# Critism of sensors ESxJ



## 90626

I am seeking insight on something I have been noticing.

There tends to be a lot of critism of sensors and typism on the forums. This pertains especially to ESFJ and then ESTJ. The ESxJ tends to be criticized for lacking depth and introspection, obsession with rules, not being original, being loud, being conformist not understanding space and boundaries of others. The ESFJ is according to many "superficial" "shallow" and in general these two types seem to the bain of some NT and NF existence. Supposedly ESxJ is severely disliked.

What is interesting to me is that in real life I don't see this. Within my social circle, family, work and general life the INFJ I know is seen as being pretenious and out of touch with others and not well liked. The INTP I know is loathed for holding up projects and refusing to be cooperative not respecting others space or ideas. My ENFJ mom can be really manipulative socially and has been ostracized by some family. An INTJ friend struggles to ask others questions about themselves or show any interest in them at all so he has socially suffered. Another INTP friend I know has hygiene issues which is off putting and causes his love life to suffer. However, he does not even seem aware of it. INxx friends will come to me for advice on health, exercise, cooking, nutrition. I help as much as I can but there can be a disconnect to the physical world for some of them and they don't ever make changes. Other NTs will seek out my help with things that require a tremendous amount of attention to detail. So the sensors are helpful and skilled but perhaps not valued?

Judging by this forum it appears that NT and NF are the most successful in getting things accomplished and in situations like work, family etc. But that has not been my personal experience. I'm looking for any input into this. I think certain healthy sensors can be successful and very well liked. What I read here does not match up to what I have been very closely observing.


----------



## TreeBob

Mollusk said:


> I am seeking insight on something I have been noticing.
> 
> There tends to be a lot of critism of sensors and typism on the forums. This pertains especially to ESFJ and then ESTJ. The ESxJ tends to be criticized for lacking depth and introspection, obsession with rules, not being original, being loud, being conformist not understanding space and boundaries of others. The ESFJ is according to many "superficial" "shallow" and in general these two types seem to the bain of some NT and NF existence. Supposedly ESxJ is severely disliked.
> 
> What is interesting to me is that in real life I don't see this. Within my social circle, family, work and general life the INFJ I know is seen as being pretenious and out of touch with others and not well liked. The INTP I know is loathed for holding up projects and refusing to be cooperative not respecting others space or ideas. My ENFJ mom can be really manipulative socially and has been ostracized by some family. An INTJ friend struggles to ask others questions about themselves or show any interest in them at all so he has socially suffered. Another INTP friend I know has hygiene issues which is off putting and causes his love life to suffer. However, he does not even seem aware of it. INxx friends will come to me for advice on health, exercise, cooking, nutrition. I help as much as I can but there can be a disconnect to the physical world for some of them and they don't ever make changes. Other NTs will seek out my help with things that require a tremendous amount of attention to detail. So the sensors are helpful and skilled but perhaps not valued?
> 
> Judging by this forum it appears that NT and NF are the most successful in getting things accomplished and in situations like work, family etc. But that has not been my personal experience. I'm looking for any input into this. I think certain healthy sensors can be successful and very well liked. What I read here does not match up to what I have been very closely observing.


You can't judge success from a forum filled with anonymous members. They can say whatever they like about their life and we cannot confirm or deny if it is truth. This forum is filled with a lot of intuitives in general because they typically enjoy this type of setting. So you will naturally hear a lot of complaining about what bothers them. You won't find as many sensors coming on to forums because this type of setting doesn't really interest us. I can confirm from what I have seen in real life as being somewhat similar to you. Most people in the world haven't the slightest what MBTI type they are.


----------



## 90626

I think ESFJ and ESFP can look like ENFJ and ENFP so some of the anger about sensors may be misdirected. On many of the forums ESFJ is described as shallow or a cheerleader but in reality healthy ones have a very real, earthy, raw type personality...especially if the J is weak.

While I have no issue with ENFPs the unhealthy ones tend to possess some of the negative characteristics NTs attribute to ESFJ (being loud, opinionated, dramatic, highly emotional, unstable at times). I suspect there is a lot of mistyping going on....or at worst closed mindedness.


----------



## Stasis

It could just be that I've had unusual experiences but the type that I've had the worst interactions with is ENFP followed by INFJ. 

