# What Do Sensors (S's) Really Think



## WesAnderson (Apr 17, 2012)

Okay so I love this forum. I come here often, either to just browse interesting topics or to find an answer to a question relating to MBTI (i.e. South Park character personalities).

Here is my problem. As much as I love PersonalityCafe I think that it has a VERY HIGH iNTUITIVE SLANT.


*I want feedback from sensors!* I want to hear what S's have to say. You all do make up 85% of the population, after all LOL 

*Do you like Ns?*  Do they annoy you? Do you feel like the online community (dominated by ituitives) bashes sensors?

I always need to hear both sides of every story and I feel like *90% of the opinions, feedback, videos, web pages and posts that I have read and watched have been from the N perspective.* 

Look on Youtube. Put in any personality that has an "N" in it and you will see tons of videos of people who are that discussing how they think. Do the same thing with an "S" personality and you might get one video, if that.

---------------Background (Why I Am Asking This)---------------


Now, keep in mind that I am a very high "N." My "SE" is my least developed function and though "Si" is my 3rd or 4th function I only use it when recalling data to back up my high Ne and Ti.

But, in all honestly, mostly ALL the forums and Youtube videos are dominated by Ns. I think that the reason is because we have a natural disposition to learning new things, how people think and how they process information. Most intuitives (Ns) are naturally drawn to Myers-Briggs, Kiersey, Jungian Cognitive Function, etc once they find out about it. 

People who have taken the test who are "Ss" never seem to dive deep into it. In my experience most sensors (S) have, at best, a quick attention span for these kinds of things unless its for their job. They think its "cool" but not one that I have had take the test been drawn or fascinated my MBTI. They read their personality, think its "pretty accurate" and quickly move on without thinking about its actual application or dive into the finer points.

Am I wrong? Are there more sensors out there than I think who study and likes MBTI as well. I see some from time to time but its rare.


----------



## Kito (Jan 6, 2012)

There's not much sensor bias, really. I think that having an N preference is constantly overhyped, though. We noticed in our forum how an INFP article has about six paragraphs on how they use Fi, yet the same article for ISFPs only has one, and then quickly moves on as if there's nothing more to say about us.

If sensors weren't commonly portrayed as close-minded, boring and crowd-following individuals then I don't think there'd be a sensor bias at all. You'd be surprised how many sensors on here have mistyped themselves as iNtuitives, because they've fallen into the trap of believing that only iNtuitives can be imaginative, creative, thoughtful etc.


----------



## Tad Cooper (Apr 10, 2010)

I don't really see a huge bias anymore. There was for a while, but a bunch of pro-sensor threads happened and people lightened up about it (it caused alot of conflict though which wasn't great).
I like Ns, I have N and S friends and family, all who I like!


----------



## Phoenix0 (Mar 16, 2012)

There is no denying the ratio of S to N in real life exceeds the amount on the internet. In my class if I were to type people myself I would be the only NT, there would be about 2-5 NFs, and the rest S's. But I am not the best typer in the world so...


----------



## Coburn (Sep 3, 2010)

I don't care what type you are, so long as you're not an asshole or a wimp, we should get along fine.



And just to counteract the N creative slant, I'm a screenwriter. Which means I get...oooooh, all creative and sparkly and stuff.


----------



## Donovan (Nov 3, 2009)

tine said:


> I don't really see a huge bias anymore. There was for a while, but a bunch of pro-sensor threads happened and people lightened up about it (it caused alot of conflict though which wasn't great).
> I like Ns, I have N and S friends and family, all who I like!


lol, i noticed the change as well. for a while there was almost a "reverse-typism" theme going on.

side note: it's interesting to see the changes on this site, like a seed is planted and has a certain effect, such as what's held as a "common belief to PerC" changing from one idea and gravitating towards another (or maybe it's just my own perception and nothing to do with the reality of PerC...?).


----------



## Jungian (Apr 14, 2012)

I'm a sensor who's really got into MBTI. I came at it from an interest in Carl Jung, but I think I've got into it because of my interest in people and relationships as an introvert with extraverted feeling. But as for sensing, I think I do generally tend to glance over things, taking them on face value and don't often get deeply into things as much as I have done with MBTI. I do often feel overwhelmed by new technology - took me a while to get into Skype for instance. I guess like you say sensors prefer to use experience to learn new things rather than throwing themselves into something new? 

I also find the Cafe slightly overwhelming as there's so much here, I want to go through it all systematically, the S that I am. Whereas an N might skip around the place quickly from one thing to the next. I think the internet is a great place for intuitives, there's infinite possibilities and distractions and you can have as much or as little as you want. So for me its overwhelming and often don't know where to start as I have little imagination for the possibilities of the internet and find myself stuck to the same websites. I know there's infinite knowledge out there but have to kind of plan what I want to find out. 

Would be interested to hear what you think of my thoughts on your interesting question!


----------



## Spades (Aug 31, 2011)

A large proportion of N's are mistypes because the functions are often thoroughly misunderstood.


----------



## LotusBlossom (Apr 2, 2011)

Yeah. We don't really think. We don't dive deep into anything that isn't blatantly shoved in our face. We don't really care for the deeper meaning of things or the global connections of anything. Nah.


----------



## Inguz (Mar 10, 2012)

I find it very interesting to finally be on the receiving side of this kind of bias. Really. I'm male and belong to the ethical majority of Sweden, so this kind of treatment is an entirely new experience to me. 

If I like Ns? Yes, I do.



WesAnderson said:


> People who have taken the test who are "Ss" never seem to dive deep into it. In my experience most sensors (S) have, at best, a quick attention span for these kinds of things unless its for their job. They think its "cool" but not one that I have had take the test been drawn or fascinated my MBTI. They read their personality, think its "pretty accurate" and quickly move on without thinking about its actual application or dive into the finer points.


Hm... This is like saying that Feeling-types would do exactly the same.


----------



## Stephen (Jan 17, 2011)

WesAnderson said:


> Here is my problem. As much as I love PersonalityCafe I think that it has a VERY HIGH iNTUITIVE SLANT.


I think that's normal for personality theory forums. I believe it's a by-product of the open nature of the Internet itself. There are blogs and websites all over the place filled with lies and stereotypes, and since they're so available and there's no rules policing these sites, people assume the stereotypes are true (here it is in print!).

There are layers of effect, I think: for one, some of those who test as sensing types see that bullshit and walk away. Second, the many dichotomy tests and websites mislead the creative, innovative, or intelligent into thinking they must be intuitive, or that one can somehow be "100% N" when that would be humanly impossible. Third, the cognitive function tests mislead people into thinking they can use functions that are in direct contradiction with each other. Fourth, nothing. There is no fourth thing, but I read somewhere on the Internet that ISTJs like lists, and four is bigger than three... and bigger is always better.



> I want feedback from sensors! I want to hear what S's have to say. You all do make up 85% of the population, after all LOL


85%? That's easily the highest number I've seen for this. Source?



> Do you like Ns? Do they annoy you? Do you feel like the online community (dominated by ituitives) bashes sensors?


All else being equal, Ns are no different than Ss to me in person. It's not a dichotomy that makes a difference to me. It's only when someone picks a type, any type, and reads a stereotype and then decides they need to act like that stereotype, that we have problems.



> Now, keep in mind that I am a very high "N." My "SE" is my least developed function and though "Si" is my 3rd or 4th function I only use it when recalling data to back up my high Ne and Ti.


It doesn't work that way. If you're an ENTP, you're not using Se. You're using Ne, Ti, Fe, and Si, ideally in that order unless something's wrong. Ne and Se are effectively opposites. You use Ne and Si all the time, in tandem, on a sliding scale as the situation demands. They don't take in data, they define your attitude toward it. You'll be much more comfortable with Ne than Si. I'm guessing you're saying you're a "very high N" because of a cognitive function test, right? If you're ENTP, your Ne and Si are as far apart as they can be, just as they are for me, just in the reverse order. So yes, in that sense, you use your Ne much more comfortably than your Si.



