# Socionics on Duals match: "Intelligence/Interests"...



## Boolean11 (Jun 11, 2012)

I stumbled on another socionics saying so I thought I'd share the crap with you, so* DONT SHOOT THE MESSENGER!* Basically according to socionics the best type dual is one that would share similar intelligence and interest otherwise the pair up would not work in any way shape or form. I just found this surprising since most folks around here disregarded ESFP on the basis that there were unlikely to similar interests or intelligence (ESFPs are stupid party animals to most of you). But again don't shoot messenger, this is just fascination with the text. 

Intelligence - Wikisocion


> *Intelligence and socionics*
> 
> Sometimes socionic definitions of intuition and sensing (and to a lesser degree logic and ethics) can give the impression that intuiters are more intelligent than sensers, possessing greater abstract thinking capabilities (modeling, visualizing, and recognizing hidden meanings). However, a close study of the subject reveals that socionists usually mean something slightly different by "abstract" than do psychologists. In socionics, intuitive types are more interested in intangible things than sensing types, which prefer more to concentrate on tangible things that can be experienced and seen.
> 
> ...


 _Karen_ was really the inspiration that helped me connect the dots on this
http://personalitycafe.com/esfp-forum-performers/6897-esfps-iq.html


----------



## Promethea (Aug 24, 2009)

Intelligence, interests, sure -- but I have also heard "values" and not just IM element values, but all of those complicated things that human beings believe in very strongly. Allegedly particularly in the gamma and beta quadras, there can exist duals who have very strong opposing life values, and they can clash because of this. I'm told that this is particularly true for betas. I guess finding one's perfect socionics dual is a pretty tall order.


----------



## Alx7 (Jun 29, 2012)

Boolean11 said:


> Intelligence - Wikisocion
> _Karen_ was really the inspiration that helped me connect the dots on this
> http://personalitycafe.com/esfp-forum-performers/6897-esfps-iq.html


Didn't read all your post or her, but about a fragment of her post.



> If ESFPs truly do score lower on IQ tests on average - and I’m not sure if they do - here's one possible reason. I don't enjoy brainteasers *at all* (though I'm a fast reader and have always read a wide variety of subjects, which could have helped my IQ score), but my NT Mensa friends and my INTJ husband find brainteasers stimulating. It’s possible the more someone enjoys and therefore plays around with various types of intellectual puzzles, the better they become at them, increasing the chances of getting a better IQ score.


This is wrong, there has been extensive research, IQ barelly change even with a lot of exposure to intellectual puzzles, also why I don't do them for the sake of getting smarter...

And IQ tests that has significant variation based on the subject previous knowledge badged are horrible. IQ tests aren't much usefull in general but these are less.


----------



## Boolean11 (Jun 11, 2012)

Alx7 said:


> Didn't read all your post or her.
> 
> 
> 
> This is wrong, there has been extensive research, IQ barelly change even with a lot of exposure to intellectual puzzles, also why I don't do them for the sake of getting smarter...


The "flynn effect" kind of indicates that, there is a high propability that you have a higher IQ than your great grand father who lived 100 years ago. It would be pretty stupid to say you "evolved" significantly in intelligence.


----------



## Alx7 (Jun 29, 2012)

There has been specific research making people do lot's and lot's of IQ tests and they barely changed. 

The flynn effect there are many variables that could be afecting it and first you need to prove it is true.


----------



## whytiger (Jul 17, 2010)

I haven't met too many ESFPs. I generally like them. I had one in a class, top student. We had an almost instinctive mutual respect.


----------



## Boolean11 (Jun 11, 2012)

Alx7 said:


> There has been specific research making people do lot's and lot's of IQ tests and they barely changed.
> 
> The flynn effect there are many variables that could be afecting it and first you need to prove it is true.


Yes IQ test are really messy/convoluted as a measure of "intelligence" but the reason they remain popular is the correlation with the significant displays of intelligence people like. Like whenever a theoretical physicist... (high IQ career individuals) scores lowly its seen more of as a bleep in the statistics, but they don't see it as a need to look down on the person since competence in their career indicates high intelligence.


