# Who does NOT hate the sensors?



## elixare (Aug 26, 2010)

It appears that animosity towards sensors is quite a common theme among intuitives in general....

But is this actually true across the board or does there exist a specific intuitive type that harbors absolutely no negative feelings towards sensors whatsoever?


----------



## SuburbanLurker (Sep 26, 2010)

How could you possibly generalize an entire type into hating or not hating sensors? 

People who dislike sensors simply because they're sensors are ignorant, and ignoramuses come in all types, shapes and sizes.


----------



## Mendi the ISFJ (Jul 28, 2011)

You are lumping too many people together, Im told on another forum by IN**ers that some people enjoy Sensors because they lack in that area


----------



## Mouse222 (Jun 29, 2011)

How could anyone hate sensors!!


----------



## reletative (Dec 17, 2010)

I don't hate sensors


----------



## MonieJ (Nov 22, 2010)

I don't hate sensors :wink:


----------



## FreeSpirit (Jun 1, 2011)

Sensor hate makes me rage.

Or feel sorry for the person hating on sensors
because it just proves to me how little they
know about both the effectiveness and the joy of
sensing.

I think, most of the time, sensor haters are
intuitives who feel like outcasts in the world.
They read somewhere that sensors are supposed to
be much more prevalent than intuitives and
so they think sensor = stupid people in society
who have made my life hard/don't understand me.

They totally miss the fact that they have 
probably crushed on a sensor, admired a sensor 
and learned from many sensors. They tend
to only remember the 'bad' sensors, and take
them as representatives of the whole sensor
world.


----------



## Fizz (Nov 13, 2010)

I hate them thar Sensors! *spits into spittoon*
They's always bellyaching about how I tries to shoot them with mah shotgun.
They's always gittin' into mah yard to look at the flowers!
It pisses me off!!!


----------



## Herp (Nov 25, 2010)

I like Thermal Conductivity Sensors.


----------



## Scruffy (Aug 17, 2009)

Intuitives are "rarer" (I believe the demographics less and less these days) than sensors, people love to develop a group-think bias towards majorities. *It's very easy to feel oppressed when you're a minority.* I rarely see the ridicule/not fitting in when an intuitive is in a room with a lot of sensors, *the S/N gap is often forced by "intuitives".* "I'm different, you will never understand me, and I don't want you to". 

Intuition is not genetic lottery, you're not special, and stop trying to matter; because you ultimately don't, as nothing matters universally.

Because a sensor is a majority, every person who has ever been mean to you is _probably_ a sensor. So obviously, fuck them all, right?


----------



## Chaotic_Stupid (Jun 15, 2011)

I don't hate sensors.

I don't hate large groups of people; individuals matter.

I can kind of understand where the hate is coming from, even if I disagree with it. I also think some people who appear to hate sensors may not; they may just be venting.

That said:
A sensor who is wrong about something can be percieved as stubborn
An intuitive who is wrong about something is often percieved as crazy


It can be extremely difficult for some sensors to see the big picture.
An intuitive might miss some details.
Communication can be a huge issue.


----------



## SarahWilliams (May 5, 2010)

I don't hate sensors, but I can't say I completely understand them either. I would assume that they would say the same about me.


----------



## truth.pride.love (Jul 20, 2011)

Hmm. I'm going to have to agree with what most people are saying. This is all about preference. I admire the S ability to exist without having to analyze things as they process the world.


----------



## Bast (Mar 23, 2011)

I like sensors a lot! Sometimes I wish that I were a sensor! I think it'd be totally cool to be able to experience the world in a different way from how I do right now, to see what it's like.


----------



## Beyond_B (Feb 2, 2011)

How am I supposed to hate sensors, when I myself am one?
We all are sensors to some degree, we need that function in our daily life.


----------



## StanAlex (Jul 23, 2011)

Looks like i have no hater.....cool ^^

i know for sure that ENFPs love us


----------



## Kriash (May 5, 2011)

I don't think type matters really when it comes to who I like and dislike. If you are an asshole sensor, I probably won't like you. If you are an asshole intuitive, I probably won't like you. It has nothing to do with type. One of my best friends is an ESFP, and another is an ISTJ. While we don't understand each other all of the time- it is one of the things that makes our friendships interesting, because we come from different perspectives, and it's interesting to share the differences between us, as much as the things that are the same.


----------



## Figure (Jun 22, 2011)

I don't hate sensors and I in fact actually really admire some of them. It took a _very_ long time to get to feeling this way, but eventually one comes to appreciate their attention to detail and reliability; especially when those traits really count in a tough situation. Ironically, I had to step away from their world in the tangible and farther than I ever had into my own, the meta, to appreciate their intelligence and character. I value them in my own way, not the way they might want/understand to be valued. I am much happier to like them than feel cynical towards every one I meet. 

This mostly applies to SJ's I guess. I actually don't know many SP's, but I don't find them as challenging to relate to since their open-endedness doesn't tend to conflict my style of thinking as directly.


----------



## Fizz (Nov 13, 2010)

Scruffy said:


> Intuitives are "rarer" (I believe the demographics less and less these days) than sensors, people love to develop a group-think bias towards majorities. *It's very easy to feel oppressed when you're a minority.* I rarely see the ridicule/not fitting in when an intuitive is in a room with a lot of sensors, *the S/N gap is often forced by "intuitives".* "I'm different, you will never understand me, and I don't want you to".
> 
> Intuition is not genetic lottery, you're not special, and stop trying to matter; because you ultimately don't, as nothing matters universally.
> 
> Because a sensor is a majority, every person who has ever been mean to you is _probably_ a sensor. So obviously, fuck them all, right?


Every time I read an intuitive claim that sensors just don't "understand" them, I slowly want to press a pillow against their face until they're unconscious.

It drives me crazy, for the most part I think these are the same people who are terrible at grammar and sentence structure. That's the fucking reason no one understands them! I was an awkward kid for most of my life, I understand how it feels to be an "outsider" of sorts but I'm still a sensor.


----------



## Hastings (Jan 8, 2011)

I generally get along better with other intuitives. But I do assume sensors generally get along better with other sensors. This is not valid cause for scorn.

Sensors and intuitives do complement eachother anyhow. The ISTJ at my work handles detailed information technology beautifully, while I rather give sweeping judgements on the end product.


----------



## Beyond_B (Feb 2, 2011)

Some people actually voted @[email protected]
I wish I was more able to experience the "here and now" from time to time, but I kinda can't. 
I would like to be a stronger sensor sometimes, just to see how the world looks like in the "here and now"mode.


----------



## nádej (Feb 27, 2011)

I love a lot of people. Quite a few of them happen to be 'sensors'.

It's dumb and irrational to hate an entire population of people based only on generalizations and stereotypes. I mean, I think it's dumb and irrational to hate an entire population of people just in general.


----------



## suicidal_orange (May 6, 2010)

truth.pride.love said:


> I admire the S ability to exist without having to analyze things as they process the world.