> But, in all honestly, mostly ALL the forums and Youtube videos are dominated by Ns. I think that the reason is because we have a natural disposition to learning new things, how people think and how they process information. Most intuitives (Ns) are naturally drawn to Myers-Briggs, Kiersey, Jungian Cognitive Function, etc once they find out about it.


Actually, I think it's because those who "have a natural disposition to learning new things, how people think and how they process information" assume they must be intuitive. It may also be in part because if you're an ESFP or ESFJ and you make a video, the comments would fill with those who believe the stereotypes. They'd be either insulting your intelligence or insisting you're mistyped if you're too smart.



> They read their personality, think its "pretty accurate" and quickly move on without thinking about its actual application or dive into the finer points.


Actual "practical" application is one of the few positive traits that are consistently applied to sensing types, even in the stereotypes. I see it all the time in descriptions, things like, "sensors only care about theory if you can show them a practical application." That kind of fits me, in all honesty, but with personality theory, I get the point immediately: to understand myself and others. Bitchin' concept, I'm on board.



> Am I wrong? Are there more sensors out there than I think who study and likes MBTI as well. I see some from time to time but its rare.


There are lots of them here. Many of the people here (Ns and Ss alike) take one test and trust the results. However, there are a number of busy, well-read, and deeply interested sensing types here who have gone deeper into the subject. I would consider @Functianalyst , @madhatter , @Kayness , @Fizz , @fourtines , @walking tourist , @KuRoMi , @teddy564339 , @Owfin, and @MBTI Enthusiast some of the best.


----------



## WesAnderson (Apr 17, 2012)

Kitzara,

Thanks for the reply. I loved it. I agree with you. Sensors can have an imagination too. They can be smart and many of them are exciting. 

So in your opinion what is the real difference between them?


----------



## WesAnderson (Apr 17, 2012)

JuliaRhys said:


> I don't care what type you are, so long as you're not an asshole or a wimp, we should get along fine.
> 
> 
> 
> And just to counteract the N creative slant, I'm a screenwriter. Which means I get...oooooh, all creative and sparkly and stuff.


I have a question Julia. I am all about seeing every angle and all sides to everything. Here goes.....

ESTJs, as a whole, have a terrible reputation. Though usually high extroverts they seem to garner a lot of enemies. They have a image of being bossy, forward, concrete about everything (no gray areas) and many times jerks.

Frankly, I know a few and I could see how many people would think that. They more or less have the typical "ESTJ" bossy attitude. 

Now, for me, you have to understand that I have thick skin and though they do annoy me I am not bothered by them. You know exactly what you are getting and I like how they get things done. Frankly, I am scatter-brained (which they hate) and I see the benefits of somewhat extreme "j-nish." Unless you are a rocket scientist being a high P causes you to back track a lot.

Ok, so here is my question. I figure I would go right to the horse's month: are the stereotypes true? Are you bossy? Do you rub people the wrong way even though you mean no harm? 

Tell me what goes on in a typical ESTJ's mind.


----------



## Kito (Jan 6, 2012)

WesAnderson said:


> Kitzara,
> 
> Thanks for the reply. I loved it. I agree with you. Sensors can have an imagination too. They can be smart and many of them are exciting.
> 
> So in your opinion what is the real difference between them?


Huh. The main difference I think is that sensors find satisfaction in the real world while intuitives find satisfaction in the world of possibilities and ideas. Though there's way more differences than that, that's just the main one I seem to notice.


----------



## Fizz (Nov 13, 2010)

@WesAnderson: Your movies are too quirky, arrogant, and overrated you hack! That's what I think!


OK, I actually like some of Wes Anderson's films. 

Also, don't make a thread like this, it treads on that line that just makes you look silly and ignorant. There's no difference in what we think about. My intention is not to insult you but by making a thread like this, you're insulting Sensors. Not only by the subject matter but grouping Si and Se users together.


----------



## WesAnderson (Apr 17, 2012)

Kitzara said:


> Huh. The main difference I think is that sensors find satisfaction in the real world while intuitives find satisfaction in the world of possibilities and ideas. Though there's way more differences than that, that's just the main one I seem to notice.


What I am saying is that I have come to realize that though I love Myers-Briggs, Kiersey and Jung they all have a bias. They were all "Ns". When you are reading personalities they are typically coming from an "N" perception things. 

Don't get me wrong, I love being an intuitive. But, my Ne, Ti and Si make me the ideal person to sniff out inconsistencies and I am seeing a huge one: point of view.

I have studied everything you can think of about MBTI/Jung/Kiersey and the thought hit me a week ago......

This crucial fact popped in my head (Ne) and will not leave until I get to the bottom of it. 

*All the major people who contributed to the MBTI system, as we know it today, were "Ns."*

David Kiersey - INTP

Carl Jung - INFP

Isabel Briggs Myers - INFP

Katherine Briggs - INFJ

Peter Myers - ENFP

Katherine Myers - INFP

Not one of them was an "S." Now, as I recall in school (can't remember what class though) whenever you read anything you are supposed to examine the point of view. You need to understand what vantage point is the information being written from.

Does this person lean a certain way? have some type of prejudice? have a their own preconceived notions that are firmly entrenched?

So, what I am saying is that everything we know, all the things we studied, all the original personality tests, were written by people with somewhat of an intuitive lean.

That is why I think that all the S personalities are not looked high upon while all the N personalities are. 

We are painted as the higher thinkers while sensors are painted as the village idiots.

Now, I am not saying this is not the case. In order for a few to have a large amount of power and money they must have a large number of followers (aka slaves, indentured servants, mill workers, pheasants, and so forth).

Think about how messed up if it was switched and 85% of the world was N and 15% S. Everyone would be thinking and there would not be enough action.

As an ENTP I always (its a curse) strive to see both sides as equally and unbiased as I can. Its impossible to be 100% neutral. But *I want more Myers-Briggs materials and research done by sensors*. I am wondering if any of the information we read about them has actually been written by them???

I might even go so far as to ask that the whole test be re-made. Its time. I want a panel of ten experts to work on it. Take Jung/ Myers Briggs and Kiersey and combine them altogether. I want half the experts to be Ns and the other half to be Ss. That way I know each side has equal input and we get a more accurate picture of how everyone really is. 


-WesAnderson (Wesley Barras)


----------



## WesAnderson (Apr 17, 2012)

Fizz said:


> @WesAnderson: Your movies are too quirky, arrogant, and overrated you hack! That's what I think!
> 
> 
> OK, I actually like some of Wes Anderson's films. Also, don't make a thread like this, it treads on that line that just makes you look silly and ignorant. There's no difference in what we think about.


Flizz,

Leave it to an ESTP to say something like that LOL Flizz if I didn't know you all love to get under people's skin (much like me) I would take what you just said seriously.

Now about Wes Anderson movies- they are a love em'/ hate em' genre. I will say that you probably do have to be an "N" to relate to them. His movies have all sorts of hidden meanings and what not.


----------



## Kito (Jan 6, 2012)

Yeah, I can't say I'm overly fond of the tests either. They're all based on some nasty stereotypes... I almost always see questions asking if you're imaginative or factual. Being factual is a T thing, and being imaginative isn't restricted to intuitives! I think they need to be based more off the functions, and not the preferences... Keirsey's not too popular on this website for his pretty obvious sensor bias.


----------



## Fizz (Nov 13, 2010)

@WesAnderson you quoted me before I edited it. I'm unintentionally harsh the first time around.

Also saying that Ns will relate to Wes Anderson films more is ridiculous. I know plenty of people of different types that enjoy his films.


----------



## Promethea (Aug 24, 2009)

WesAnderson said:


> Flizz,
> 
> Leave it to an ESTP to say something like that LOL Flizz if I didn't know you all love to get under people's skin (much like me) I would take what you just said seriously.
> 
> Now about Wes Anderson movies- they are a love em'/ hate em' genre. I will say that you probably do have to be an "N" to relate to them. His movies have all sorts of hidden meanings and what not.


S types aren't incapable of getting hidden meanings, just like they aren't incapable of seeing that something is a pretentious cliche pile of pseudo-intellectual shit.


----------



## Eleventeenth (Aug 24, 2011)

JuliaRhys said:


> To elaborate on Teddy's comment--
> 
> Look at the below post you sent me:
> 
> ...