I work alongside a couple of ESFJs and I have no problem with them. I don't get the sensor hate either ;(.


----------



## Figure

First of all, a lot of people on this forum are either mistyped or have mistyped others and have no clue what they letters they throw around mean.

Second of all, in real life it is often the case that people who have extremely different types (a personal example, INTJ and ESFJ) have perfectly fine opinions of each other despite not knowing each other well or deeply. 

Third of all, ESFJ and ESTJ, like all MBTI types, can look extremely different from each other in real life. There is a lot of diversity within these two types as to how the type appears, and everyone is different.

Fourth of all, a lot of the criticism of these types is not directed at ESFJ or ESTJ members on the forum specifically, but of immature, petty, irritating, and/or generally unlikeable individuals who would be that way regardless of what their type is - although this distinction often isn't brought forward. Which really pisses me off. 

Fifth of all, we discuss this topic almost weekly, and the end result every time is that we agree typism needs to be stopped, but there is basically no way to do anything about it except enforce on-forum.


----------



## Zeta Neprok

Well I'm not an intuitive type, but I was hoping to share my experience with a particular ESxJ (I'm not sure about the T or F cause I'm not too good at typing other people )

I loved her, and despite the fact that our marriage is over (don't worry it's mutual), I really appreciate everything about her. She is so smart and so practical that I can't even comprehend how she does it. She notices details, and her feet are firmly planted in reality which is something that I lack completely. I've always admired her brains. She is way smarter than me (I'm kind of a dunderhead to be honest...), in fact she is one of the smartest people I've ever met. 

She was a little anal retentive about her things, but that's where that ended. Yes she liked all of her stuff to be organized and in a certain way but she never forced anything like that on me. I always knew that if she handled the practical details in our life, I would be fine. She's always been fair, and very understanding of my needs. She never tried to change me, and she never made me feel guilty for being different which is more than I can say for a lot of people in my life. 

Did she conform to society's norms? No, not at all. In fact she hates them. One time she ranted to be for about a half hour about why she hated capitalism and why it's evil. She even argued with her mother about why the conservative party is evil and why she could never vote for them :tongue: 

She was very sweet, kind, caring, warm, and gentle. Although our break up is mutual, there will always be a side of me that will miss her. I will always admire how good she is with the realities of the world, and it's interesting cause she always said that she admired my "creativity and imagination", which I don't really think I have but OK. 

ESxJs are not bad people by any stretch. There are a lot of good ones out there, you just have to be open minded. :happy:


----------



## Vegetables

First off, most people type themselves wrong on the forum. Not many men want to be feelers, not many women want to be thinkers and EVERYBODY thinks their intuitive. The amount of people claiming to be INTJ on this forum is staggering. The questionnaires used to type people are flawed and based on self definitions. I type people using a system called P2MR, it is irrefutably the best method and only requires eyeballs no questionnaires. Google it if you like.

I don't support any form of typist. Actually any hate for someone for reasons beyond their control is foolish and close minded. I look at every type as part of the world, an essential building block of society that would crumble and collapse without each type. There is not one type is better than another. There are types with natural abilities better suited for specific activities, but better as a whole no way. Do I hate any type? Absolutely not. Like everyone in the world I have preferences though.

I won't date any sensor also there's 2 intuitive types I won't either. It's not a typist thing, I just know what I want from a relationship and which types can provide it. I have spent a lot of time dating the wrong people who don't understand me and don't appreciate me for what I am.


----------



## amucha

the individuals whose gross/weird/unhealthy behaviour you've provided examples of are maybe also examples of some of the people who come on to this forum, no? ;-) a lot of the people carrying these stereotypes about sensors, often the esxj types as you've specified, will probably be immature and unhealthy, and mainly introverts or socially awkward extroverts who've probably had to deal with some uncomfortable instances of social rejection. then they discover a system like mbti and decide that a certain type (or group of types) may superficially look like a group of people for whom they nurture a dislike, and so it's very easy to simply blame this type for its (perceived) innate shortcomings.


