh" "what?" and look at you like you have gigantic horns growing out of your face, whilst rotating head at a 90 degree angle and surrounded by flames.

You try to have a discussion with people after being told continuously that you should open up or "share" more, only to be laughed at and ridiculed after you do, because everything you try to talk about is "so weird" and "out there"


----------



## niss (Apr 25, 2010)

PaladinX said:


> So the forest is the end of a tree?


Or, is the end of the forest a tree?


----------



## Planisphere (Apr 24, 2012)

MeteorShadow said:


> N---more likely to be seen as a freak, crackpot, or weirdo. People are more likely to go "huh" "what?" and look at you like you have gigantic horns growing out of your face, whilst rotating head at a 90 degree angle and surrounded by flames.
> 
> You try to have a discussion with people after being told continuously that you should open up or "share" more, only to be laughed at and ridiculed after you do, because everything you try to talk about is "so weird" and "out there"


Pretty much. But, to be fair, that really only applies when you see an N-type among S-types - specifically S-types who don't know said N-type personally very well. I've had S-type friends that wouldn't pick on me because of iNtuition, but that's because they took the time to know me and we managed to find some common interests. Can't talk about all the things I think around them though. I word things... weirdly.

As for the second thing, isn't that the usual demand made by insensitive Extroverts (or Introverts who think they're Extroverts for whatever reason) toward Introverts? The "weird" descriptor for iNtuitives, sure, but being a private person suggests Introversion to me.


----------



## Bunny (Jul 11, 2015)

People call me weird all the time.


----------



## Swede (Apr 2, 2013)

Planisphere said:


> As for the second thing, isn't that the usual demand made by insensitive Extroverts (or Introverts who think they're Extroverts for whatever reason) toward Introverts? The "weird" descriptor for iNtuitives, sure, but being a private person suggests Introversion to me.


Not sure I agree with this. 

My closest friend is an ENTJ - loud, bulldozery, awesome self-esteem, the life of the party, an extremely driven and self-motivate entrepreneur - in short, a pretty stereotypical caricature of an ENTJ. We hung out for several years while I always had the feeling that she was something very different behind her intimidating (for lack f a better word) facade. When she finally started to trust me 100%, she shared the real person behind the mask. 

The reason as to why we finally got there is likely because I was honest and open with her from the get-go; I never hid who I was. Being honest with who one is, is a common behavior for INTJs and probably why so many people pull away from us when we are younger - we don't TRY to fit in or play the game. Sure, we may deal with bad situations by shutting down, which is indeed a way to protect ones privacy, but building up an outwards facade is also a form of privacy protection. Introverts and extroverts might simply not recognize that we use different techniques.


----------



## Amy (Jan 15, 2015)

It's pretty simple: Sensors take decisions based on their experiences, while intuitives take decisions based on concepts.


----------



## SevSevens (Aug 5, 2015)

Karla said:


> It's pretty simple: Sensors take decisions based on their experiences, while intuitives take decisions based on concepts.


And at the end of life the two are flipped...sensors make decisions based on concepts and experience and intuitive people on experience and concepts since undoubtedly they were eventually both burned for their one sided nature.


----------



## Sunn (Mar 12, 2014)

Karla said:


> It's pretty simple: Sensors take decisions based on their experiences, *while intuitives take decisions based on concepts.*


_grosssssss_ 

you're triggering me. This is a concept-free zone ma'm' only the tangible are allowed here.


----------



## Swede (Apr 2, 2013)

Sunn said:


> _grosssssss_
> 
> you're triggering me. This is a concept-free zone ma'm' only the tangible are allowed here.


You probably don't want to hear this, but...

* *




...MBTI _is_ a concept...
* *


----------



## Amy (Jan 15, 2015)

SevSevens said:


> And at the end of life the two are flipped...sensors make decisions based on concepts and experience and intuitive people on experience and concepts since undoubtedly they were eventually both burned for their one sided nature.





Sunn said:


> _grosssssss_
> 
> you're triggering me. This is a concept-free zone ma'm' only the tangible are allowed here.


:shocked: 
I forgot one thing: The sensors take decisions based *first* on experiences, while intuitives take decisions based *first* on concepts.
Sorry guys, I made a mistake! :frustrating:


----------



## Sunn (Mar 12, 2014)

Swede said:


> You probably don't want to hear this, but...
> 
> * *
> 
> ...