That's a point well taken. I see where you're coming from on that. I think maybe the OP could have approached that better. I do think that he just wants to understand your own personal experience. He wants to know if you see yourself as bossy and if you ever make enemies by being bossy (like the stupid stereotypes seem to suggest). My step-sister is an ESTJ and I've asked her the very same question actually. I said, "You're really firm with your employees at work. Do they think you're bossy? Do you think you're bossy?" And she said, "Heck yeah, I'm bossy - only because a lot of them are total slackers so I have to be bossy. If they did their work I wouldn't have to be bossy. You get paid to work...so if you want a paycheck, then you better be working!" And not all of her employees like her - and she admits that. So, in my sister's case - she is bossy and she does have people who don't like her. It's the exact same thing with my old ESTJ boss and another ESTJ family member. All 3 of them are supervisors/small business owners and all 3 would say the same thing. That doesn't mean that all ESTJ's are bad people, it just means that 3 of the ESTJ's that I know are very firm bosses who have high expectations of their employees (and some of the employees think they are bossy) and not all of their employees like them. Some employees do like them, others do not. Or they like them sometimes, don't like them other times. 

So, people can observe certain things/trends with ESTJ's that they know (or any other type), but some people like to come on this website to learn about other people and other types. So, even if I know 3 ESTJ's that are bossy, it's still interesting to hear your input and your personal experience - what it's like for you, as an ESTJ. That helps us (other types) to maybe get some insight or understanding into what the ESTJ's might be thinking (i.e., they just want their employees to work hard and stop goofing around!). We're not asking to give you a hard time, we're just asking "What is life like for you, ESTJ? Help us understand."

People say all kinds of crazy stuff about INTP's. Some of it's true, some it's nonsense. But, if they ask me what it's like for me, I don't have a problem telling them because that's why we come on this website - to gain understanding - or at least that's why I come here. Can't speak for everyone.


----------



## Brian1 (May 7, 2011)

WesAnderson said:


> Okay so I love this forum. I come here often, either to just browse interesting topics or to find an answer to a question relating to MBTI (i.e. South Park character personalities).
> 
> Here is my problem. As much as I love PersonalityCafe I think that it has a VERY HIGH iNTUITIVE SLANT.
> 
> ...


 Thank you for wanting to my opinion. Someone who wants to hear what a Sensor has to say. I think that the Republican primary race was too short and now that it's over, I do wish there's this let's stick with Rick group of blue collar voters that puts fissures into the Republican Party, in a way that a group of voters representing Hillary tried to make life hell for Obama after that primary race was over. I think we need to have more DeLoran cars out on the market today and more wing tipped cars. I believe the world is going to hell in a hand basket and that Gary Sinese should go back to making films, instead of doing CSI:nY, though I like that show very much, I also liked him in Snake Eyes opposite Nic Cage. 

Now my opinion on Ns, keep in mind I do not go around asking people of all different sorts from every walk of life are you an N?, as if that was some sort of secret code like how they used in the speakeasy days when you wanted a beer but not jail time. I guess yes sometimes they are fun...next question. 

I only like the internet community bashs when iNtuitive bash sensors in those great big birthday bashs, New Years Eve Bashs, which I have heard are really fun, though I've never been invited to one. I sincerely hope this answers your questions, and now I would like to sign off by saying this is Brian1, channeling Rosanne Rosannadanna.


----------



## Neon Knight (Aug 11, 2010)

Brian1 said:


> I only like the internet community bashs when iNtuitive bash sensors in those great big birthday bashs, New Years Eve Bashs, which I have heard are really fun, though I've never been invited to one. I sincerely hope this answers your questions, and now I would like to sign off by saying this is Brian1, channeling Rosannadanna.


Actually N bashes happen "irl" as well. See here a bunch of Ns picking on some poor sod, this doesn't look like fun however...look at the poor guy lying there helpless and beaten, all hot and sweaty and needing to be rescued:








/derail


----------



## Brian1 (May 7, 2011)

KuRoMi said:


> Actually N bashes happen "irl" as well. See here a bunch of Ns picking on some poor sod, this doesn't look like fun however...look at the poor guy lying there helpless and beaten, all hot and sweaty and needing to be rescued:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Well I guess it's always something.


----------



## Kabosu (Mar 31, 2012)

I like seeing this thread. I like finding the other perspective.

And then there's the silliness of the thread.


----------



## teddy564339 (Jun 23, 2010)

JuliaRhys said:


> To elaborate on Teddy's comment--
> 
> Look at the below post you sent me:
> 
> ...



I hadn't even looked at @_WesAnderson_ 's post about ESTJs. I think it's a really good example of what I referred to. To be honest, unlike the OP, I really can see how this post can be very offensive (though I may be more easily offended than an ESTJ might be).

To go back to the black/white example...this would be like me (as a white person) saying to a black person "Black people have a bad reputation of being lazy. Every black person I've been around has been lazy. But I know they can't *all* be lazy, right? You're a black person. Are you lazy? Tell me how a black person perceives all of this."

Now, one could argue that this is a whole lot better than just saying "Black people are lazy, I've made up my mind." But that doesn't mean that it still doesn't have a racist mentality. It's making a negative assumption about a group and starting from that point, instead of starting from a neutral standpoint. 

And it's not just because the person asking is white. The reason why it doesn't happen happen where a black person asks another black person to say if all black people are lazy is that the majority of black people wouldn't even ask the question in the first place because it doesn't really make sense. This is why I mentioned earlier that what WesAnderson's ENFJ sister said was only partially true.


Now, one might say "But MBTI is different than race, since type influences behavior." While there's some truth to that, to me, I've never read anything about ESTJs that makes me feel they're more negative than other types. I've never read a book that said ESTJs are bossy or are jerks. 

You mentioned earlier that you think many N type theorists have a biased attitude towards S's. I haven't read the work of all of them, but I didn't find Keirsay's descriptions of Ss to be negatively biased.

So here's my point: It's just as much about our perceptions as readers as it is about the authors'. WesAnderson may have read an ESTJ description and found it to be negative, and I may have found it to be neutral. It may just be that things that I don't have a problem with are things that WesAnderson does. So he interprets it as being negative and I don't.


It's the same thing with an ESTJ being "bossy". An NTP may find something to be bossy that I don't. What does "bossy" truly mean? There are so many different interpretations of the word. 


So I think part of my point is... @_WesAnderson_ , if you truly are interested in learning about the truth behind Ss and other types, it's not just asking them...it's also examining your own perceptions and understanding that some of them might not be accurate, and if they're not, you may have to change them.


For example, I don't find ESTJs to be bossy. I've only had interactions with some of them, but the ones I've interacted with I've found to be very helpful, stabilizing, and willing to answer my questions.

But I'm not going to come in here and think "ESTJs are fantastic, and anyone who doesn't like them needs to prove me wrong." I have to understand that my positive interactions with ESTJs have just as much to do with me as they do with the ESTJ. Part of the reason why I haven't found the ESTJs that I have to be bossy is that I prefer to have very clear intructions so that I can follow them. The ESTJs I've mentioned have been in positions where they have had authority over me, and for me, I view that as a situation where they can help me. It has just as much to do with my own personality as an ISFJ as it does with them. An NTP might find the same ESTJs I'm referring to to be very bossy because an NTP might have more of a need to be independent.


So my point is...I think WesAnderson made some negative assumptions about ESTJs based on his own experience, and instead of starting from scratch, it's like he started off with the assumption and was trying to get someone to prove that they were wrong...like the assumption was the default position.


Now, I don't think there's anything wrong with this if WesAnderson is willing to remove these assumptions. To me, that truly is being open-minded about type. 





