# How do sensors find intuitives frustrating?



## Promethea (Aug 24, 2009)

firedell said:


> Honestly, I think that learning these theories has complicated things with people rather than helping all together. The prejudice that comes along with types is unhealthy on a certain level; creating barriers where is no need.
> 
> "An ESTJ you say? There is no possible way I can ever be friends with you. You are far too serious, and controlling." I've seen some people on here mention they have shunned people because of their type, and I find it ridiculous.


I have gotten the -distinct- impression at times that my insights have been dismissed by certain socionists who have it in their heads that quadra values are extremely relevant to how well two people get along, and that simply because I am a beta, my perspective won't fit their non-beta world-view enough to even be considered. I told one of them once that it feels like a harsh prejudice. I reframed his entire resistance to me as though it was based on race. It didn't look as acceptable then.


----------



## possiBri (Jan 4, 2011)

amatsuki said:


> Not all intuitives, but when it is frustrating, it's usually because by their tone or manner, it feels like they're trying to change me. If I have my own stances, I'd rather they try to respect that rather than tell me I'm wrong :/


Yeah, my ESFP roommate would get so mad at me sometimes. We'd be having a discussion and then he'd tell me it's either this, this or this... and then I'd offer another perspective and say, "I don't know what IS right, but I think you should consider this as well." And he'd start getting mad and just say, just say "You're wrong." And I'd try to explain I wasn't saying he was wrong because I don't have all the answers, but that it seems to me like he's leaving stuff out. Extremely pissed at that... and it'd piss me off too, because I honestly wasn't saying YOU'RE WRONG, he just refused to take my suggestions any other way. =\

Also, as far as the N's bugging S's because we're forgetful or whatever... my ESFP friend was totally the forgetful, unobservant one, and it drove me absolutely CRAZY.


----------



## Laeona (Feb 20, 2012)

Almost said:


> 1. When they think of things they can't explain.
> Them: It's a gut reaction.
> Me: :crying:
> 
> ...


LOL You are awesome. Anyone who can point out things with humor has got me wrapped around their finger. I've so often wondered what it looked like from the other side.

I love it when all the types get in the mix. You never know what's going to pop up in a thread!


----------



## Boolean11 (Jun 11, 2012)

mangiferaindica said:


> Sometimes the most respectful thing you can do for someone is to try to change their opinion.
> 
> Like me, right now, I'm trying to change your opinion. I'm trying to change you, the way you think. Not because I don't respect you and the opinion you hold right now, but because the I think a different opinion would make you happier and healthier.
> 
> ...


Sorry but you guys don't get "Fi" at all, I'm with _amatsuki_ here, somethings are just out off limits, you have no grounds to even consider questioning them. All you can do is present your alternate view point just as another viewpoint without any endorsement, since that it respectful. If your point of view is superior the other person will change to it comfortably if they see so but expecting them to change is none of your business. It feels like you are trying to control the adoption of a point of view, which is something that is off limits. I'm not sure even if this is an "Fi" issue but for some people you just can't touch that part, choosing to adopt, not or challenge values.

But sometimes some people's values are unacceptable so an all or nothing war has to be brought up, the intrusion has to happen and the result is the division of the people in question if none come to an agreement.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

firedell said:


> I don't click with people because simply our life doesn't match up, and there hasn't been the right time to actually learn how to get along with that person. This is not to say I could get along with everyone I pass in life, but I believe given enough time and effort you can find a way to relate to anyone.
> 
> It's just because we are purely selfish and lazy. We expect to click with people almost instantly, otherwise this new person isn't worth our time. I do it too. I judge too soon, and hold on to the first impression instead of working on it. For all I know, the person I decided who I can't click with is a great person to have in my life.