Just thought you'd like to know you want to be an ESP not any other S - as an ISJ I compare everything to see how it fits with what has gone before which coupled with weak Ne making me constantly question if I've missed something important removes any hint of the spontanaeity you seek. Similarly an ISP is often hesitant to do something until it's been OK'd by their dominant Fi/Ti as having meaning to them (Fi) or isn't seen as a waste of time/energy (Ti) :happy: 

I agree with the idea though - it would be fun to "just do it" for a day :laughing:


----------



## dagnytaggart (Jun 6, 2010)

ENTJs fit in well wherever they go, since they're good with "sensor reputed" things, like details (even though they may not like details) and physical coordination/spatial ability.

So, ENTJs have no reason to "feel misunderstood." I'd vote for them.

*insert blatantly fucking obvious disclaimer about how this does not apply to all, that generalizations are inaccurate, and other no-fucking-DUH politically correct eggshell tiptoe shit* 

ty.


----------



## StrixAluco (Apr 8, 2011)

I can't hate sensors, I always wanted to be one. Plus, I can see the skills of my brother compared with mine. Sure I am all abstract and good at analysing society, making criticism or talking philosophy and literature but when I'm building ideas, he's building a dalek robot. My brother is cool.

(And I would never assume that his flaws are sensor flaws or that mine are purely intuitive flaws so I am not going to blame sensing for some issues. The ability to be practical is amazing to me because I am not balanced at all and it took me time to be less abstract, more down-to-earth and a bit more attentive as he is learning to enjoy less practical theories and conversations. We all have our issues.)

So, of course, people living in the "here and now" can be irritating because they seem to react to small elements rather than the whole system (and to be fair, we are annoying because we seem to concentrate on something random which is not important NOW) but it is also a matter of education and awareness and it seems easier to be slightly more intuitive than slightly more sensing sometimes.

However, I think it is more ignorance than type that makes one a sensor hater.


----------



## Fizz (Nov 13, 2010)

dagnytaggart said:


> ENTJs fit in well wherever they go, since they're good with "sensor reputed" things, like details (even though they may not like details) and physical coordination/spatial ability.
> 
> So, ENTJs have no reason to "feel misunderstood." I'd vote for them.
> 
> ...


I'm related to an ENTJ and I agree with this and the part where you have to stop people's bitching before they start. Yes, of course there are exceptions and I'm sure there are some weird ENTJs out there that lack social prowess.


----------



## Doom (Oct 25, 2010)

I was thinking about this the other day, I find S types easier to work with as they're more willing to just get things done rather than over analysing everything and trying to change/improve it.

I sometimes wish I had the straight forward nature of S types kind of like how they can follow something perfectly where as I keep questioning the validity and open endness of something.


----------



## skycloud86 (Jul 15, 2009)

I don't hate or love anyone simply because of their preferences or cognitive function strengths/weaknesses. All humans are both I and E, are all both S and N, are all both F and T and are all both P and J, even those who get 100% for a preference in one of the online tests.


----------



## TiNeSi (Jan 10, 2011)

Of course, as everyone said before me I don't "hate" sensors. But beyond that, I don't really get the big disconnect. I don't feel that "sensors don't understand me" neither do I feel a strong connection with every intuitive I come across. Maybe that's more of a Ne/Ni dom thing. Quite frankly some sensors get me way better than some intuitives. I like my Si and I find Se extremely attractive.


----------



## NeedsNewNameNow (Dec 1, 2009)

I worry that there might be sensors hiding under my bed 

:laughing:


----------



## Magic Mirror (May 20, 2011)

I wanted to vote *Any wise, mature intuitive does NOT hate sensors* but unfortunately, there was no such option in the poll.


----------



## apprehended (Sep 24, 2010)

I love sensors personally. They are so helpful when I am developing a plan or idea because they will notice some important detail that I overlooked, or something that is not practical or realistic in it. I love how detail oriented they are, sometimes.

If everyone was like me our plans would fail most of the time because we would overlook some important detail, or they would be totally unrealistic.

Sometimes it is annoying because they don't understand my abstract reasoning, but I really can't fault them for their brain not working the same way as mine. 

The main annoyance for me is not sensors, but a lack of intuitive friends who can understand my abstract reasoning.


----------



## Napoleptic (Oct 29, 2010)

What is it with this theme today? :crazy: I'll just quote what I posted earlier.



Napoleptic said:


> Meh, humans aren't so bad, it's the individual specimens that get to me.
> 
> "_I have ever hated all nations, professions, and communities, and all my love is toward individuals: for instance, I hate the tribe of lawyers, but I love Counsellor Such-a-one, and Judge Such-a-one: so with physicians—I will not speak of my own trade—soldiers, English, Scotch, French, and the rest. But principally I hate and detest that animal called man, although I heartily love John, Peter, Thomas, and so forth. This is the system upon which I have governed myself many years, but do not tell..._" ~ Jonathan Swift


----------



## Erbse (Oct 15, 2010)

Khys said:


> I don't hate sensors


Just when I wanted to post that. Now I hate sensors, too.

Screw you.


----------



## dejavu (Jun 23, 2010)

I've put a lot of thought into this sensor hate thing.

I think that intuitives who have just discovered MBTI have a sudden realization about why they are different from the majority of people they've come in contact with in real life. They also learn that there is an actual, legitimate reason they didn't fit in as easily. This is good as it can help a person feel better and more accepting of their personalities. However...it can cause a person to take a very negative look at the people around them.

A lot of intuitives have many memories of being misunderstood and made to feel bad for just being themselves. Sensors can't take all the blame for that. Without an understanding of MBTI, even other intuitives could be responsible. Sensors are the majority, however, so it is them that the intuitives (for the most part) could not fit in with.

Sensors aren't another species and they are certainly not here to keep intuitives down. :tongue: The differences can be very small, as both sensors and intuitives have the same functions, just different preferences. I can't say I've ever harbored a hate towards sensors, as two of the most valued people in my life are sensors and I enjoy their company immensely. Besides that, the people who have made my life the most difficult in the past were, in fact, other intuitives. :tongue:

Anyway, in most cases, I think those who display any kind of hate toward sensors will get over it as they mature. I will say that the stereotypes get very tiring. Neither being an intuitive or a sensor will make you superior, and being an intuitive doesn't make you smart. :dry:


----------



## unico (Feb 3, 2011)

I can't speak for my MBTI type (INFJ), but I don't have a problem with sensors. There are many I am friends with and really like.


----------



## truth.pride.love (Jul 20, 2011)

asmit127 said:


> Just thought you'd like to know you want to be an ESP not any other S - as an ISJ I compare everything to see how it fits with what has gone before which coupled with weak Ne making me constantly question if I've missed something important removes any hint of the spontanaeity you seek.