Eleventeenth said:


> That's a point well taken. I see where you're coming from on that. I think maybe the OP could have approached that better. I do think that he just wants to understand your own personal experience. He wants to know if you see yourself as bossy and if you ever make enemies by being bossy (like the stupid stereotypes seem to suggest). My step-sister is an ESTJ and I've asked her the very same question actually. I said, "You're really firm with your employees at work. Do they think you're bossy? Do you think you're bossy?" And she said, "Heck yeah, I'm bossy - only because a lot of them are total slackers so I have to be bossy. If they did their work I wouldn't have to be bossy. You get paid to work...so if you want a paycheck, then you better be working!" And not all of her employees like her - and she admits that. So, in my sister's case - she is bossy and she does have people who don't like her. It's the exact same thing with my old ESTJ boss and another ESTJ family member. All 3 of them are supervisors/small business owners and all 3 would say the same thing. That doesn't mean that all ESTJ's are bad people, it just means that 3 of the ESTJ's that I know are very firm bosses who have high expectations of their employees (and some of the employees think they are bossy) and not all of their employees like them. Some employees do like them, others do not. Or they like them sometimes, don't like them other times.



This is a good example of what I was talking about regarding perceptions. In this case, it's not about whether something is bossy or not, it's whether being bossy is a positive or a negative. It sounds like your sister is saying that if her behavior is bossy, she views it as a good thing rather than a bad one. An employee may view her behavior as a bad thing. The behavior is still there, but it's a judgment to refer to it as one way or another. The key thing is understanding the perspective from both sides to understand why people feel the way that they do.

To me, the behavior she's describing isn't bossy...to me it sounds like she's doing her job. And that's probably why if I worked with her I wouldn't find it to be bossy (though it kind of depends...there is such a thing as micro-management). But that doesn't mean that I'm going to think that anyone who doesn't think it's bossy is wrong. I understand that different people have different preferences in their working style.


The problem with WesAnderson's post is that there were some other negatives thrown in there, saying things like ESTJs have a horrible reputation and that they're jerks. It's possible WesAnderson would view your sister's behavior as fitting that description. So that's my point...it's more about the perception of the behavior than the behavior itself. 





Eleventeenth said:


> So, people can observe certain things/trends with ESTJ's that they know (or any other type), but some people like to come on this website to learn about other people and other types. So, even if I know 3 ESTJ's that are bossy, it's still interesting to hear your input and your personal experience - what it's like for you, as an ESTJ. That helps us (other types) to maybe get some insight or understanding into what the ESTJ's might be thinking (i.e., they just want their employees to work hard and stop goofing around!). We're not asking to give you a hard time, we're just asking "What is life like for you, ESTJ? Help us understand."
> 
> People say all kinds of crazy stuff about INTP's. Some of it's true, some it's nonsense. But, if they ask me what it's like for me, I don't have a problem telling them because that's why we come on this website - to gain understanding - or at least that's why I come here. Can't speak for everyone.



And I agree with you that this is good and it's the right way to go about doing it. But as you've said, there were some problems with the way WesAnderson worded his posts about ESTJs. Like I said, it made some negative assumptions instead of starting from a neutral standpoint of asking the questions. This is ok, as long as those negative assumptions can be removed and everyone can start from a better starting point. 

And I think it can get frustrating feeling like one has to "defend" their type when this happens, especially if it happens more than once.


----------



## Erbse (Oct 15, 2010)

WesAnderson said:


> Here is my problem. As much as I love PersonalityCafe I think that it has a VERY HIGH iNTUITIVE SLANT.


What makes you think this should be different? After all this is forum revolving around *theoretical psychology*.



> *I want feedback from sensors!* I want to hear what S's have to say. You all do make up 85% of the population, after all LOL


What would make an S feedback particularly interesting on the subject of *theoretical psychology*? You either understand the basics and build on it, or you do not. It's more hit and miss more than anything else. Given the 'LOL' at the end, which completely strips you of any seriousness it's also highly likely that you have *not* understood the basics. Granted, the 'LOL' is far less of an indicator than this very thread's existence in the first place.



> *Do you like Ns?* Do they annoy you? Do you feel like the online community (dominated by ituitives) bashes sensors?


You're doing great in setting up divide where none should be. In your own mind there obviously exists a S/N divide. Let me tell you this, though: Out of I/E, T/F and S/N the S/N divide is the least contributing factor that creates difference.



> I always need to hear both sides of every story and I feel like *90% of the opinions, feedback, videos, web pages and posts that I have read and watched have been from the N perspective.*


It's great that you *feel* that way, that doesn't make it any more true, though. In fact, it's an outright retarded claim, if I may be so free to speak my mind on this one.



> Look on Youtube. Put in any personality that has an "N" in it and you will see tons of videos of people who are that discussing how they think. Do the same thing with an "S" personality and you might get one video, if that.


Further down the thread, where you typed some people, it's became blatantly obvious that you cannot type people even remotely accurate. Thus all you're doing is projecting. Interpreting things as indicators for something you may only wished to exist in your mind. It's a far cry from reality, though.



> Now, keep in mind that I am a very high "N." My "SE" is my least developed function and though "Si" is my 3rd or 4th function I only use it when recalling data to back up my high Ne and Ti.


This sentence alone will make anyone cringe that has understood the very basics behind MBTI.



> But, in all honestly, mostly ALL the forums and Youtube videos are dominated by Ns. I think that the reason is because we have a natural disposition to learning new things, how people think and how they process information. Most intuitives (Ns) are naturally drawn to Myers-Briggs, Kiersey, Jungian Cognitive Function, etc once they find out about it.


Think I've already shredded your projection somewhere up above.



> *People who have taken the test who are "Ss" never seem to dive deep into it.* In my experience most sensors (S) have, at best, a quick attention span for these kinds of things unless its for their job. They think its "cool" but not one that I have had take the test been drawn or fascinated my MBTI. They read their personality, think its "pretty accurate" and quickly move on without thinking about its actual application or dive into the finer points.


Given the flawless judgment you've shown in the rest of the post, I'm sure that we can take your interpretation of reality for accurate. I think the layer of sarcasm was thick enough on this one. See the bold part however; Your understanding of the subject is so limited you actually just labeled sensors as shallow / superficial.



> Am I wrong?


Yes, horribly so.

Have a good day; and you're welcome.

Also, in my humble opinion you're horribly mistyped, too. Either that or your Ti is horribly lacking.


----------



## Inguz (Mar 10, 2012)

Eleventeenth said:


> He's trying to get along with you, not fight with you. He likes people and he thinks that people give bad stereotypes to sensors. And he's right. He's saying, "I actually like you guys and those ridiculous stereotypes are stupid."


Really now? Let's be systematic and do a proper analysis of what has been written by @_WesAnderson_ 
And *NO*, don't even think about it, I'm ISFP, arguably one the least structured type along with the other xxFPs.



WesAnderson said:


> But, in all honestly, mostly ALL the forums and Youtube videos are dominated by Ns. I think that the reason is because we have a natural disposition to learning new things, how people think and how they process information. Most intuitives (Ns) are naturally drawn to Myers-Briggs, Kiersey, Jungian Cognitive Function, etc once they find out about it.


 This part implies that Sensors lack the ability to process abstract theories. Negative stereotype.



WesAnderson said:


> People who have taken the test who are "Ss" never seem to dive deep into it. In my experience most sensors (S) have, at best, a quick attention span for these kinds of things unless its for their job. They think its "cool" but not one that I have had take the test been drawn or fascinated my MBTI. They read their personality, think its "pretty accurate" and quickly move on without thinking about its actual application or dive into the finer points.


 This part implies that Sensors lack intellectual depth and generally are shallow. Negative stereotype.



WesAnderson said:


> Thanks for the reply. I loved it. I agree with you. Sensors can have an imagination too. They can be smart and many of them are exciting.


 This part implies that not all Sensors even has an imagination, as assumed: in contrast to iNtuities that all got an imagination. Even speaks against the xSxP-stereotype "The Artists". Negative stereotype.



WesAnderson said:


> ESTJs, as a whole, have a terrible reputation. Though usually high extroverts they seem to garner a lot of enemies. They have a image of being bossy, forward, concrete about everything (no gray areas) and many times jerks.


 Here ESTJs has to disprove a false statement which by logic should be almost practically impossible. The one who makes the claims has the burden of proof, not the other way around. VERY negative stereotype.