Never implied we can't learn to get along with others we would normally not get along with with time, but I don't think we will click with anyone. We can learn to compromise but I see this very different to clicking with people. And look what I am doing here, I see in your signature it says you're a 6w7 sp/sx. See, this is a very different type to 5w4 sp/sx that I am. Why do we seem to reason differently? Because we're not sharing enneagram type. Because you're an ISFP and I'm an INTP. These are all reasons why we don't click. Maybe I'd learn that you're also into the Baptist Church. This would also make me frown and feel that we click even less. Let's say you're into frivolous activities such as partying and living life as if you're going to die tomorrow - this will also probably lead to us not clicking. 

I can learn to respect and understand our differences, but it doesn't mean that understanding and respect will eventually make us click. It doesn't mean you're not a great person, but it means that I won't feel that I get out a lot from socializing and hanging out with you in general. And no one expects anyone to do that with everyone. The MBTI, enneagram and what else have you are all small puzzle pieces why people don't click. You see people in the heavy metal community saying that they can't get along with hipsters because those people are hipsters and they clearly share differences in music taste too. This differs nowhere less than when an intuitive says they can't get along with a sensor and vice versa and this is a natural way for people to make sense of their reality. You're different to me so therefore we don't get along.

The problem as I said, is when people use it as a justification to not try to get along with people different tham themselves or use it as an excuse to not try to compromise. Then yes, it's lazy. Saying that the reason why we can't get along because we think so differently, have different goals and motivations in life and do not have any common interests is not lazy, that's just admitting fact. Why should I spend time trying to get to know or get along with someone whose company I am clearly not enjoying? It's not about first-time expectations. I think most people are willing to give others a second chance, but why should I spend time trying to interact with you and feel frustrated because I need to compromise when I can go find another person who is more to my liking and whose company I will enjoy more?

I am not saying that the reason why I shouldn't speak or compromise is because you're a sensor, but I might for example feel that the reason why I feel I must compromise so much is because you are a sensor. That's where the difference lies. And maybe I also feel that I rather not spend so much time and energy to compromise with you when I could go off and meet an entirely new person who for the matter could also be a sensor for all I know, but I get along much better with without feeling the need to compromise so much. We always look for reasons and underlying causes to things. I think that's natural (perhaps even more so for me being an INTP 5). There's nothing with trying to explain reality. We just shouldn't let our explanations become justifications.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

possiBri said:


> Yeah, my ESFP roommate would get so mad at me sometimes. We'd be having a discussion and then he'd tell me it's either this, this or this... and then I'd offer another perspective and say, "I don't know what IS right, but I think you should consider this as well." And he'd start getting mad and just say, just say "You're wrong." And I'd try to explain I wasn't saying he was wrong because I don't have all the answers, but that it seems to me like he's leaving stuff out. Extremely pissed at that... and it'd piss me off too, because I honestly wasn't saying YOU'RE WRONG, he just refused to take my suggestions any other way. =\
> 
> Also, as far as the N's bugging S's because we're forgetful or whatever... my ESFP friend was totally the forgetful, unobservant one, and it drove me absolutely CRAZY.


This to me sounds like a perfect example of Se versus Ne. The reason why he's unwilling to consider another point of view seems to be the Se-Fi combination. He's only interested to reconsider Se things but you want to do Ne things, idea-generation and all that, and he takes offense because he doesn't understand it's just an idea you're tossing out there, he thinks that you are literarily suggesting him to see something a certain way. 

This is the problem when people try to frame a specific behavior alone to one function. You can very well convince Fi users with well-structured arguments but as with anyone and anything, it has to _appeal to their perception._ If they cannot understand where you are coming from, then agreement will never be possible. I can be equally stubborn when someone tells me how they think reality is like (suggestion) but I don't see the logical reasoning that would make me sway. I don't think any MBTI type is more or less stuborrn, I think that's if anything enneagram-related.


