# why do I feel like many people are mistyped as iNtuitives?



## Inguz (Mar 10, 2012)

Arclight:2924483 said:


> Oh Dear!! LOL N superiority eh? Methinks someone is feeling persecuted and inferior and might want to learn a little something about projection.. This is my thread .. Enjoy what it shows you.
> http://personalitycafe.com/venting/103842-everybody-n.html


I wrote "if I didn't know any better", but this reply is hillarious, so now I'm projecting as well because I'm a Six? It's amazing what people can reveal if you just tease them a little. 

But my point still remains though, there is no contradiction in Ns feeling like social outcasts.


----------



## niss (Apr 25, 2010)

raichu said:


> I'm pretty sure this is exactly what my sister's going through. I really think she's an ISTJ, but she sees herself as an ENFP, and it's hard to convince her otherwise.


These are so radically different that it would be hard to confuse the two.


----------



## Staffan (Nov 15, 2011)

AimfortheBrain said:


> On the forums its bad to be an S. Whether people admit it or not, you are not looked at like an equal. Some people will get really politically correct and start talking about how sensors and intuitives are equal, but it doesn't change the fact that there is a huge, huge bias.
> 
> N is associated with creativity and innovation. Sometimes S is associated with these things but its usually in the form of physical creativity (i.e. ISTP Mechanics, ISFP Artists, etc.). N is associated with thinking outside of the box and seeing beyond whats right in front of your face. Those sure sound like qualities that I'd like to associate myself with, I mean, who wouldnt?
> 
> I, personally, don't believe any of this sensor/intuive superiority crap, and I also believe that a good chunk of people on the forums are probably mistyped sensors. It's hard to overcome blatant, rampant stereotyping, especially on these forums, and since the forums are a social place, a lot of people just want to fit in.


I think Ns are more creative in the idea department and sensors in designing or expressing stuff. But yes, there is a bias. Also, the people who think outside the box are not N but P.

(I think Daryl might be an ISTP. I have a slight man crush on him : ))


----------



## Owfin (Oct 15, 2011)

niss said:


> These are so radically different that it would be hard to confuse the two.


Depends on what measures you use. Somebody could be an ISTJ in thinking style but ENFP in temperament, and when the two systems clash...


----------



## Raichu (Aug 24, 2012)

niss said:


> These are so radically different that it would be hard to confuse the two.


she's very confused and doesn't see herself clearly at all


----------



## alionsroar (Jun 5, 2010)

nevermind.


----------



## Boolean11 (Jun 11, 2012)

Esoteric Enchantment said:


> So What're some major indicators between the two? I personally think I'm an intuitive but I'd like to know anyway


Too many kids around here enough said


----------



## Boolean11 (Jun 11, 2012)

socionics is different though intuition isn't superior


----------



## itsme45 (Jun 8, 2012)

LiquidLight said:


> There is also what I think is the fact that because we all sort of 'live' sensation -- that is we are constantly influenced by our five senses in a noticeable and tangible way, I think people are often unaware to the degree to which they rely on their sense perceptions. I know for me, it never dawned on me that Sensation would be an inferior function. Prior to my knowledge of Jung I always thought, as many people do, that I was good with my five senses (that is until I began to compare myself up against actual sensation types and realized that there is a vast degree of differences).


Hmm I'm curious what kind of vast differences have you found between yourself and S types? I'm really curious myself about how good my senses are compared to others...




> One of the tricks psychologists who study how people interact with the physical world is to note the difference between observing and seeing. In other words that many people do not actively pay attention to what they are looking at, they simply perceive or observe it without really knowing what they are looking at.


I find I prefer to not look for too long at one thing unless I'm actually interested in it. I also rely a lot on my peripheral vision and that by definition means not paying active attention because that would require full focus. (Though it is possible to pay active attention via peripheral vision too, just by default it isn't designed so)




> This is true of both sensation types and intuitives, its just worse with intuitives. If I were to ask you, what kind of lights are hanging out in the hallway in front of your classroom or office, or three houses down from you how many windows are on the front face of the house, most people would be stumped even though we walk past or drive past those things every day.


Well your second example involves more than just pure sensing, you'd have to explicitly count the windows if there was more than 3 or so of them. Also, neither example is great in terms of it being relevant information. Someone is not a Sensing type because of paying attention to really irrelevant details. No, that's just a basic human attitude to drop such crap to be more efficient in general. You'd have to be really really bored to pay much attention at these redundant little things. Basically, who cares?




> Jung simply says that Intuitives will have an archaic or primitive appeal to sensation, meaning that their appeal to their five senses will not usually be highly nuanced but rather very basic.


What does that mean? Can you give a few examples of highly nuanced vs very basic sensations, e.g. with Se function?




Joseph said:


> Someone who sits on the computer all day and watches tv in the background isn't necessarily an intuitive because they are afraid of real life, they may just enjoy the physical numbing sensation of these luxuries so they do it and detach from reality. Then they answer questions on a random-ass googled mbti test that they do not live in the moment or notice thing around them so they end up looking like an intuitive.


Er, you can live in the moment while using the computer... these two aren't exclusive to each other.




Julia Bell said:


> Seriously, if I took out the word "Intuitive" in descriptions of Intuition, I'd think that the descriptions were just describing an intellectual. An open-minded, smart, kind of Introverted intellectual. Seriously.


Yeah... IQ and Intuition are not the same thing and even people who seem to be real experts in personality type systems seem to make this mistake of confusing one for the other...




> I still see people running around on PerC saying that if you prefer a tell-it-as-it-is style versus a bunch of metaphors, you're a Sensor. This is ridiculous.


 Why is a literal style not highly indicative of being S > N? Though of course I can imagine N's talking in this way. Maybe it would be a better question to ask if literal explanation or metaphors are preferred for someone?




> Also, a lot of people say that Sensors on the whole are "details-oriented", and Intuitives like the "big picture". This is such a broad statement and can be taken the wrong way. It depends on what you mean by "details-oriented" or "big picture". This way of describing the difference between Sensing versus Intuition has probably done more harm than good.
> 
> It's amazing how much Se looks like Ne. I'm sure a lot of Si-doms and auxs find themselves thinking they are Intuitives as well, due to the abstract nature of Si.


Hmm... Interesting. -.- Food for thought. Or I'll just use my own views about how there is no true overarching boundary between N and S. Ha!


----------



## Owfin (Oct 15, 2011)

itsme45 said:


> Why is a literal style not highly indicative of being S > N? Though of course I can imagine N's talking in this way. Maybe it would be a better question to ask if literal explanation or metaphors are preferred for someone?


Because you can be very literal when referring to your intuitions and very metaphorical when referring to your sensing? Especially if Ne and Si are involved. It also just might be a way to get your point across. Speaking styles and all that.


----------