Hmm, ISFJ. I know two, they both happen to be female. And I could guess that they do the same! Maybe I'm thinking of a few ISFPs I know. In which case, which function do you think would be most responsible for the carefree thing?? Very interesting insight!! =)


----------



## Persephone (Nov 14, 2009)

Mouse222 said:


> How could anyone hate sensors!!


I do. They're such a pain in the ass every time I try to pass through immigration 

I suspect some people hate sensors because they were dominated by one in their early lives. My mother, an ISFJ, is probably a type 8 (1w2 or 8w7) and she dominates everyone in the family. Everything has to be done according to her, and she did give me a lot of grief and because her view is so prevalent in the general population (prevalence of sensors in society), she doesn't think there is another way to do things. I went through a sensor hating phase because of that. When you're an intuitive minority (as some other poster said, any sort of minority), you tend to feel ostracized and out of place. It's pretty human, like being a racial or political minority. If the situation were reversed I think immature sensors might be wary of intuitives.


----------



## Mulberries (Feb 17, 2011)

How could anyone dislike those lovable cave people? 







Just kidding...really.


----------



## MCRTS (Jul 4, 2011)

I don't hate the Sensors! :tongue:


----------



## MissJordan (Dec 21, 2010)

I hate sensors.

Then again, I hate people in general...

Sensors _just happen_ to be included in my hate...


----------



## viva (Aug 13, 2010)

Am I the only one who read the title of this thread aloud in my brain in the robotic voice from the "Sensor Hate" video on Youtube?


----------



## Awesomeste (Nov 22, 2011)

Fizz said:


> I hate them thar Sensors! *spits into spittoon*
> They's always bellyaching about how I tries to shoot them with mah shotgun.
> They's always gittin' into mah yard to look at the flowers!
> It pisses me off!!!


Wait but you are an ESTP which is a sensor?! Their main trait is sensing  But lol I can tell you're funny! That made me laugh..


----------



## Thalassa (Jun 10, 2010)

LXPilot said:


> I don't hate sensors and I in fact actually really admire some of them. It took a _very_ long time to get to feeling this way, but eventually one comes to appreciate their attention to detail and reliability; especially when those traits really count in a tough situation. Ironically, I had to step away from their world in the tangible and farther than I ever had into my own, the meta, to appreciate their intelligence and character. I value them in my own way, not the way they might want/understand to be valued. I am much happier to like them than feel cynical towards every one I meet.
> 
> This mostly applies to SJ's I guess. I actually don't know many SP's, but I don't find them as challenging to relate to since their open-endedness doesn't tend to conflict my style of thinking as directly.


I think it's about functions, really. I have more problems with ESTJs than I have with Si doms, and more problems on-line with INTJs and ENTPs than I do with INTPs. I've also gotten into more squabbles with INFx men than I have any NF female. 

There's no blanket ...thing...where it's like "omgz I don't get along with Ns" or whatever.

That's the ignorance of it. It's like...saying all Sensors are STJs. Do you see what I mean?


----------



## Thalassa (Jun 10, 2010)

dagnytaggart said:


> ENTJs fit in well wherever they go, since they're good with "sensor reputed" things, like details (even though they may not like details) and physical coordination/spatial ability.
> 
> So, ENTJs have no reason to "feel misunderstood." I'd vote for them.
> 
> ...


ENTJs are the SJs of the Ns, and ENFPs are the SPs of the Ns. Or something.

ENTJs have tertiary Se and tend to do well IRL because of being Te doms, and that's probably why they don't experience any of this feeling of being "left out" that other Ns might feel.

But, like, an ISFP might feel left out or weird, and ISFPs are sensors. 

Whatever.


----------



## dagnytaggart (Jun 6, 2010)

fourtines said:


> ENTJs are the SJs of the Ns, and ENFPs are the SPs of the Ns. Or something.
> 
> ENTJs have tertiary Se and tend to do well IRL because of being Te doms, and that's probably why they don't experience any of this feeling of being "left out" that other Ns might feel.
> 
> ...


I don't know. I tend to feel like an alien from the outside looking in at the world. Yes, my Te helps, but I think that I've got more Ni. I'm just so used to it being my dom function, that I kind of take it for granted. 

I tend to relate more to INTJs than to ENTJs, though I often do test as an Introvert. 

ISFPs though, IMO, have a rough hand of cards to deal with in this world. The Fi + tertiary Ni, fueling the impulsive Se, has gotta be tough. But they manage.


----------



## Fizz (Nov 13, 2010)

Awesomeste said:


> Wait but you are an ESTP which is a sensor?! Their main trait is sensing  But lol I can tell you're funny! That made me laugh..


That's part of the joke, yes. You deconstructed it well.


----------



## Spades (Aug 31, 2011)

I bet that about half of people claiming to be intuitives are actually sensors misguided by the anti-sensor bias that's propagated by completely ignorant intuitives. The irony.


----------



## Dino (Mar 25, 2011)

People who hate sensors are simply ignorant.


----------



## Zerosum (Jul 17, 2011)

My functional analysis has absolutely no real world applications... I can't type a sensor from an intuitive and therefore how can I hate something I don't even understand


----------



## WamphyriThrall (Apr 11, 2011)

Spades said:


> I bet that about half of people claiming to be intuitives are actually sensors misguided by the anti-sensor bias that's propagated by completely ignorant intuitives. The irony.


I don't know about that. Given the fact that we're on a typology forum, this means there's a higher chance of a) introverts and b) intuitives, so not surprisingly INTx and INFx types dominate. Half? It seems a bit high, and I can safely say most of the regular intuitive members I've spoken to are intuitives. Perhaps some users who don't take the whole system seriously and rarely post are. But yeah, there are a LOT of ignorant intuitives (as well as sensors) online. They just get more of a bad rep since they make up the majority.


----------



## Linnifae (Nov 13, 2009)

The only sensors I don't like are the ones that act like intuitives are annoying and their thoughts are invalid or a waste of time. I haven't run into too many people like that, but the ones I did annoyed me. Basically the world needs all types and if you can respect me, I'll respect you, it's that simple.


----------



## RedDeath9 (Apr 22, 2010)

This thread is bad and TS should feel bad.


----------



## Thalassa (Jun 10, 2010)

WamphyriThrall said:


> I don't know about that. Given the fact that we're on a typology forum, this means there's a higher chance of a) introverts and b) intuitives, so not surprisingly INTx and INFx types dominate. Half? It seems a bit high, and I can safely say most of the regular intuitive members I've spoken to are intuitives. Perhaps some users who don't take the whole system seriously and rarely post are. But yeah, there are a LOT of ignorant intuitives (as well as sensors) online. They just get more of a bad rep since they make up the majority.


I agree that a lot of people on-line are mistyped sensors. I was once one of them, but I realize now I'm so Se that it's not even a question anymore, as well as fitting the Keirsey SP temperament.

I think there are a bunch of ISTJs or ESTJs on INTJ forum, that some NFs are actually SFPs, and maybe even an INTP here and there is really a smart ISTP. 