WesAnderson said:


> *All the major people who contributed to the MBTI system, as we know it today, were "Ns."*
> 
> That is why I think that all the S personalities are not looked high upon while all the N personalities are.


This is a false dichotomy presented as reality, and then taken as true. This gets my blood boiling as this is the very core of what I'm annoyed by: (faulty) theoretical assumptions are taken as objective facts. Negative stereotype.



WesAnderson said:


> We are painted as the higher thinkers while sensors are painted as the village idiots.
> *
> Now, I am not saying this is not the case.* In order for a few to have a large amount of power and money *they must have a large number of followers* (aka slaves, indentured servants, mill workers, pheasants, and so forth).


 Ah, so we Sensors are indeed village idiots, it's just that the name "village idiot" is offensive?

And all dictators and slave drivers has been Sensors. Not at all Negative stereotypes here.



WesAnderson said:


> As an ENTP I always (its a curse) strive to see both sides as equally and unbiased as I can. Its impossible to be 100% neutral. But *I want more Myers-Briggs materials and research done by sensors*. I am wondering if any of the information we read about them has actually been written by them???
> 
> I might even go so far as to ask that the whole test be re-made. Its time. I want a panel of ten experts to work on it. *Take Jung/ Myers Briggs and Kiersey and combine them altogether. I want half the experts to be Ns and the other half to be Ss.* That way I know each side has equal input and we get a more accurate picture of how everyone really is.


 This assumes that there practically has been no Sensor in Jung/MBTI/Kiersey which obviously is disputed. False dichotomy yet again that leads to an imaginary world view that not at all correlates with reality. Sensors are seen as "special people" that has to speak their minds so that their puny little feelings doesn't get insulted when the real experts (ie iNtuitives) writes about them in an honest fashion. Very Negative stereotype...



WesAnderson said:


> Now about Wes Anderson movies- they are a love em'/ hate em' genre. I will say that you probably do have to be an "N" to relate to them. His movies have all sorts of hidden meanings and what not.


 Sensors doesn't understand hidden meanings. Not at all a Negative stereotype.



WesAnderson said:


> Okay, I am the one who started this thread and now I regret it. What I was trying to do is get an unbiased opinion on what sensors think. I am kind of upset that I have been blasted the way I have. I am one of the few people who has tried to understand the other side of the coin. Instead, I get a bunch of replies of people who sound defensive and annoyed that I said what I said. This is why various groups cannot communicate. People nit-pick words and focus on technicalities instead of the big picture.
> 
> Last night I was pissed. I thought the reception of what I said would be good. At first it was but after about four people the responses I got was negative. I couldn't understand why. So I called my gf (ENFJ) and she explained it to me.
> 
> She said people will always get on the defensive when you ask them a question about themselves and you are not one of them. If I was an "S" asking the same question the response would have been all positive. Because I am an "N" asking the question I did, though I mean well, it was taken bad. She said "what if you were a white person asking how do black people think"? Even if you totally meant well it would be taken the wrong way. I was really just trying to open dialogue up and see what really was the case (instead of just blindly believing what people tell you) and I see some people took it wrong.


Insult every Sensor there is and then claim to be emotionally hurt when Sensors doesn't appreciate it? That's a very reasonable position to take.



@_Eleventeenth_ Attend to reality. If you agree with the biases that were presented in the quotes above, I will simply stop thinking of you as a sensible human being.


Edit: @_Erbse_ Great minds think alike.


----------



## Owfin (Oct 15, 2011)

Guys, guys, there's no need to get vicious. We all have to come from somewhere in our knowledge, and @WesAnderson is at least _trying_ to improve, asking questions. Now, it might be good for us to establish exactly what S is, so we can all discuss from the same platform.

So S, in my knowledge, is perceiving what something is. N is perceiving something that isn't there, like "hidden meaning" (Yes, I am aware I have a bias against N from being Si dominant, but I wanted to emphasize here the validity of S).


----------



## Erbse (Oct 15, 2010)

Owfin said:


> Guys, guys, there's no need to get vicious. We all have to come from somewhere in our knowledge, and @WesAnderson is at least _trying_ to improve, asking questions.


That wasn't a all vicious, rather than straight-forward. Minus the self-censoring pink ribbon society BS attached to it.

Anyway, while he *might* be trying to improve, he's still only asking question from a completely false bottom line he interprets as fact, when it's really not. Throwing around ridiculous claims isn't exactly working in ones favor - if anything he should verified his bottom line first before trying to build a case on it.

It's not like I go sign up on a computer tech forum and try to help people when I think it was cool to push AGP cards into PCI-E slots.


----------



## Owfin (Oct 15, 2011)

Erbse said:


> Anyway, while he *might* be trying to improve, he's still only asking question from a completely false bottom line he interprets as fact, when it's really not. Throwing around ridiculous claims isn't exactly working in ones favor - if anything he should verified his bottom line first before trying to build a case on it.


But in that case, it'd be more constructive to further his understanding of the basics rather than being frustrated at them, wouldn't it be? While it is a bit foolish to make a thread like this before you understand things, I think that now the point has been made, and we can move on. So I apologize for calling those posts "vicious". They were needed, but I just don't want a torrent of them. Being ganged up on does wonders for turning you against understanding.

I find this thread highly informative, @WesAnderson. And this one has some neat insights on S.


----------



## Eleventeenth (Aug 24, 2011)

Good grief. All I'm getting from this thread is "don't ask sensors what their experience is like". And I think that's why @_WesAnderson_ left the thread and will probably not return. Too much headache. I created a thread in the ESTP forum a few days ago asking "Do you guys feel like you have a lot of spatial intelligence? And does that help you in being good at sports/athletics?" They all happily said, "Yes! It helps a lot! I do have spatial intelligence." That's also a stereotype, but since it's a "positive" stereotype, they all said, "Yes!! That stereotype is true!" But, if it's something like, "Do you find yourself bossy?", everybody jumps out of their skin. I've seen an ESFJ ask, "Why do INTP's care about things that nobody else cares about?" Total stereotype, but she was trying to understand us better. So, it's no big deal. I wouldn't take offense. I would help her understand why I enjoy the things that I do. The spirit of the OP was to understand sensors better. He may have worded things a bit wrong in certain areas, and he may have had some false assumptions, but he was just trying to have some good conversation about different types - which is what this site is for. It's not like he went into a grocery store and said, "Sensors suck!" No. He came on an MBTI website to try to understand sensors better. I perceived that as a positive thing. Each person can perceive it how they want, I'm not telling anyone they are wrong. It is what it is. 

I just wish that if he had been operating on bad premises or if he was way off in his statements, that someone could have nicely taught him the correct way to view it from an MBTI/Jung perspective, instead of mocking him and basically telling him he's the town idiot. Not very productive, not really helping anybody. 

After this thread, I am way less likely to ask sensors questions about how they experience things or how they function (unless it's a positive behavior...then it will be OK). I'll quietly dip out of this thread now because I think it's beyond the point of being salvaged for anything positive. I think it would only get more ugly from here, and I have too much respect for you all to go down that road. I like all of your guys' contributions to this forum. I just don't see why it always has to get like this when people are trying to understand each other and learn.


----------



## Brian1 (May 7, 2011)

At Eleventeenth, here's what @_WesAnderson_ said:



WesAnderson said:


> Okay so I love this forum. I come here often, either to just browse interesting topics or to find an answer to a question relating to MBTI (i.e. South Park character personalities).
> 
> Here is my problem. As much as I love PersonalityCafe I think that it has a VERY HIGH iNTUITIVE SLANT.
> 
> ...


This last sentence with the You do make up 85% of the population after all LOL," I took acting, and did a small stint as an actor. I went out for an audition, and chose Marc Antony's Funeral Oration as what I did. Antony gives a speech for Brutus and his deed, and it sounds favourable but it is very condescending, "For Brutus is an honourable man, So are they all honourable men But Brutus says he was ambitious, and Brutus is an Honourable man" and Antony succeeds in turning the crowd against Brutus. Compare Marc Antony's Funeral Oration, to "You do make up 85% of the population after all LOL." Now why did he write this sentence, if he was really serious? 