----------



## Tezcatlipoca

It's a matter of who is more common that makes a norm


----------



## XZ9

Mollusk said:


> I am seeking insight on something I have been noticing.
> 
> There tends to be a lot of critism of sensors and typism on the forums. This pertains especially to ESFJ and then ESTJ. The ESxJ tends to be criticized for lacking depth and introspection, obsession with rules, not being original, being loud, being conformist not understanding space and boundaries of others. The ESFJ is according to many "superficial" "shallow" and in general these two types seem to the bain of some NT and NF existence. Supposedly ESxJ is severely disliked.
> 
> What is interesting to me is that in real life I don't see this. Within my social circle, family, work and general life the INFJ I know is seen as being pretenious and out of touch with others and not well liked. The INTP I know is loathed for holding up projects and refusing to be cooperative not respecting others space or ideas. My ENFJ mom can be really manipulative socially and has been ostracized by some family. An INTJ friend struggles to ask others questions about themselves or show any interest in them at all so he has socially suffered. Another INTP friend I know has hygiene issues which is off putting and causes his love life to suffer. However, he does not even seem aware of it. INxx friends will come to me for advice on health, exercise, cooking, nutrition. I help as much as I can but there can be a disconnect to the physical world for some of them and they don't ever make changes. Other NTs will seek out my help with things that require a tremendous amount of attention to detail. So the sensors are helpful and skilled but perhaps not valued?
> 
> Judging by this forum it appears that NT and NF are the most successful in getting things accomplished and in situations like work, family etc. But that has not been my personal experience. I'm looking for any input into this. I think certain healthy sensors can be successful and very well liked. What I read here does not match up to what I have been very closely observing.


Your observation is actually true and are apparent weakness of the types according to personality page. 

INFJ may be sarcastic and condescending which is they you said they're pretentious. INTP may reject other people ideas and those who think too differently. ENFJ may be manipulative. INTP may not be aware of proper dress code or at least in your friends case, hygiene. These are all weakness listed in the personality page

*Judging by this forum it appears that NT and NF are the most successful in getting things accomplished and in situations like work, family etc.* NT and NF are not the most successful in getting things done such as work and family. Those are SJ types who are generally reliable and like structured routine. Examples would be ESTJ and ISTJ.


----------



## 90626

Thank you all for your feedback. I appreciate hearing everyone's perspective.
Another thing I find curious is the complaining about lack of Ns IRL. For me there is a lack of sensors. I work mostly with Ns...some sensors but for the most part I am surrounded by intuitives, especially NTs. My closest friends are also intuitives. Seeing them in real life and hearing the thoughts on the forum I noticed a huge disconnect. In real life many NTs really appreciate my help with practical everyday things. 

I find my messy INTP friend witty and charming and have a natural chemistry with INTJs and enjoy their company. I dated and INTJ and there was an attraction from the polarity between us. Reading the forums can almost make one suspicious, defensive and possibly taint an otherwise unblemished view of a type...

In real life there are beneficial and happy relationships between ESFJs and NTs but this forum does not reflect that.


----------



## AmandaLee

Vegetables said:


> First off, most people type themselves wrong on the forum. Not many men want to be feelers, not many women want to be thinkers and EVERYBODY thinks their intuitive. The amount of people claiming to be INTJ on this forum is staggering. The questionnaires used to type people are flawed and based on self definitions. I type people using a system called P2MR, it is irrefutably the best method and only requires eyeballs no questionnaires. Google it if you like.
> 
> I don't support any form of typist. Actually any hate for someone for reasons beyond their control is foolish and close minded. I look at every type as part of the world, an essential building block of society that would crumble and collapse without each type. There is not one type is better than another. There are types with natural abilities better suited for specific activities, but better as a whole no way. Do I hate any type? Absolutely not. Like everyone in the world I have preferences though.
> 
> I won't date any sensor also there's 2 intuitive types I won't either. It's not a typist thing, I just know what I want from a relationship and which types can provide it. I have spent a lot of time dating the wrong people who don't understand me and don't appreciate me for what I am.


You don't think there's a reason as to why most people on this forum are self-proclaimed intuitives? Especially there seems to be a high ratio of INTPs and INFPs. Gross generalization, I know, but on the whole, intuitives are dreamers while sensors are doers. The sensors are out there in the world, doing things, making sure society is staying intact. The ESXJ is not likely to find it rewarding to hang around here. They're busy planning yet another boisterous dinner party to host for their group of friends.  