----------



## possiBri (Jan 4, 2011)

LeaT said:


> This to me sounds like a perfect example of Se versus Ne. The reason why he's unwilling to consider another point of view seems to be the Se-Fi combination. He's only interested to reconsider Se things but you want to do Ne things, idea-generation and all that, and he takes offense because he doesn't understand it's just an idea you're tossing out there, he thinks that you are literarily suggesting him to see something a certain way.
> 
> This is the problem when people try to frame a specific behavior alone to one function. You can very well convince Fi users with well-structured arguments but as with anyone and anything, it has to _appeal to their perception._ If they cannot understand where you are coming from, then agreement will never be possible. *I can be equally stubborn when someone tells me how they think reality is like (suggestion) but I don't see the logical reasoning that would make me sway.* I don't think any MBTI type is more or less stuborrn, I think that's if anything enneagram-related.


EXACTLY! The stuff in bold is totally me, too. It is waaaay too often that someone tells me something and I get mad because it doesn't make sense (usually because they haven't given me all the information), so I will refuse to believe someone until I test it or look it up for myself. =]


I also agree, the Enneagram really helps give a full picture of someone. My ESFP friend most likely is a CP-6, which generally explains a lot of his personality IMO.


----------



## Boolean11 (Jun 11, 2012)

firedell said:


> Honestly, I think that learning these theories has complicated things with people rather than helping all together. The prejudice that comes along with types is unhealthy on a certain level; creating barriers where is no need.
> 
> "An ESTJ you say? There is no possible way I can ever be friends with you. You are far too serious, and controlling." I've seen some people on here mention they have shunned people because of their type, and I find it ridiculous.


Another way to rephrase that is saying the labels don't really work properly, they are inconsistent thus frustrating


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

possiBri said:


> EXACTLY! The stuff in bold is totally me, too. It is waaaay too often that someone tells me something and I get mad because it doesn't make sense (usually because they haven't given me all the information), so I will refuse to believe someone until I test it or look it up for myself. =]
> 
> 
> I also agree, the Enneagram really helps give a full picture of someone. My ESFP friend most likely is a CP-6, which generally explains a lot of his personality IMO.


I mean, the reason why I'm stubborn is probably my 8 gut fix so in arguments of disagreement (conflict), I'm more likely to just dig my heels and say "no, not going to bulge". Of course, then people can also probably be stubborn for other reasons than enneagram, but yes, definitely, it's about seeing the big picture and not just MBTI, enneagram or whathaveyou, but everything that makes a person that person. The MBTI and enneagram are just two pieces to that, socionics another, religious beliefs another one, political affiliation yet another one and so forth.

So let's say I meet my socionics ideal and we get along great until it's revealed that he hates metal music. I would perhaps be able to deal for a brief time but eventually I think the compromise would tear on me so much that I would feel it separates us to the point where interaction might be frustrating instead of meaningful. So yeah, labels. They only mean as much as the meaning you attach to them. 

I like fooling around with mine.


----------



## Bast (Mar 23, 2011)

When I am having just a normal conversation with one of my roommates (who I strongly suspect to be an ISFP), she will often stop, cock her head to the side, and say "you're so random!!" or something similar. I am not trying to be goofy or random or whatever, but maybe it appears that way to some people? I know I get irritated if I can't follow someone's train of thought, so maybe she gets irritated by that.


----------



## Raichu (Aug 24, 2012)

firedell said:


> I believe given enough time and effort you can find a way to relate to anyone.


But that's the thing, I don't think everyone is that good at relating to people. I lived in the same room as my sister for sixteen years, and I just could not get along with her until I started thinking about it in terms of her type.



firedell said:


> It's just because we are purely selfish and lazy. We expect to click with people almost instantly, otherwise this new person isn't worth our time.


I see what you're saying, but I don't think this is necessarily true for everyone. Different people approach relationships in very different ways, and especially for the more friendly extroverted types, I think there are a lot of people who wouldn't do that at all. I mean, I'm definitely not one to initiate friendships or conversations, but I think because of that I'm more likely to accept anyone who wants to talk to me. Even if I don't necessarily love them, I know that friends are hard to come by for me. There was this girl my sophomore year of high school who I thought was actually really annoying and I didn't like her much at all, but I knew that she was really nice on the inside. Like, even if I hated her laugh and we didn't have anything in common, I also knew that she was someone who'd be really loyal, you know? You don't pass up the opportunity to have a real friend just because you don't click. And I never did fully understand her or click with her, but I was a good friend to her because she was a good friend to me. And this wasn't something that I learned once I was old and wise or whatever, I was fifteen. Like, obviously I'm more drawn to people I click with, but it's never been in my nature to disregard somebody if we didn't.