WesAnderson said:


> *Do you like Ns?* Do they annoy you? Do you feel like the online community (dominated by ituitives) bashes sensors?
> 
> I always need to hear both sides of every story and I feel like *90% of the opinions, feedback, videos, web pages and posts that I have read and watched have been from the N perspective.*
> 
> ...


 @_Kayness_ took offense to this sentence. Now, this statement is true for me, if another person takes offense to it, maybe what's good for the goose is not always good for the gander and to each their own. Otherwise, to me this was a perfectly good post. If @_WesAnderson_ left the thread, that's his call, and if he did, it speaks to insincerity in wanting to know what Sensors are really like. Also, aren't NTs the geeks that get beat up by the bully Sensors, who don't excel well in school and are stupid? We shall need to ask him. As for hostility, I can't speak for others, but I remember Roger Wilkins said about LBJ's reaction to the Watts and Detroit riots,LBJ was ungrateful, saying, "I did this, and I did this, how can they do this to me?", "that if you keep putting a people down for a long time and then you say we're going to make it all better, a lot of that hostility needs to be purged, and it's not going to be pretty. " I think the OP needs to take a neutral stand and expect things like purges. 



WesAnderson said:


> In my experience most sensors (S) have, at best, a quick attention span for these kinds of things unless its for their job. They think its "cool" but not one that I have had take the test been drawn or fascinated my MBTI. They read their personality, think its "pretty accurate" and quickly move on without thinking about its actual application or dive into the finer points.
> 
> Am I wrong? Are there more sensors out there than I think who study and likes MBTI as well. I see some from time to time but its rare.


----------



## Owfin (Oct 15, 2011)

Eleventeenth said:


> I just wish that if he had been operating on bad premises or if he was way off in his statements, that someone could have nicely taught him the correct way to view it from an MBTI/Jung perspective...


Which was what I was trying to do.


----------



## LotusBlossom (Apr 2, 2011)

Brian1 said:


> @_Kayness_ took offense to this sentence.


 I wouldn't go quite so far as to say that I took offense. More like frustrated, annoyed and dismayed at the, uh, sheer ignorance that I didn't even know to begin, so I just said something super sarcastic as a response.


----------



## teddy564339 (Jun 23, 2010)

Eleventeenth said:


> *After this thread, I am way less likely to ask sensors questions about how they experience things or how they function (unless it's a positive behavior...then it will be OK).* I'll quietly dip out of this thread now because I think it's beyond the point of being salvaged for anything positive. I think it would only get more ugly from here, and I have too much respect for you all to go down that road. I like all of your guys' contributions to this forum. I just don't see why it always has to get like this when people are trying to understand each other and learn.


I really hope the part in bold ends up not being the case. Some people got upset by some things said in this thread, but I don't think everyone did, and I think some were legitimately trying to help. I in no way wanted to insult @WesAnderson or make him feel stupid, or anything like that, and if anything I said did, I apologize for it. 

And I personally don't have any problem in the aspect of asking ESTJs if they think they're bossy, or about people asking about negative stereotypes. As long as people are willing to listen to what I have to say if they ask a question about me (and if they believe what I say), then I'm ok with it.


----------



## Inguz (Mar 10, 2012)

@Eleventeenth
Fact 1: Sensors found his thread-start insulting and made that pretty clear
Fact 2: That didn't stop @WesAnderson from slandering Ss even more
Fact 3: Being polite and patient didn't help

There's a nice Swedish proverb for this: "He who enters the game must endure it." meaning, if you engage in something and it backfires you have no one but yourself yourself to blame for it as you willingly accepted the set rules. He came out with pretty serious typist statements, and as such it's not more than right that we can tell him back what we think about it. In a civil manner of course, but you can't expect anyone to be patient with him if he doesn't listen to reason.


----------



## Neon Knight (Aug 11, 2010)

teddy564339 said:


> I really hope the part in bold ends up not being the case. Some people got upset by some things said in this thread, but I don't think everyone did, and I think some were legitimately trying to help. I in no way wanted to insult WesAnderson or make him feel stupid, or anything like that, and if anything I said did, I apologize for it.
> 
> And I personally don't have any problem in the aspect of asking ESTJs if they think they're bossy, or about people asking about negative stereotypes. As long as people are willing to listen to what I have to say if they ask a question about me (and if they believe what I say), then I'm ok with it.


This is one of the very precise reasons I don't like to ask many questions, especially in the open. If people are always afraid to ask questions, how is anyone supposed to learn anything? The last time I checked this was a forum where people talk about ideas and theories, not a library where you'll_ only_ find facts.


----------



## Brian1 (May 7, 2011)

JungyesMBTIno said:


> I though Peter Myers was an ISTJ, and Jung was most likely an ISTP. Also, you're definitely not thinking critically about who had the "deepest" theory - that would be JUNG, the potential sensor. Kiersey and the Myers's, all the "N" types, are a lot more shallow by comparison, and the logic of the MBTI is particularly shaky and not very acceptable in the pychological community.



No wonder I loathe the MBTI section of job applications. I always have to pace myself. I sincerely hate Myers-Briggs tests.


----------



## Inguz (Mar 10, 2012)

KuRoMi said:


> This is one of the very precise reasons I don't like to ask many questions, especially in the open. If people are always afraid to ask questions, how is anyone supposed to learn anything? The last time I checked this was a forum where people talk about ideas and theories, not a library where you'll_ only_ find facts.


 "Are ESTJs bossy?" vs. "ESTJs have a bad reputation and are generally bossy. Are you ENTJs bossy?"

Don't assume stuff you're going to ask said audience about, it generally pisses people off to get a pat on the head and to have their opinions undermined even before they can write a helpful answer.


----------



## Saira (Feb 2, 2012)

I've had fun reading these responses and I have to stand up for something I see as unfair. I know you're all gonna throw rocks at me, but some responses in this thread actually fit the stereotype in a way. Like picking every word apart. You've attacked the poor guy for wanting to learn something. A couple of you guys have chosen to see the question as offensive and ignorant instead of seeing what it really is - well-intentioned curiosity coming from someone who isn't a licensed psychologist. You have to make mistakes while learning, and generalization is one of them, one we overcome after we learn more. I know it can be frustrating and boring to see mistakes being made again and again, but if the people who make them are new, there's really no need for such aggressive responses. Especially not because of 4 silly letters.


----------



## Neon Knight (Aug 11, 2010)

Brian1 said:


> No wonder I loathe the MBTI section of job applications. I always have to pace myself. I sincerely hate Myers-Briggs tests.


Yeah as if they're guaranteed to be always right anyway.



Inguz said:


> "Are ESTJs bossy?" vs. "ESTJs have a bad reputation and are generally bossy. Are you ENTJs bossy?"
> 
> Don't assume stuff you're going to ask said audience about, it generally pisses people off to get a pat on the head and to have their opinions undermined even before they can write a helpful answer.


I understand what you're saying. The problem is not everyone reacts the same and that is why there's even an issue here it seems like. I get what you're saying as far as assuming stuff too. I tend to assume people will be offended no matter how I ask, because that is how it seems mostly as a result mostly of not knowing my audience I suppose you could say. I've been caught off guard too often in the last (almost) 2 years to even want to ask something "out loud". It's almost guaranteed at least one person will take it the wrong way. I will experiment, however because there are questions I'd like answered. After seeing other posts by people who had issues, I do see where there were problem areas like you talk about giving a pat on the head and patronized at the same time. I've seen enough of those in the ESFP section, I guess I'm just trying to not expect the worst when it's more out and about. Hooray for that 7 optimism! :\ I honestly didn't want to read too much into it because of that and because this has been going on probably ever since the site first started, and it's never really going to stop. "Yelling" at people (flame wars) doesn't work much like in real life, infractions and bans don't work, so how do you respond to such issues other than at least attempt to give a positive spin to it and answer for people who really would like to know the answer? I think that is what @teddy564339 has been trying to do. I know I have been trying to approach things that way as well. If we're being insulted or trolled it doesn't matter then because at least some people are actually getting worthwhile answers to their own questions if they had any. Hope that made sense, I know I tend to go all over the place.