Dichotomy tests are geared toward the Si definition of sensing, so Se types are likely to mistype themselves as NPs, and any self-respecting intelligent ISTJ is going to be offended that his description makes him sound so freaking boring, when he knows darn well how funny and sarcastic he is and what good taste he has. I'd be pissed off too if someone told me I was a "duty fulfiller" and wore "homespun" clothes.

I also think a lot of ESFPs think they're too smart to be ESFPs, because good lord, everyone on-line knows how _dumb _they are...


----------



## donkeybals (Jan 13, 2011)

Depends on the type of sensor. I've said I hated a few types before, it's not that I hate them, I just rather be around certain types and some types drain the sh*t out of me and the fact that I can only live my life like it's jersey shore for so long.


----------



## Thalassa (Jun 10, 2010)

Linnifae said:


> The only sensors I don't like are the ones that act like intuitives are annoying and their thoughts are invalid or a waste of time. I haven't run into too many people like that, but the ones I did annoyed me. Basically the world needs all types and if you can respect me, I'll respect you, it's that simple.


Well as an Ne dom you're going to clash with Si doms who are less balanced with their tert/inf functions. 

There are going to be clashes with Ne/Ni and Se/Si naturally...and yes, on-line especially, Si or Se types are going to get incredibly frustrated with a person who is gabbing about blah blah blah unrealistic theories but then acting all superior like they're smarter than they are. But by the same token, I know there is a certain condescending way that Si doms (or Te doms, including ENTJs as well as ESTJs) can act, like their organization and plans make them naturally smarter or more superior.

My defense typically is to make people feel like they're factually lacking, emotionally retarded, or socially inept...but those are defense mechanisms against people acting superior because they are N, T, or INxx...and trust me I've had run-ins with other sensors...as I mentioned in my earlier post, it's generally a clash of FUNCTIONS rather than a simple dichotomy clash.


----------



## WamphyriThrall (Apr 11, 2011)

fourtines said:


> I agree that a lot of people on-line are mistyped sensors. I was once one of them, but I realize now I'm so Se that it's not even a question anymore, as well as fitting the Keirsey SP temperament.
> 
> I think there are a bunch of ISTJs or ESTJs on INTJ forum, that some NFs are actually SFPs, and maybe even an INTP here and there is really a smart ISTP.
> 
> ...


If they're so immature to buy into MBTI stereotypes and let those influence their decision, then they're not taking the whole system seriously, for what it was designed to do. I frequent both the INTJ and ISTJ forums, can tell the difference between communication styles, and also say with certainty that most of the regulars there are not mistyped (they're usually the ones who take the site and typology system seriously). Perhaps those members whose posts count is in the double digits..

I was actually mistyped as ISTJ before *Gasp* and a lot of people have a tough time believing that, since the inverse is more common. Read my earlier posts to see for yourself how convinced I was at the time, until a few unfortunate conversations with members of both sides of the fence opened my eyes. I didn't have a strong background in the eight functions at the time, and having been raised by two SJ parents and having an enneagram 613 tritype, as well as the already many similarities between the two IxTJ types did provide some initial confusion.

And as strange as it might sound, I actually preferred the description and company of SJs than NTs in the beginning.


----------



## Spades (Aug 31, 2011)

fourtines said:


> I agree that a lot of people on-line are mistyped sensors. I was once one of them, but I realize now I'm so Se that it's not even a question anymore, as well as fitting the Keirsey SP temperament.
> 
> I think there are a bunch of ISTJs or ESTJs on INTJ forum, that some NFs are actually SFPs, and maybe even an INTP here and there is really a smart ISTP.
> 
> ...


I agree with those common mistypes!

@_WamphyriThrall_ has a good point, but despite that, I think the numbers are off. "Half" is perhaps an overestimate, but I still think it's a significant portion. When people talk about SJ's, they seem to always mention parents/grandparents/teachers etc, and their image of an SJ is that. And so, sometimes they incorrectly conclude they are not an SJ. But young SJ's are obviously different because they grew up in a different generation and their personal "traditions" will be completely different. Just an example of one common misconception I see.*
*


----------



## bengalcat (Dec 8, 2010)

No entiendo.

I harbour some negative sentiment towards every type hahaha. I laugh but it is the truth. Geez, I was so ready to participate in the poll based on the thread title "who does not hate the sensors?" - I was all "Yeah! I get to put my vote in!" 

But now I have abstained because seriously, no negative sentiment whatsoever? Are you kidding me? There are probably less than a handful of people out of all the people I've ever met towards whom I have never harboured the slightest little bit of negative sentiment, and it may be that I idealised them. 

Am always disappointed when the polls don't match up with what the thread suggests :\


----------



## pinkrasputin (Apr 13, 2009)

Not me. I want to make deep spicy love to my sensor :wink:

And omg, ENFPs are nothing like ESFPs. I have nothing against them, they are sweethearts. But due to commonalities, in real life I tend to attract way more ENFJs and ENFPs as friends. Even an ESFJ, INTJ, or ISTJ will frequently enter my life on a regular basis. But hardly ever has an ESFP been in the same social circle I've been in.


----------



## Thalassa (Jun 10, 2010)

happyending said:


> You guys are retarded.


 ISTJ knows best!




happyending said:


> No, but seriously retarded.


no u


----------



## Thalassa (Jun 10, 2010)

Staffan said:


> I think Jung might have started this sensor hating. I remember he writes something in Psychological Types to the effect that they aren't always bad.


That's interesting since he was uppermost introverted thinking and secondly sensing as a scientist, with intuition and feeling in his subconscious, by his own admission...an ISTP!


----------



## Staffan (Nov 15, 2011)

fourtines said:


> That's interesting since he was uppermost introverted thinking and secondly sensing as a scientist, with intuition and feeling in his subconscious, by his own admission...an ISTP!


Strictly speking I don't think he can have claimed to be an ISTP because he died in 1961 and the first MBTI was published in 1962. Which is an intereseting timing by the way. But I haven't heard him referring to himself as a sensor at all, only as an IT. Do you know where he makes this claim? I always thought of him as an INTP.


----------



## Thalassa (Jun 10, 2010)

Staffan said:


> Strictly speking I don't think he can have claimed to be an ISTP because he died in 1961 and the first MBTI was published in 1962. Which is an intereseting timing by the way. But I haven't heard him referring to himself as a sensor at all, only as an IT. Do you know where he makes this claim? I always thought of him as an INTP.


