# Do you think there are more iNtuitives now?



## Glenda Gnome Starr

I was mistyped as an ESTJ and, later, as an INFP.
There is some mistyping of xSFP types as "N" types.
I think that ESFP is accurate for me, although I sometimes test as ESFP, ISFP, ENFP, and EXFP.



Verity3 said:


> I agree that it's probably cultural values that affect which types people are pressured into (not that they truly become the valued types, but social pressure encourages mimicking on the surface, and perhaps even testing as those valued types). However, that would seem to point to more men being mistyped as ESTJ and more women being mistyped as ESFJ (in the West). NOT more people being mistyped as Ns. Of course, different subcultures (e.g. Personality Cafe) might create more of a demand for N-ness and thus more mistyping in that direction.
> 
> (Paraphrasing others above, I don't think technology demands more N-ness; it just relieves some of the pressure for S-ness.)


----------



## Peter

MNiS said:


> IQ scores are normative and relative to the rest of population. If someone were to have an IQ of 100 in one population and lived among a group of people with an IQ of 75, that person would have an IQ of 133 within that population but 100 in the other. I guess the normative nature of IQ is a bit confusing to some.


So now the average person is a genius compared to the average person 100 years ago? Please read that article about the flynn effect.



MNiS said:


> *sigh* I wasn't talking about sex, I was talking about selective mating. Unless you're assuming that unwanted pregnancies are how the majority of babies are born. Also, I'm not sure how quickly societal shifts can occur but 3 to 4 generations sounds like plenty of time. I wasn't talking about biological evolution which takes several thousands of generations. Also, I think it makes perfect sense that as a society values intuitiveness more, there will be more intuitives.


Societal shifts can occur in a generation, but since cognitive functions are genetically determined, that's completely irrelevant.



MNiS said:


> IIRC, the thread I was referring to earlier had the US at 27% intuitives. So no, I think the percentages of N doesn't matter as much as the culture does. The US has always highly valued innovation and progress. That reason alone is why people in this country strive to innovate which in turn leads to new technology. At least that's how the US used to be. I get the sense that the innovation drive is slowly shifting toward an interest in corporatism and money-making.


People always say that the USA is less inovative now than it was in the past. I think people always say that because they like to complain or something like that. The reality is that inovation has never been as fast as it is now. You´re just so used to it that you don't notice it.

If we would build things the same way as we did 40 years ago, the earth wouldn't have enough iron to produce it all.
If cars would be as polutant as in the 70's, we wouldn't be able to breath the air we breath anymore.
The obvious things like: Google, Facebook, Apple, etc. Most of what they provide didn't exist 10 years ago.
etc.
etc.
etc.


----------



## Helweh18

Quiz! Let's test this theory. Take the quiz...

Right Left Brain Test


----------