----------



## Owfin (Oct 15, 2011)

Saira said:


> I know you're all gonna throw rocks at me, but some responses in this thread actually fit the stereotype in a way.


Actually, this post was one of the few that I agreed about wholeheartedly in this thread, and reminded me that I cringe at some of my own old posts. It wasn't foolish for him to have made a thread, or at least not anymore foolish than some of my eager theoretical love affairs ("Idea -> One Post + Minor acceptance = Advance the theory over all the forums!").


----------



## Worriedfunction (Jun 2, 2011)

Stephen said:


> I think that's normal for personality theory forums. I believe it's a by-product of the open nature of the Internet itself. There are blogs and websites all over the place filled with lies and stereotypes, and since they're so available and there's no rules policing these sites, people assume the stereotypes are true (here it is in print!).
> 
> There are layers of effect, I think: for one, some of those who test as sensing types see that bullshit and walk away. Second, the many dichotomy tests and websites mislead the creative, innovative, or intelligent into thinking they must be intuitive, or that one can somehow be "100% N" when that would be humanly impossible. Third, the cognitive function tests mislead people into thinking they can use functions that are in direct contradiction with each other. Fourth, nothing. There is no fourth thing, but I read somewhere on the Internet that ISTJs like lists, and four is bigger than three... and bigger is always better.
> 
> ...


If I didn't think id get locked up for being insane id have this tatooed on my back and make a video of me running down the street naked for all to see.

Hmm maybe that is an overreaction....in any case GREAT POST!.


----------



## Saira (Feb 2, 2012)

@Owfin, thanks! I didn't mean literally all of you, but I can be such a stereotype myself that I often write/speak before thinking.


----------



## Donovan (Nov 3, 2009)

@Erbse 



> Let me tell you this, though: Out of I/E, T/F and S/N the S/N divide is the least contributing factor that creates difference.


i thought that part was interesting and it made me think of something: 

while of course all of these things only make as much difference as one lets them, and even then the "type-problems" that one encounters are usually only problems because of the individuals lack of knowledge, or, even more ironic, a lack of their own development which causes them to reject/hate/fear the opposite. 

with that said, have you ever thought that the "S/N divide" isn't a factor because you yourself have both forms of perception, i.e. both perspectives to use as auxiliaries due to being a J-dominant? if i absolutely had to say which one would be harder to connect with, or better yet, "could i more easily bridge the T/F gap than the S/N gap", i'd have to say that the T/F gap would be much easier, although neither would stop a friendship/etc... 

i guess what i'm saying is that i can't see how one would play a bigger role, every time, for everyone--seems more like it would depend on the people interacting, more due to what inferiors and what aux.'s the people had. anyhow, just some thoughts.


----------



## firedell (Aug 5, 2009)

tine said:


> I don't really see a huge bias anymore. There was for a while, but a bunch of pro-sensor threads happened and people lightened up about it (it caused alot of conflict though which wasn't great).
> I like Ns, I have N and S friends and family, all who I like!


I have noticed people actually taking an intelligent approach to MBTI, a lot more lately. So I have seen some fall in sensor hate, but there is still some there.

This is nothing to do with the above quote, but to be honest I am getting fed up of the whole sensor v.s intuitive crap. Though I understand as sensors we build up a defensive mechanism on the forums because of the really bad stereotypes we get given, but sometimes we are TOO defensive, and gang up on the intuitives. 

Though I have been one of these people. I am kind of feeling it's a topic that keeps creeping up, and it's getting boring now.


----------



## Erbse (Oct 15, 2010)

celticstained said:


> @Erbse
> 
> i thought that part was interesting and it made me think of something:
> 
> ...


This is interesting and may even be true. If we do assume that aux and tert are freely interchangeable, or 'two aux' for that matter, then yes - I'm blessed in the sense that I take a sensory look at things *and* an intuitive look. Although not both simultaneously I figure, but at best in sequentially.

However, the bottom line remains that S/N merely determines what information you absorb. *Neither* of them are even remotely attached to intelligence (let alone creativity), or can do anything more than *purely* perceiving things. Judging on the contrary is responsible for what happens to absorbed information. 

Thus S/N describes information intake. Nothing more.

A principle foreign to many, although it's quite that simple - thus it's frustrated that people either don't know, or simply don't want to accept that simple truth.


----------



## Inguz (Mar 10, 2012)

KuRoMi said:


> I understand what you're saying. The problem is not everyone reacts the same and that is why there's even an issue here it seems like. I get what you're saying as far as assuming stuff too. I tend to assume people will be offended no matter how I ask, because that is how it seems mostly as a result mostly of not knowing my audience I suppose you could say. I've been caught off guard too often in the last (almost) 2 years to even want to ask something "out loud". It's almost guaranteed at least one person will take it the wrong way. I will experiment, however because there are questions I'd like answered. After seeing other posts by people who had issues, I do see where there were problem areas like you talk about giving a pat on the head and patronized at the same time.


I'm not even entirely sure if I understand your insecurity here. To be it's very simple, if you say something you have to stand for it. If you ask a question about stereotypes you have read you only stand for finding out the "truth", but if you before that make insulting remarks you have to stand for those too!

Let's say you walk up to a guy with long hair and ask "Why do you have long hair? My mom says that only gay men have long hair. Is that true?" then you will probably get an answer that you want (though maybe irritated as to how you approached him), but, if you were to walk up the same guy and instead say: "I have a question for you. Men with long hair are most often gay, and in my experience that is true. Are you gay? I want to know from a long haired guys perspective." then* at least* don't be surprised if an F-word comes flying at you.


----------



## Donovan (Nov 3, 2009)

> However, the bottom line remains that S/N merely determines what information you absorb. *Neither* of them are even remotely attached to intelligence (let alone creativity), or can do anything more than *purely* perceiving things. Judging on the contrary is responsible for what happens to absorbed information.
> 
> Thus S/N describes information intake. Nothing more.


judging may be responsible to what happens to the information that is absorbed, but perceiving is responsible for the information that is judged... like a chicken-and-the-egg sort of thing lol. (and yeah, none of it has anything to do with intelligence, i guess you were just clarifying?)


----------



## JungyesMBTIno (Jul 22, 2011)

I think @JuliaRhys got to the core of the problem with this thread with the "defense attorney" comment. I mean, really, I'm just going to be brutally honest at this point whether anyone's sensibilities are hurt or not: If you believe in vapid stereotypes (e.g. ESFJs are stupid, ESTJs are bossy, INTJs are sociopaths (WTF?), etc.), you really don't even deserve our responses. How's that. Can anyone really be *this* naive or *this* bad at communicating their confusions? Can anyone really be *this* out-of-touch with reality that they actually believe that stereotypes cover a whole group of people? I just feel stupid typing this post, since it's so obvious. Not even the damn type descriptions actually say that ESTJ, the entire personality, = the recipe for bossy! Yeah right. My INTP twin is bossier than most of the ESTJs I know. The type descriptions say that *they might come off as bossy, due to how they react to being motivated by accomplishments*. Gees, people, read the whole f-ing descriptions before you sound like humiliating idiots/typists and hypocrites (e.g. I'm thinking of the "Ns" online who pretend that they have super high IQs and are super deep, extraordinary snowflakes, but they're actually as shallow as what they stereotype S types to be, since they have the stereotypist mentality of an elementary schooler).


----------



## Erbse (Oct 15, 2010)

celticstained said:


> judging may be responsible to what happens to the information that is absorbed, but perceiving is responsible for the information that is judged... like a chicken-and-the-egg sort of thing lol. (and yeah, none of it has anything to do with intelligence, i guess you were just clarifying?)


Yep, it was clarification. A needed one however since Kiersey did quite a good job with attaching 'N' to intelligence.

N/S are equally limited within their own spheres of what they can absorb as information (within their spheres they'll pick up on *everything* though, permanently). Se can only absorb the here and now, be grounded, Ne on the contrary creates possibilities from the here and now. Neither can do what the other does - so overall they have a complementary effect.

Judging is what makes people truly different. Ne / Se will always absorb the same things, Ti, Te, Fi and Fe will all draw a different conclusion respectively, though. So S/N is still the least deciding factor in the equation, as far as difference is concerned since their potency is the very same, the information intake, is, too - in all 4 of the possible judging cases.