----------



## Karen (Jul 17, 2009)

@Boolean11, I caught this thread through Notifications. After many years of studying MBTI, I'm still in the process of sorting out my type, right now through PM where the person's best guess so far is that I'm ESFP.  After spending the last year trying to figure out the lens through which I view the world, I finally realized it's not likely to happen. It appears I manifest ENTP in part of my life, ESFP in another, and the two don't overlap much. I know this is behavior, but while in that state of mind I seem to think that way also. Whatever type I am, I did know an ESFP Mensa man who got his undergraduate and graduate degrees at Stanford in civil engineering and spent his life thinking it was all great fun and managed to party as much as he worked.

You might be correct about the puzzles, @Alx7, but I wonder if getting a college degree could raise an IQ score after exposure to various ways of more quickly solving problems. Edit: I just read the Flynn effect...interesting. That seems to go against common sense, but then common sense isn't always accurate.


----------



## Boolean11 (Jun 11, 2012)

Karen said:


> @_Boolean11_, I caught this thread through Notifications. After all these years of studying MBTI, I'm still in the process of sorting out my type, right now through PM where the person's best guess so far is that I'm ESFP.  After spending the last year trying to figure out the lens through which I view the world, I finally realized it's not likely to happen. It appears I manifest ENTP in part of my life, ESFP in another, and the two don't overlap much. I know this is behavior, but while in that state of mind I seem to think that way also. Whatever type I am, I did know an ESFP Mensa man who got his undergraduate and graduate degrees at Stanford in civil engineering and spent his life thinking it was all great fun and managed to party as much as he worked.
> 
> You might be correct about the puzzles, @_Alx7_, but I wonder if getting a college degree could raise an IQ score after exposure to various ways of solving problems. Edit: I just read the Flynn Effect...interesting. That seems to go against common sense, but then common sense isn't always accurate.


Ok, Out of interest have you read into socionics, after seeing your post rate being so anaemic I was just guessing that you might not had done so. I guess I should PM you with this.

Sensing Ethical Extratim - Wikisocion


----------



## Alx7 (Jun 29, 2012)

Boolean11 said:


> Yes IQ test are really messy/convoluted as a measure of "intelligence" but the reason they remain popular is the correlation with the significant displays of intelligence people like. Like whenever a theoretical physicist... (high IQ career individuals) scores lowly its seen more of as a bleep in the statistics, but they don't see it as a need to look down on the person since competence in their career indicates high intelligence.


You can read the book Outliers by Malcom Gladwell.



> Reemphasizing his theme, Gladwell continuously reminds the reader that genius is not the only or even the most important thing when determining a person's success. Using an anecdote to illustrate his claim, he discusses the story of Christopher Langan, a man who ended up owning a horse farm in rural Missouri despite having anIQ of 195 (Gladwell claims that Einstein's was 150).[SUP][2][/SUP]Gladwell points out that Langan has not reached a high level of success because of the environment he grew up in. With no one in Langan's life and nothing in his background to help him take advantage of his exceptional gifts, he had to find success by himself. "No one—not rock stars, not professional athletes, not software billionaires, and not even geniuses—ever makes it alone," writes Gladwell.[SUP][2][/SUP]Later, Gladwell compares Langan with Oppenheimer, the father of the atomic bomb. Noting that they typify innate natural abilities that should have helped them both succeed in life, Gladwell argues that Oppenheimer's upbringing made a pivotal difference in his life. Oppenheimer grew up in one of the wealthiest neighborhoods in Manhattan, was the son of a successful businessman and a painter, attended the Ethical Culture Fieldston School on Central Park West, and was afforded a childhood of concerted cultivation.[SUP][7][/SUP] _Outliers_ argues that these opportunities gave Oppenheimer the chance to develop the practical intelligence necessary for success.[SUP][7][/SUP]Gladwell then provides an anecdote: When Oppenheimer was a student at University of Cambridge, he made an unsuccessful attempt to poison one of his tutors. When he was about to be expelled from the school, he was able to compromise with the school's administrators to allow him to continue his studies at the university, using skills that he gained during his cultivated upbringing.[SUP][7][/SUP]



Outliers (book) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In the book he shows that over 120 IQ there is no correlation to more success, and argues that is like a threshold, if you have this you have enough to think about given subjects.