"As a natural scientist, thinking and sensation were uppermost in me and intuition and feeling were in the unconscious and contaminated by the collective unconscious."
-Carl Jung

from: Analytical Psychology (Amazon.com: Analytical Psychology (9780691019185): C. G. Jung, William McGuire: Books)




> As a natural scientist, thinking and sensation were uppermost in me and intuition and feeling were in the unconscious and contaminated by the collective unconscious. You cannot get directly to the inferior function from the superior, it must always be via the auxiliary function. It is as though the unconscious were in such antagonism to the superior function that it allowed no direct attack. The process of working through auxiliary functions goes on somewhat as follows: Suppose you have sensation strongly developed but are not fanatical about it. Then you can admit about every situation a certain aura of possibilities; that is to say, you permit an intuitive element to come in. Sensation as an auxiliary function would allow intuition to exist. But inasmuch as sensation (in the example) is a partisan of the intellect, intuition sides with the feeling, here the inferior function. Therefore the intellect will not agree with intuition, in this case, and will vote for its exclusion. Intellect will not hold together sensation and intuition, rather it will separate them. Such a destructive attempt will be checked by feeling, which backs up intuition.
> 
> Looking at it the other way around, if you are an intuitive type, you can't get to your sensations directly. They are full of monsters, and so you have to go by way of your intellect or feeling, whichever is the auxiliary in the conscious. it needs very cool reasoning for such a man to keep himself down to reality. To sum up then, the way is from the superior to the auxiliary, from the latter to the function opposite to the auxiliary. Usually this first conflict that is aroused between the auxiliary function in the conscious and its opposite function in the unconscious is the fight that takes place in analysis. This may be called the preliminary conflict. The knock-down battle between the superior and inferior functions only takes place in life. In the example of the intellectual sensation type, I suggested the preliminary conflict would be between sensation and intuition, and the final fight between intellect and feeling.


Thank you, *Calysco*.


----------



## INTJellectual (Oct 22, 2011)

"No one" wins the vote yay!

Well in reality we live in a Sensors world, so whether you like it or not you have to mingle with too many Sensors.
No offense Sensors, and I'm not generalizing you all because some of my friends are Sensors even my partner is a Sensor too.
But, honestly you don't have the patience to understand us Intuitives just because we are so few. And most of the time some type of Sensors are mean and shallow. Pardon me for my word and don't take it personally, you're just not my level and I don't intend to argue with you because we just go in to two different directions. 

MBTI is created to promote peace, harmony, and undertanding of each individual's type and how to relate to them, not to create barriers. But some Sensors (I'm not generalizing all Sensors), never cared to give a fack understanding why an individual is this and that and thus they just label them as such and such derogatory names like weird, odd, different, boring, abnormal.


----------



## Staffan (Nov 15, 2011)

fourtines said:


> "As a natural scientist, thinking and sensation were uppermost in me and intuition and feeling were in the unconscious and contaminated by the collective unconscious."
> -Carl Jung
> 
> from: Analytical Psychology (Amazon.com: Analytical Psychology (9780691019185): C. G. Jung, William McGuire: Books)
> ...


So I guess I should dig up the quote about sensors. Unfortunately I don't have the book but I am pretty sure he did make a derogatory remark. Your quote is a few years on so maybe he changed his mind. He did change his mind a lot. 

At any rate he still can't have claimed to be ISTP since that theory was published after his death. And personally I don't buy him being a sensor. He may have started out as natural scientist but he ended up as a mystic. No sensor (or scientifically minded person for that matter) would come up with something like synchronicity.


----------



## Thalassa (Jun 10, 2010)

Staffan said:


> So I guess I should dig up the quote about sensors. Unfortunately I don't have the book but I am pretty sure he did make a derogatory remark. Your quote is a few years on so maybe he changed his mind. He did change his mind a lot.
> 
> At any rate he still can't have claimed to be ISTP since that theory was published after his death. And personally I don't buy him being a sensor. He may have started out as natural scientist but he ended up as a mystic. No sensor (or scientifically minded person for that matter) would come up with something like synchronicity.


What do you not understand about Thinking was uppermost in him with Sensing? IT(S) would be the Jungian representation of that, which roughly translates to ISTP.

And since you're saying the MBTI theory wasn't published until after his death, he certainly did not say anything derogatory about them.

Why would he talk shit about himself? Do you understand that someone who starts out as a natural scientist who ends up as a mystic PERFECTLY fits an STP who has tertiary (or even inferior) Ni?

Same thing happened with Se dom Henry Miller he was a cross between a romantic, an adventurer, and a crude sensualist well into middle age, then at the end of his life was some sort of ...beatnik holy man who lived in Big Sur, CA out in nature. 

I suggest you re-read that passage actually written by Jung to understand what he is saying.


----------



## Staffan (Nov 15, 2011)

fourtines said:


> What do you not understand about Thinking was uppermost in him with Sensing? IT(S) would be the Jungian representation of that, which roughly translates to ISTP.
> 
> And since you're saying the MBTI theory wasn't published until after his death, he certainly did not say anything derogatory about them.
> 
> ...



I understand he claiming to be IST but that can only be translated to ISTP if he accepted that theory. And he died before that. He could of course say something derogatory about sensors regardless of when the MBTI was first published because sensing was part of the orginal theory. 

Why would he talk shit about himself? Like I said, maybe he changed his mind. There are a few years between Psychological types and the quote you refer to. 

And no I don't understand how someone who is STP (and wasn't he ISTP?) can end up like a mystic and come up with an anti-sensor idea like synchronicity. I would say he was never a scientist to begin with. He started out trying to be one but he never succeeded. He only came to his right as a mystic, an intuitive. From the Free Dictionary: *mystic* - having an import not apparent to the senses nor obvious to the intelligence..."


----------



## Owfin (Oct 15, 2011)

Staffan said:


> Why would he talk shit about himself? Like I said, maybe he changed his mind. There are a few years between Psychological types and the quote you refer to.


Because he realizes his way of thinking has flaws? I recall feeling and intuition having rather sobering descriptions, too.


----------



## Staffan (Nov 15, 2011)

Owfin said:


> Because he realizes his way of thinking has flaws? I recall feeling and intuition having rather sobering descriptions, too.


He does say some weird things about other types as well. Like the extraverted feeling type: "Examples of this type that I can call to mind are, almost without exception, women." That sounds like someone living up in the world of ideas rather than in reality. Good ideas a lot of them but nevertheless. 

I found the quote that I found derogatory,

"His aim is concrete enjoyment, and his morality is similarly orientated. For
true enjoyment has its own special morality, its own
moderation and lawfulness, its own unselfishness and
devotedness. It by no means follows that he is just
sensual or gross, for he may differentiate his sensation
to the finest pitch of aesthetic purity without being the
least unfaithful, even in his most abstract sensations, to
his principle of objective sensation."

I read it in Swedish though and "It by no means follows that he is just
sensual or gross" was translated more like "He doesn't necessarily have to be sensual or gross". I don't know German well enough to compare translations. But it doesn't sound that flattering in English either. Some other quotes that may have inspired the sensor-hating:

"The sensation type has neither a differentiated
thinking nor a differentiated feeling, but his sensuousness
is well developed. This, as we know, is also the case with
the primitive."