I'm not trying to say I'm better, not at all. I'm just saying that you shouldn't take things about yourself and assume they apply to everyone. Like, maybe you get discouraged if you don't click with someone right away, but I don't. Maybe you can figure people out if you have enough time, but I can't. I never did figure out how to relate to her or understand her, I just decided it didn't matter.


----------



## firedell (Aug 5, 2009)

LeaT said:


> Never implied we can't learn to get along with others we would normally not get along with with time, but I don't think we will click with anyone. We can learn to compromise but I see this very different to clicking with people. And look what I am doing here, I see in your signature it says you're a 6w7 sp/sx. See, this is a very different type to 5w4 sp/sx that I am. Why do we seem to reason differently? Because we're not sharing enneagram type. Because you're an ISFP and I'm an INTP. These are all reasons why we don't click. Maybe I'd learn that you're also into the Baptist Church. This would also make me frown and feel that we click even less. Let's say you're into frivolous activities such as partying and living life as if you're going to die tomorrow - this will also probably lead to us not clicking.
> 
> ...


To me this complicating things, and really its simply a difference of opinion. 

And for the mention of my interests, I dislike partying, and I'm an atheist but to why this is a reason why people don't click, i'm not sure. Sure, I can relate easier to people who share similar interests, but it doesn't mean that I will get along with that person easier than others that don't. It's who the person is, not what they do.


----------



## mackenzye (Sep 19, 2012)

Siren said:


> I can be very out of touch with the physical world and I know that annoys my sensor friends. I lose my keys constantly. I bump into things, forget birthdays and important dates, etc.


Is this an intuitive thing? I am exactly the same way. I forget my phone and sunglasses everywhere, I trip, knock into things, stumble. I think I'm just so in my head that I become unaware of my surroundings.


----------



## possiBri (Jan 4, 2011)

firedell said:


> To me this complicating things, and really its simply a difference of opinion.
> 
> And for the mention of my interests, I dislike partying, and I'm an atheist but to why this is a reason why people don't click, i'm not sure. Sure, I can relate easier to people who share similar interests, but it doesn't mean that I will get along with that person easier than others that don't. *It's who the person is, not what they do.*


What you do (or, perhaps, _would_ do) is at least a good chunk of what defines you, especially if what you do and what you say don't match up. So to say it's who the person "is" not what they do, really doesn't make any logical sense, because, in fact, they are related. Yes, you could be defined solely by your thoughts, but that's not a whole person just as defining someone by actions alone. However, actions _tend_ to speak louder than words. ;D


----------



## dpt727 (Jul 16, 2012)

@ DarwinsBastard Thanks for the link~ very funny. It does make me stop and think how my comments must sound to S types. Now, I can really appreciate the looks my sister (ESTJ) gives me. 
I will have the picture "thislineislong" stuck in my brain the next time I am standing in line. :crazy:


----------



## amatsuki (Apr 17, 2012)

LeaT said:


> Never implied we can't learn to get along with others we would normally not get along with with time, but I don't think we will click with anyone. We can learn to compromise but I see this very different to clicking with people. And look what I am doing here, I see in your signature it says you're a 6w7 sp/sx. See, this is a very different type to 5w4 sp/sx that I am. Why do we seem to reason differently? Because we're not sharing enneagram type. Because you're an ISFP and I'm an INTP. These are all reasons why we don't click. Maybe I'd learn that you're also into the Baptist Church. This would also make me frown and feel that we click even less. Let's say you're into frivolous activities such as partying and living life as if you're going to die tomorrow - this will also probably lead to us not clicking.