----------



## Boolean11 (Jun 11, 2012)

Alx7 said:


> You can read the book Outliers by Malcom Gladwell.
> 
> 
> Outliers (book) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> ...


Christopher Langan is an idiot in my book, looking at his videos and interviews I became some what perplexed, underwhelmed over him. I doubt that Malcom Gladwell has really anything worth while to offer since such authors are blind advocates in my sight. With IQ, I'm still puzzled, really wondering what is actually there, I just want to learn about their creation process and actually get to make one myself. To an extent I think they (IQ test) are potentially really stupid since they are fundamentally created by fellow man, they don't seem to stand independently as laws of physics.


----------



## Alx7 (Jun 29, 2012)

He tells Langan story since childhood in the book, not really an idiot, he basically raised himself, his father was an abusive drunk, not ending a total screw up is already a good achievement given his background.

The author definitely has something to offer looking from the knowledge you has about the subject, he don't gives too many opinions in the book.

Edit: It's somewhat like freakonomics.


----------



## Alx7 (Jun 29, 2012)

Boolean11 said:


> With IQ, I'm still puzzled, really wondering what is actually there, I just want to learn about their creation process and actually get to make one myself. To an extent I think they (IQ test) are potentially really stupid since they are fundamentally created by fellow man, they don't seem to stand independently as laws of physics.


There are a lot of stupid IQ tests, many official ones used by U.S.A values the ability to conform to norms, like being the disciplined boy, it actually is a good predictor of academic achievement...


This is an test I could live with:
http://www.iqtest.dk/main.swf


----------



## Boolean11 (Jun 11, 2012)

Alx7 said:


> There are a lot of stupid IQ tests, many official ones used by U.S.A values the ability to conform to norms, like being the disciplined boy, it actually is a good predictor of academic achievement...
> 
> 
> This is an test I could live with:
> http://www.iqtest.dk/main.swf


Nice one, I began to study spatial reasoning tests gradually and what I found out is that at times I could decipher multiple logical meanings from the same question (which is more like Ni's hidden talent); that is where you'e got the tests that provide answers which allows you to see the point of reasoning the creator had intended. And from that I realised that the tests could never be perfect since other people can discover new meanings which are valid but makes them get a wrong answer. 

Anyway I did the test as a joke and got "79" deliberately looking for the wrong answers but with about 10 questions I was randomly clicking which increased the result to slightly above "very low". Anyway I think multiple-choice IQ tests are limited since they fail to reveal the actual thoughts that can be used to drive to the answer.


----------



## Alx7 (Jun 29, 2012)

Boolean11 said:


> Nice one, I began to study spatial reasoning tests gradually and what I found out is that at times I could decipher multiple logical meaning from the same question (which is more like Ni's hidden talent);


I used to get pissed at it.


----------



## cyamitide (Jul 8, 2010)

Alx7 said:


> You can read the book Outliers by Malcom Gladwell.
> 
> Outliers (book) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> In the book he shows that over 120 IQ there is no correlation to more success, and argues that is like a threshold, if you have this you have enough to think about given subjects.[/FONT][/COLOR]


Thanks, that it an interesting link. I had a couple of friends whose IQ I suspected to be in 130-150 range and they suffered many setbacks due to their much higher intelligence, ranging from feeling isolated to having to deal with envy of those who saw them as a threat.



Boolean11 said:


> Christopher Langan is an idiot in my book, looking at his videos and interviews I became some what perplexed, underwhelmed over him.


IMO he is an example of what intelligence looks like without the spark of creativity. Very bland and boring.


----------