And about the extraverted sensor:

"He is by no means unlovable ; on the contrary, he frequently
has a charming and lively capacity for enjoyment; he is
sometimes a jolly fellow, and often a refined aesthete.
In the former case, the great problems of life hinge upon
a good or indifferent dinner; in the latter, they are
questions of good taste."


----------



## Owfin (Oct 15, 2011)

Staffan said:


> "His aim is concrete enjoyment, and his morality is similarly orientated. For
> true enjoyment has its own special morality, its own
> moderation and lawfulness, its own unselfishness and
> devotedness. It by no means follows that he is just
> ...


These two seem quite flattering to me. I don't see where the "hate" is.


----------



## Staffan (Nov 15, 2011)

Owfin said:


> These two seem quite flattering to me. I don't see where the "hate" is.


It's the "for he may" that sounds like they don't usually differentiate. But it did sound worse in Swedish. And I wouldn't be flattered if someone said that I thought the greater problems of life "hinge upon a good or different dinner". 

Not that there is any hate in these or even that about "the primitive" but I can see how these quotes could inspire a negative view of sensors.


----------



## Owfin (Oct 15, 2011)

Staffan said:


> It's the "for he may" that sounds like they don't usually differentiate. And I wouldn't be flattered if someone said that I thought the greater problems of life "hinge upon a good or different dinner".


I interpreted the "for he may" as "he is able to" and not as "he might", so that would explain our different opinions about the texts. And the part I thought was flattering about the second example was the "refined aesthete" and "questions of good taste". To me, it seems like he is saying that extroverted sensing sorts are often connoisseurs of the senses, so to speak.


----------



## JungyesMBTIno (Jul 22, 2011)

> Like the extraverted feeling type: "Examples of this type that I can call to mind are, almost without exception, women. That sounds like someone living up in the world of ideas rather than in reality."


I thought the complete opposite, actually. The Fe doms definitely seem to be the most stereotypically feminine on average, since they're the least likely to hold their feelings back. This reasoning seems pretty logical to me, as he "called to mind examples" - concrete(ish) evidence.


----------



## Le9acyMuse (Mar 12, 2010)

I can intuitively tell a sensor apart from an intuitivist now. I love that feeling of "bingo" I get. Helps me appreciate their abilities all the more. Sensors are like...different shades of people I see as natural buddies. Intuitivists are more foreign and maintain contact with me through a lens fixed on zoom-out. I feel a respectful rivalry with them, which can lead to insightful growth for us both and an inseparable bond. Sensors that hate Intuitivists, and vice versa, may fear competition involving their potential weaknesses.


----------



## Staffan (Nov 15, 2011)

JungyesMBTIno said:


> I thought the complete opposite, actually. The Fe doms definitely seem to be the most stereotypically feminine on average, since they're the least likely to hold their feelings back. This reasoning seems pretty logical to me, as he "called to mind examples" - concrete(ish) evidence.


Don't get me wrong. I agree that women dominate this type. It's the "almost without exception" part that makes me wonder. I take that to mean at least 95 percent which doesn't make any sense to me.


----------



## Thalassa (Jun 10, 2010)

Staffan said:


> I understand he claiming to be IST but that can only be translated to ISTP if he accepted that theory. And he died before that. He could of course say something derogatory about sensors regardless of when the MBTI was first published because sensing was part of the orginal theory.


He would be an ISTP because IT(S) = Introverted Thinking (Sensing). Of course it doesn't translate exactly. I believe in Jung's original theory I am ES(F) = Extroverted Sensing (Feeling) which is the cultural realist.

The reason why there *is* a rough translation is because in Jung the rejected inferior is opposite....so ISTP has inferior Fe, right? Yes, so this means that Jung's neurosis would be Fe, while mine would be Ni. 

I know it's confusing, and no the systems aren't exact, but yes, that roughly translates to to Ti dom, supported by Sensing, inferior Fe neurosis...which we would simply call an ISTP to make short work of it. 





> And no I don't understand how someone who is STP (and wasn't he ISTP?) can end up like a mystic and come up with an anti-sensor idea like synchronicity. I would say he was never a scientist to begin with. He started out trying to be one but he never succeeded. He only came to his right as a mystic, an intuitive. From the Free Dictionary: *mystic* - having an import not apparent to the senses nor obvious to the intelligence..."


It's because Ni develops later in life and takes on more significance in the mature, balanced individual. 

His Ni would be tertiary, so it would be developed by age 30 or so, if not by his mid-to-late 20s. 

Not really shocking in the slightest.

I do think he was a scientist in the beginning because it takes a SHIT LOAD OF HUMAN OBSERVATION (I'm talking years and years and years of observation, including patient study of the same individuals over long periods of time) to even develop Jung's original theory.

Development of lesser functions later in life does not dismiss the dom/aux.


----------



## Thalassa (Jun 10, 2010)

Staffan said:


> He does say some weird things about other types as well. Like the extraverted feeling type: "Examples of this type that I can call to mind are, almost without exception, women." That sounds like someone living up in the world of ideas rather than in reality. Good ideas a lot of them but nevertheless.
> 
> I found the quote that I found derogatory,
> 
> ...


Those aren't insults, that's just the perception of your own biased mind.

The meaning of undifferentiated feeling and thinking is how Jung saw the aux/tert functions...actually I'm not sure about Jung's theories on the tertiary I may be wandering into Lenore Thomson or Linda Berhens so I'll refrain...

But I think you simply don't understand that a Ti dom has undifferentiated sensing and intuition, like the Se dom has undifferentiated thinking and feeling.

Understand now?

He's also saying that *some* "lesser developed" (less mature or perhaps even less intelligent) Se doms might be more prone to gross excess or over-simplicity of what we had for dinner and nothing more...but the more mature and/or more intelligent Se dom is a refined aesthete with good taste.

All of the descriptions have their good and bad points, their lesser developed and more developed versions of the types...read them again.

How about the Fi dom? The childish, banal mask? The coldness? Nice, eh? 

Come on, try to use your inferior Te objectivity just a teensy tiny bit. :wink:


----------



## Splintered in Her Head (Sep 19, 2011)

Mouse222 said:


> How could anyone hate sensors!!


I agree! I am married to one!


----------



## Staffan (Nov 15, 2011)

Le9acyMuse said:


> I can intuitively tell a sensor apart from an intuitivist now. I love that feeling of "bingo" I get. Helps me appreciate their abilities all the more. Sensors are like...different shades of people I see as natural buddies. Intuitivists are more foreign and maintain contact with me through a lens fixed on zoom-out. I feel a respectful rivalry with them, which can lead to insightful growth for us both and an inseparable bond. Sensors that hate Intuitivists, and vice versa, may fear competition involving their potential weaknesses.


 
I also recognise other intuitivists instantly, through eye contact. It's like you say, natural buddies or something. Even though we aren't necessarily actual buddies. Most tabloid journalists are probably intuitivists.