But if one day, the two of you were to bump into one another on the street (without knowing who the other was) and for some reason you two were to sit down at a quaint little cafe for afternoon tea (or cake, or coffee, i don't know what you fancy) and found that you both had a common band in interest, perhaps the same favourite member and same favourite song. Maybe you both went to the same concert at one point and end up building rapport over that. With common interests, it's easy to feel like you've clicked. Maybe you won't feel the barrier at all, or will be blind to it because of your intense like for each other. You wont feel the same on every subject of course, but it's actually not all that difficult to click with people. If you make assumptions about each other due to type (on this forum where it is openly displayed to all) and hold on to that, of course the chances of you both clicking are reduced: we're only on one topic, of which there is a disagreement! 

On a slightly related note, I like bubble tea.


----------



## Siren (Jun 25, 2011)

mackenzye said:


> Is this an intuitive thing? I am exactly the same way. I forget my phone and sunglasses everywhere, I trip, knock into things, stumble. I think I'm just so in my head that I become unaware of my surroundings.


Yes, I think it is common among intuitives to be so far into our thoughts that we forget we have bodies.


----------



## Ellis Bell (Mar 16, 2012)

LeaT said:


> Yes, Ne doms can often seem like they are "stealing" others' ideas because they want you to vocalize something based on an idea they had, and then they go off to generate more ideas based on that one idea and then come back and ask you another question and do the same thing again. I know an ENFP on another forum who does this all the time to me sigh. He always asks something like "what does this mean?", I explain but instead of giving me an answer in return what he thought (I also think my enneagram 5 craves an answer since I'm giving away some of my precious information and knowledge so I need compensation), he just disappears into cyberspace and I'm like: :sad: not again! Damn you Ne doms and your idea-stealing torture!



Dang, now I know my coworker is a Ne dom... and why she drives me nuts.


----------



## ParetoCaretheStare (Jan 18, 2012)

I used to get tested as INFP all the time, and recently have been consistently tested as ISFP in both cognitive function, mbti, oh and socionics SEI as well. 

I'm borderline. 

Which makes sense. My dad's an ISTJ and my mom is an INFP. Don't ask how they got married, but they've been apart since kids got into that picture. 

Anyway, at times I become more N, usually when I'm depressed, and the sensor world doesn't make sense to me, it seems shallow. Other times I'm more of an S, like when I'm in love and feeling optimistic, and off my period. 

My ISTJ dad is super S, and he just isn't a deep person at all. He does the same thing every single day, and is boring as hell. He thinks I'm stupid and am never going to go anywhere with my life. 

My INFP mom is like a kid who loves to watch fantasy movies and read books on fairies and paint really trippy fantasy surrealist artwork. I'm like that sometimes, but not as trippy as she is, she just gets super deep and contemplative and upset easily. I hurt her a lot because I'm much more blunt and impatient around my family. So yeah, heavy intuitives think I'm shallow. 

Hahaha, I just spend most of my time on here. The funny part is that my INFJ summer fling from last year introduced me to this.


----------



## ParetoCaretheStare (Jan 18, 2012)

amatsuki said:


> But if one day, the two of you were to bump into one another on the street (without knowing who the other was) and for some reason you two were to sit down at a quaint little cafe for afternoon tea (or cake, or coffee, i don't know what you fancy) and found that you both had a common band in interest, perhaps the same favourite member and same favourite song. Maybe you both went to the same concert at one point and end up building rapport over that. With common interests, it's easy to feel like you've clicked. Maybe you won't feel the barrier at all, or will be blind to it because of your intense like for each other. You wont feel the same on every subject of course, but it's actually not all that difficult to click with people. If you make assumptions about each other due to type (on this forum where it is openly displayed to all) and hold on to that, of course the chances of you both clicking are reduced: we're only on one topic, of which there is a disagreement!
> 
> On a slightly related note, I like bubble tea.


I love bubble tea. Just because of you, I'm going to declare myself as an ISFP now.


----------