Swede I'm gunna 


* *




tickle


 

you so freaking hard I swear

Absolutely unacceptable. :dry:


----------



## Planisphere (Apr 24, 2012)

Swede said:


> Not sure I agree with this.


Sorry, I meant it like this: all private people tend to be Introverted, but not all Introverts are private people.

But I agree otherwise.


----------



## ShadowsRunner (Apr 24, 2013)

Planisphere said:


> Pretty much. But, to be fair, that really only applies when you see an N-type among S-types - specifically S-types who don't know said N-type personally very well. I've had S-type friends that wouldn't pick on me because of iNtuition, but that's because they took the time to know me and we managed to find some common interests. Can't talk about all the things I think around them though. I word things... weirdly.
> 
> As for the second thing, isn't that the usual demand made by insensitive Extroverts (or Introverts who think they're Extroverts for whatever reason) toward Introverts? The "weird" descriptor for iNtuitives, sure, but being a private person suggests Introversion to me.


I don't know.

It's just been the common experience for me; but I have found other N's to find me strange as well. 

I guess I am wired differently.


----------



## Planisphere (Apr 24, 2012)

MeteorShadow said:


> I don't know.
> 
> It's just been the common experience for me; but I have found other N's to find me strange as well.
> 
> I guess I am wired differently.


I'm sorry if I sounded harsh. That was honestly not my intention. I merely thought I'd point out my own observations as everyone else has pointed out theirs. I've no doubt there are many answers, as is often the case with _any _subjective system classifying personality like MBTI. It would be better to judge each hypothesis on a case-by-case basis.

As for what the difference is between Sensing and Intuition _objectively_... well, that's impossible if people keep trusting tests or thinking they must fit perfectly within a single type. It could be as simple as Sensors being more literal and Intuitives being more abstract, but I bet my life's savings somebody will reply with "But I know a Sensor/Intuitive who..." followed by an example. Ultimately, the only way to answer this is to first have a less subjective way of determining types, preferably by using more precise definitions and unbiased tests administered by unbiased experts. And to be an unbiased expert, one has to have precise definitions and unbiased tests, etc. (rinse and repeat).

It's a cycle I don't see MBTI getting out of anytime soon, unfortunately. Hence why I won't argue definitions - only share those colored by my own observations and experiences, as everyone else does.


----------



## ShadowsRunner (Apr 24, 2013)

Planisphere said:


> I'm sorry if I sounded harsh. That was honestly not my intention. I merely thought I'd point out my own observations as everyone else has pointed out theirs. I've no doubt there are many answers, as is often the case with _any _subjective system classifying personality like MBTI. It would be better to judge each hypothesis on a case-by-case basis.
> 
> As for what the difference is between Sensing and Intuition _objectively_... well, that's impossible if people keep trusting tests or thinking they must fit perfectly within a single type. It could be as simple as Sensors being more literal and Intuitives being more abstract, but I bet my life's savings somebody will reply with "But I know a Sensor/Intuitive who..." followed by an example. Ultimately, the only way to answer this is to first have a less subjective way of determining types, preferably by using more precise definitions and unbiased tests administered by unbiased experts. And to be an unbiased expert, one has to have precise definitions and unbiased tests, etc. (rinse and repeat).
> 
> It's a cycle I don't see MBTI getting out of anytime soon, unfortunately. Hence why I won't argue definitions - only share those colored by my own observations and experiences, as everyone else does.


Nothing you said sounded harsh 

I've sort of grown weary with the MBTI anyway. I think it's too vast of a simplification and generalization on human nature. 

But what's the opposite? I know there's the Big Six, or whatever it's called, but honestly I find it too negative(and no, I don't somehow find that it makes it more objective) 

It might as well be at the back of the DSM. 

I suppose I'm more of a fan of Maslow when it comes to trying to look at the way we function.


----------



## Planisphere (Apr 24, 2012)

MeteorShadow said:


> Nothing you said sounded harsh
> 
> I've sort of grown weary with the MBTI anyway. I think it's too vast of a simplification and generalization on human nature.
> 
> ...


Big Six is sort of broad too, but it's the closest thing I've found to a system of personality classification based on neurological research. While there's some evidence for and against Maslow's infamous theory, I find myself leaning towards the camp who thinks it needs to be revised. His theory doesn't take into account cognitive dissonance with developmental priority, nor does it recognize the effects of cultural values on an individuals' personality.

I'm not entirely convinced of any personality theory being more "correct" than another, but it can still be fun to dabble in them sometimes, if only to keep the hamster wheel in my head running on its little treadmill.


----------