----------



## Mouse222 (Jun 29, 2011)

Normality27 said:


> That was a question not a statement. (-_-) I don't hate all sensors, just the ones who don't have the ability to sit in the peace and quiet and just think. I love doing that, I'll often be caught pacing around the house (eating unconsciously) and just thinking.
> Another thing i dislike about most sensors, is that most intuitives have the ability to use their sensing when desired, but for most sensors it's almost impossible for them to use their intuition (but usually only the ones who haven't heard of the MBTI theory).
> 
> P.S. If you need proof I don't hate sensors one of my best friends is sitting in the room with me right now, and she's a sensor >u<


Crap, that was a question.... Explains my English grade. Anyway, I'm glad you don't hate us all!


----------



## nakkinaama (Jun 20, 2012)

Lets not separate eachothers. People view the world differently, and I know that there are some people among the other tail of the horses tail, that view the world just as the same as an INTP or anyone intuitive! Lets focus on teaching each others to value real, important things in life, rather than just acknowledge that there could be someone different than you. Lets all be happy together.

Edit: the horse tail was a thingy i made up, and sorry for the nonsense of this post, really Im just _trying_ to master my English but it aint going well.


----------



## Navi (Jul 8, 2012)

Mendi the ISFJ said:


> You are lumping too many people together, Im told on another forum by IN**ers that some people enjoy Sensors because they lack in that area


My mom's an ISFJ and I need her like water. 
I enjoy sensors for the reason you stated; I lack in that area. My sensing mom teaches me a lot.


----------



## Laguna (Mar 21, 2012)

I don't hate sensors. I love sensors. Sensors take care of me. They are so cool. But they do not fulfill every need I have in terms of human contact. So I need to venture out to fulfill those deeper parts of my head and heart. But sensors are the bomb and if anyone has a problem with them- let's take it outside!


----------



## kelar (Nov 30, 2011)

...every one is a sensor. For example, I use Se. It happens to be my inferior function, but it's still there...
I don't know why they always make sensors out to be simple or shallow. Because...they're not.


----------



## Kabosu (Mar 31, 2012)

Good question, cuz I hates sensors! I tried chasing after them with pitchforks and they tortured me instead! Zomg!!!


----------



## Finagle (Jun 4, 2011)

Nobody handle a pitchfork like a sensor.


----------



## Coburn (Sep 3, 2010)

Did anyone who answered this poll "no one" actually read the question? It says "who does not hate the sensors?" 

If you reply "no one," the sentence becomes "no one does not hate the sensors." In other words, everybody hates sensors.


----------



## Praesepe (Dec 4, 2011)

childofprodigy said:


> It appears that animosity towards sensors is quite a common theme among intuitives in general....
> 
> But is this actually true across the board or does there exist a specific intuitive type that harbors absolutely no negative feelings towards sensors whatsoever?


I don't see animosity. All I see are differences in communication and values. Most of the musings about "sensing hate" comes from sensors. A handful of N's jump on the bandwagon with the "Sensors can be smart, philosophize and be deep too. All while being dominant/auxiliary sensors, There soo amazing11!!!" Strengths and weaknesses amongst the preference dichotomy is what deepens the divide. Face it, a lot of N's feel that they are expendable to what's revered in the dominant sensing culture. Intuitives have been browbeaten, ostracized and even bullied for "having their head in the clouds" and choosing not to take everything at face value. That's one of the reasons why more iNtuitives gravitate toward and stick with the MBTI. All it does is acknowledge that such persons _exist_. I doubt one wouldn't appreciate that. At the realization that I'm neither diseased, daft, illogical, crazy, pathological or stupid, I would too.


----------



## Praesepe (Dec 4, 2011)

Double Post


----------



## Katheryn (Aug 1, 2012)

:/ Why would i hate sensors? I have absolutely no reason to. The only way I become frustrated with them is when they look down on me for how I see things. Like when I connect two ideas that they have no idea how i connected, and then they say "why did you just say that? That's stupid and is not relevant at all." And even when i explain it to them, they just stare at me and say, "... you're too random." If they respect how i see things, while i respect theirs, i have no problem at all.


----------



## PlushWitch (Oct 28, 2010)

Marlowe said:


> Did anyone who answered this poll "no one" actually read the question? It says "who does not hate the sensors?"
> 
> If you reply "no one," the sentence becomes "no one does not hate the sensors." In other words, everybody hates sensors.


Well... I personally voted "no one" since everybody can hate everybody so also a Sensor can hate a Sensor and an intuitive can hate an intuitive. Who hates whom is not only determined by their MBTI type.


----------



## Anonynony (Jun 24, 2012)

Do senors hate intuitives?
Sensors aren't all bad.

I started typing this, but then got distracted for an hour or two...


----------



## Kabosu (Mar 31, 2012)

thread responses r so srs.


----------



## Sporadic Aura (Sep 13, 2009)

ENTP's.
Also, what's up with all these simpleton sensors posting in this thread. It's a thread about INTUITIVE OPINIONS, don't need it flooded with all their dull thoughts.


----------



## electricky (Feb 18, 2011)

There's little real sensor hate, just people who don't understand each other.


----------



## electricky (Feb 18, 2011)

Sporadic Aura said:


> ENTP's.
> Also, what's up with all these simpleton sensors posting in this thread. It's a thread about INTUITIVE OPINIONS, don't need it flooded with all their dull thoughts.


Fill it with your bright and sparkling opinions you all-wise intuitive!!!


----------



## Subtle Murder (May 19, 2012)

I love my Sensor friends because they just get so much shit done. And they encourage me to get up and actually do things instead of just sitting around thinking about it all day. We don't sit around and have philosophical conversations, but they have so much everyday knowledge that I tend to miss. I am absolutely fascinated by them.  <3


----------



## Meowmixmuffin (Dec 10, 2011)

I'm not even gonna lie, they drive me fucking nuts.
That being said, my best friend is an ISTP. Some of the closest people I've had in my life have been S's. Just because the S quality irritates me doesn't mean I dislike S people. 
When it comes to my close S friends, the thing that annoys me the most is their total lack of ability to think about the future. I feel like I want to sit down and help them and set goals and make plans and motivate them to think about the rest of their life so that they don't end up in a pile of crap when they're older, but they're all very convinced that things will just fall into place on their own and everything will be fine.


----------



## Meowmixmuffin (Dec 10, 2011)

This is so true! I love that quality about S's. They're able to just get up and go do something. I have to psyche myself up, mull it over for 3 days, decide how I feel about it..


----------



## Morpheus83 (Oct 17, 2008)

I hate individuals more than I hate types.


----------



## Who (Jan 2, 2010)

Yes.


----------



## HollyGolightly (Aug 8, 2009)

Damn sensors. The S stands for slut don't you know.