ISTP's and INTP's can easily be on the save wavelength, despite the N/S divide - that is because Ti is shared as the dominant function. What N/S does mostly for the ISTP/INTP distinction is providing fairly radical different (at times) fields of interest more than anything else.

EDIT: Biggest pet peeve however is that MBTI isn't Kiersey, Kiersey/MBTI isn't socionics and neither of them are Jung. Thus people delve into a realm where they just mix and match things as they see fit from completely *different and inherently different pools* without knowing where they actually step over the boundary of the system they're currently trying to use.

I wouldn't expect people / beginners to know that, but it's been discussed and pointed out indefinitely already, within these forums even. It's easy to read up on, if one desires doing so anyway. Barely a year ago I, too, only possessed shallow MBTI knowledge and considered letter swapping - which naturally is the first starting point (in my mind) when delving deeper into the subject.


----------



## JungyesMBTIno (Jul 22, 2011)

I swear the OP is a troll.


----------



## Neon Knight (Aug 11, 2010)

Inguz said:


> Let's say you walk up to a guy with long hair and ask "Why do you have long hair? My mom says that only gay men have long hair. Is that true?" then you will probably get an answer that you want (though maybe irritated as to how you approached him), but, if you were to walk up the same guy and instead say: "I have a question for you. Men with long hair are most often gay, and in my experience that is true. Are you gay? I want to know from a long haired guys perspective." then* at least* don't be surprised if an F-word comes flying at you.


Thanks, yeah that's exactly how I pictured it. I really hope I've never done that and if I did I must apologize because it wasn't meant in that way. I'm too used to hearing this type of question on here I was desensitized to it used with 4 letter codes thrown around so much, it's much different if you take time to make the relation of what you just said to have a human face on it. Well it worked for me...eventually. 



JungyesMBTIno said:


> I swear the OP is a troll.


So let's keep turning it into something else that actually means something if that's the case?.


----------



## TaylorS (Jan 24, 2010)

Most of the "recieved wisdom" about N vs. S in the MBTI-sphere is complete and utter nonsense and has little to do with Jung's original ideas. S is conscious perception while N is perception filtered through the Unconscious. According to Jung if you prefer what your senses tell you over what your gut says you are an S. If you trust the possibilities your gut gives you even if the factual reality of your senses contradict them you are an N.



WesAnderson said:


> What I am saying is that I have come to realize that though I love Myers-Briggs, Kiersey and Jung they all have a bias. They were all "Ns". When you are reading personalities they are typically coming from an "N" perception things.
> 
> Don't get me wrong, I love being an intuitive. But, my Ne, Ti and Si make me the ideal person to sniff out inconsistencies and I am seeing a huge one: point of view.
> 
> ...


Jung typed himself an ISTP.


----------



## TaylorS (Jan 24, 2010)

Owfin said:


> Great description of me! You even got one of my favorite people-oriented interests down!
> 
> This site takes up much of my free time and I'm an active poster on the cognitive functions forum, 'specially when it's about sensing (what can I say... write what you know).


Everytime I see a description of Ns as oh-so open-minded and creative while us Sensors are dullards I feel like throwing shit across the room and wanting to strangle Kiersey, who popularized the bigoted anti-S BS now current on MBTI sites.

Jung, an S, is spinning in his grave.


----------



## TaylorS (Jan 24, 2010)

WesAnderson said:


> I have a question Julia. I am all about seeing every angle and all sides to everything. Here goes.....
> 
> ESTJs, as a whole, have a terrible reputation. Though usually high extroverts they seem to garner a lot of enemies. They have a image of being bossy, forward, concrete about everything (no gray areas) and many times jerks.
> 
> ...


Jung uses Charles Darwin as an example of an ESTJ. Darwin's mind was lead by outwardly demonstrable concepts (Extraverted Thinking) backed up by loads and loads of data (sensation)


----------



## Inguz (Mar 10, 2012)

TaylorS said:


> Most of the "recieved wisdom" about N vs. S in the MBTI-sphere is complete and utter nonsense and has little to do with Jung's original ideas. S is conscious perception while N is perception filtered through the Unconscious. According to Jung if you prefer what your senses tell you over what your gut says you are an S. If you trust the possibilities your gut gives you even if the factual reality of your senses contradict them you are an N.


Would it be OK for me to use that as reference in the future? I love the way it's written.



TaylorS said:


> Everytime I see a description of Ns as oh-so open-minded and creative while us Sensors are dullards I feel like throwing shit across the room and wanting to strangle Kiersey, who popularized the bigoted anti-S BS now current on MBTI sites.
> 
> Jung, an S, is spinning in his grave.


 Why is Jung an S, according to you?



TaylorS said:


> Jung uses Charles Darwin as an example of an ESTJ. Darwin's mind was lead by outwardly demonstrable concepts (Extraverted Thinking) backed up by loads and loads of data (sensation)


 That's commonplace for PerC I guess. :\


----------



## Korvyna (Dec 4, 2009)

WesAnderson said:


> *Do you like Ns?* Do they annoy you? Do you feel like the online community (dominated by ituitives) bashes sensors?


Well, I married one, so I guess I don't hate all of them. =P



WesAnderson said:


> I always need to hear both sides of every story and I feel like *90% of the opinions, feedback, videos, web pages and posts that I have read and watched have been from the N perspective.*
> 
> Look on Youtube. Put in any personality that has an "N" in it and you will see tons of videos of people who are that discussing how they think. Do the same thing with an "S" personality and you might get one video, if that.


I can't stand my voice, so I don't videotape anything, otherwise I probably would have a video out there. All my videos on youtube are of my cat...or kiddo. 




WesAnderson said:


> But, in all honestly, mostly ALL the forums and Youtube videos are dominated by Ns. I think that the reason is because we have a natural disposition to learning new things, how people think and how they process information. Most intuitives (Ns) are naturally drawn to Myers-Briggs, Kiersey, Jungian Cognitive Function, etc once they find out about it.


I'm on my seventh major right now (already have one degree) and it's purely because I have a strong desire to continue learning anything and everything I can. I've majored in computer science, architecture, engineering, sociology, legal assistance, office administration, and now I'm majoring in photography. I've always been very into learning new things and expanding my horizon. It probably helps that I work in a college... Oh and one of my favorite things to do is people watch. I love watching how people interact with others. 



WesAnderson said:


> People who have taken the test who are "Ss" never seem to dive deep into it. In my experience most sensors (S) have, at best, a quick attention span for these kinds of things unless its for their job. They think its "cool" but not one that I have had take the test been drawn or fascinated my MBTI. They read their personality, think its "pretty accurate" and quickly move on without thinking about its actual application or dive into the finer points.


I tested as INTJ the first time I took the MBTI (I was really depressed at the time and answered how I was feeling in that moment, not how I normally was)... I never really felt like it was right... So when I was over my depression I tested again and felt like ISFP was closer to me. So I continued reading up and researching ISFPs to learn more about myself. It also helped me better understand why I clashed with some Ns...even if we were trying to argue the same point, we argued it in different ways. 



WesAnderson said:


> Am I wrong? Are there more sensors out there than I think who study and likes MBTI as well. I see some from time to time but its rare.


Everyone has different interests... In our household, I'm the one obsessed with MBTI and my husband (INTJ) could care less.


----------



## Kabosu (Mar 31, 2012)

As a strong N, I actually find that sometimes communicating with S's is much easier than communicating with N's, especially if it's one on one. I say concrete-level conversations are pretty good and can interest me just as much as tangent speaking. Plus, I think both sides like discussing about life and what's going on in it, and it comes off pretty natural with them. Who knows, maybe all of those S's have a different impression. (Although I tend to highly favor N's when it comes to romantic interests.)

Maybe I'm saying this because I think half of my siblings (I think one of my sisters might be ISFJ, my brother seems more like a sensor) and my grandparents (ESTJ grandpa & ESFJ grandma if I could guess) were all S's and I get along with them just fine, as well as a few good friends I've had.


----------