But yeah i'm just echoing what others have said when I say you can't generalise it to type. Some sensors are nice, some are not. Some intuitives are nice, some are not. Someone being an arsehole can't really be explained by their type like: "all INFJs eat babies, it's an INFJ thing". Oh wait that one is true....


----------



## Nicole Hobbs (May 31, 2012)

I don't hate them. I just realize that I may have to communicate slightly different with them, considering that they think differently than I do.


----------



## frenchie (Jul 7, 2011)

I'm pretty sure the INFJ stereotype of eating babies is false.

But I knew an INFJ that was all about eating puppies....


----------



## ToStand (Nov 10, 2014)

[No message]


----------



## PaladinX (Feb 20, 2013)

ToStand said:


> I don't like SJs. But some SPs are cool.
> 
> However, all the SJs I know are pretty much annoying.
> 
> ...


I don't have Ni. Do you hate me too? :sad:

Personally, I find small-minded perspectives annoying.


----------



## Highway Nights (Nov 26, 2014)

I don't understand sensor hate. Sure, at their worst, sensors can potentially be frustratingly short sighted and unimaginative. 

But go to any forum about crazy conspiracies, and ask their MBTI types. I can promise you that you'll be getting page after page of xxNJs. After that, find an (unhealthy) xNxP and ask them how to implement one of their ideas. Enjoy the silence. 

There are more sensors than there are intuitives, and I think that knowledge has created something of an "us" vs "them" mentality for some people.


----------



## Ummon (Jun 16, 2014)

Silly stereotypes. I bet sensors could just as easily get frustrated with intuitives if they judge people based on oversimplified descriptions of their types.

One of the smartest people I know is an ESTJ. Very perceptive, kind, great reader of people, and far more practical than I am. XD Go sensors.


----------



## Tetsuo Shima (Nov 24, 2014)

INFPs don't hate anybody.

Except for themselves. Budump tch.


----------



## Highway Nights (Nov 26, 2014)

To be perfectly honest, if I were to place either an ESTJ or an ENTJ in a command position without any supervision from me, and the only thing I know about them is their type, I would probably pick ESTJ. I would expect them to generally be more cautious. My hypothetical business might not skyrocket under the ESTJs rule like it might under an ENTJ (and an absolute tragedy might unfold if a competitor rocks the boat, even a bit!), but I wouldn't have to worry as much about it careening towards disaster either.


----------



## visionaryspirit (Nov 24, 2014)

Out of all the personality types, sensors have a tendency to irritate me the most. I can appreciate their individual selves, but I would go crazy having too many sensors in my life.


----------



## Zeta Neprok (Jul 27, 2010)

When I first got interested in MBTI I always assumed that the main conflicts would be between thinkers and feelers, or maybe extroverts and introverts but I never expected a sensor vs intuitive conflict. I don't really get it myself.

I personally don't understand why people in MBTI communities seem to hate sensors so much. I've seen countless posts on personality cafe and on reddit where people seem to think that sensors are all dumb, ignorant, shallow morons while intuitives are "deep, intelligent, amazing, etc." I don't know if it's just me but my experience with sensors has been mostly positive in my life. A lot of my friends happen to be sensors and I really think they're great people. Yeah sure I'll admit sometimes we don't always see eye to eye on everything but that's OK. I don't know, it just seem to me that these people who hate on sensors probably associate every person they've had bad experiences with as sensors, while thinking that everyone good in their life is an intuitive. The dichotomy seems to be this now: sensor = ignorant, intuitive = smart. 

I just think that all people are capable of great things if they put their mind to it. We need sensors in our lives to deal with the tangible realities in front of us. We need intuitives to help deal with the abstract realities in our lives. If people develop, grow, and mature well then it doesn't really matter what type they are. I appreciate anyone for whatever strengths they have. 

Sorry for the rant there, I just had to say it.


----------



## Andersk (Nov 25, 2014)

I wouldn't say that I hate sensors in general. What I will say is that there are people I've met who ramble about their daily lives without letting me get a word in edgewise. I'm very polite and an attentive listener, so I find myself on the receiving end of long, meaningless word barrages, from which I'm too nice to escape.

It makes me seem like an awful person, but I have trouble seeing the value of sensors. I much prefer intuition over sensing, but my sensing functions are exceptional. I pay close attention to detail, facts, etc., and then integrate details into my 'big picture' to form an intuitive landscape.

I don't generalize sensors as stupid, because that's not true. I've met some highly intelligent sensors. The problem is that I'm very good at understanding their perspective, but they have trouble understanding mine.

If I were to make a generalization, it would be that sensors are, ironically, blind.


----------



## Derange At 170 (Nov 26, 2013)

I understand sensors, I understands intuitives. Intuitives understand me, but sensors sure as fuck don't.


----------



## Megas (Oct 25, 2014)

I don't hate sensors, I hate it when people don't tolerate my intuitive-ness.


----------



## Retsu (Aug 12, 2011)

ToStand said:


> I don't like SJs. But some SPs are cool.
> 
> However, all the SJs I know are pretty much annoying.
> 
> ...


No you're not. Well done on bumping a two year old thread just to spew.

So how do you go about typing SJs in real life? Do you see if they use Si? Do you know what Si is?

You realise that SJs are capable of using iNtuition as well? Ne, specifically? And you too use Sensing, Se specifically? If you did not you would be blind and deaf and you would stumble into things and cry.


----------



## The_Wanderer (Jun 13, 2013)

ToStand said:


> I don't like SJs. But some SPs are cool.
> 
> However, all the SJs I know are pretty much annoying.
> 
> ...


Firstly; maybe you're just associating everything you hate with stupid "SJ" (a.k.a stupid grouping) stereotypes. And well, hating somebody because they don't _value_ a function (breakthrough! oh my darwin, people use all of the functions) is fucking stupid. You're an idiot.


----------



## Glenda Gnome Starr (May 12, 2011)

Every day, I look in the mirror and say, "You... you... YOU!!!! You sensor... oh, look, something shiny!"
Um. No.
I don't.
I'd like to say that I greet the morning with great joy, ready to dance in the beauty of the world.
But I'm not that good.
Nevertheless, I love my wonderful Se function.
And I love having loads of Ne, as well.
I get the best of both worlds... the real world in its beauty and richness...
and my imagination, which knows no bounds.
We know of 16 personality types.
There may be others that we don't know of.
Each type and each individual sees the world in unique and different ways.
We all communicate our experiences differently.
There is much to appreciate about people who see things in different ways than we do.
They add so much.
There is no room for hate. 
Hating people for their personality type makes no sense at all.


----------



## Megas (Oct 25, 2014)

walking tourist said:


> Every day, I look in the mirror and say, "You... you... YOU!!!! You sensor... oh, look, something shiny!"
> Um. No.
> I don't.
> I'd like to say that I greet the morning with great joy, ready to dance in the beauty of the world.
> ...


But isn't Ne a shadow function for ESFPs? If you do have loads of Ne you should be grateful, Ne is cool.


----------