Regards, 

~The INTJ with a sensor partner of 6 years


----------



## Coburn

AmandaLee said:


> You don't think there's a reason as to why most people on this forum are self-proclaimed intuitives? Especially there seems to be a high ratio of INTPs and INFPs. Gross generalization, I know, but on the whole, intuitives are dreamers while sensors are doers. The sensors are out there in the world, doing things, making sure society is staying intact. The ESXJ is not likely to find it rewarding to hang around here. They're busy planning yet another boisterous dinner party to host for their group of friends.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> ~The INTJ with a sensor partner of 6 years


LOL. Yup, all those dinner parties to attend...

*looks at empty social calendar*

Why don't you invite me to some of yours so I can feel more sensory?


----------



## AmandaLee

Dumaresq said:


> LOL. Yup, all those dinner parties to attend...
> 
> *looks at empty social calendar*
> 
> Why don't you invite me to some of yours so I can feel more sensory?


I could put you in touch with my ESFJ mother.


----------



## Coburn

AmandaLee said:


> I could put you in touch with my ESFJ mother.


Do these parties frequently end with drunken karate matches, or is that something I'd have to arrange with the hostess in advance?


----------



## AmandaLee

Dumaresq said:


> Do these parties frequently end with drunken karate matches, or is that something I'd have to arrange with the hostess in advance?


They tend to begin with gossip and end with lots of red wine ingested and... more gossip!  Although once my dad did end up doing push ups (true dat!) on the dinner table.


----------



## Coburn

AmandaLee said:


> They tend to begin with gossip and end with lots of red wine--


Red wine? 

OH HELL NO.


----------



## Iselia

Mollusk said:


> I think ESFJ and ESFP can look like ENFJ and ENFP


And quite a few N types are actually S types that are mistyped and a few vice versa. I think a lot of individuals are afraid to come to terms with themselves because of all the Sensor bashing on PerC.


----------



## Zee Bee

Perhaps this site attracts a "topheavy" NF representation, and the bias noted, comes from the group which has their collective issues on the afor mentioned.


----------



## something987

Maybe I am blinded by my own N privilege but I guess I'm not picking up on the bias against S here. I like S types and enjoy their presence on the board. Where are the sensors being bashed? I mean, sure, if you hang out in the N boards you'll probably see it, but that's just their problem...people like to establish group identities when they don't have one of their own, and part of that is establishing those outside of the group as bad.


----------



## Max

Why criticize each others types? There's four different temperament forum subtypes with four different sub-types for a reason.


----------



## jcal

Ksilva said:


> Maybe I am blinded by my own N privilege but I guess I'm not picking up on the bias against S here. I like S types and enjoy their presence on the board. Where are the sensors being bashed? I mean, sure, if you hang out in the N boards you'll probably see it, but that's just their problem...people like to establish group identities when they don't have one of their own, and part of that is establishing those outside of the group as bad.


Either you haven't looked very far or you're view is distorted by your N-colored glasses... your "privilege". It's rampant around here... but NOT in the world at large.

Three very common statements (or variations thereof) that make my skin crawl:


You're an S, so you couldn't possibly understand. 
You seem too intelligent to be an S... you MUST be mistyped. 
An intelligent ISTJ can appear to be an INTJ 
The last one really gets to me... because they seem to think they are saying it in a non-offensive PC way. 'Ya know what an intelligent ISTJ *REALLY* looks like? An intelligent ISTJ!


----------



## something987

jcal said:


> Either you haven't looked very far or you're view is distorted by your N-colored glasses... your "privilege". It's rampant around here... but NOT in the world at large.
> 
> Three very common statements (or variations thereof) that make my skin crawl:
> 
> 
> You're an S, so you couldn't possibly understand.
> You seem too intelligent to be an S... you MUST be mistyped.
> An intelligent ISTJ can appear to be an INTJ
> The last one really gets to me... because they seem to think they are saying it in a non-offensive PC way. 'Ya know what an intelligent ISTJ *REALLY* looks like? An intelligent ISTJ!


Well, yes, I did say that maybe I'm not seeing it, but that still doesn't answer my question of where specifically you see it... I've been around a lot of the forums and have yet to see this, though it's just been a month I've been here so that could be why.


----------



## AmandaLee

jcal said:


> Either you haven't looked very far or you're view is distorted by your N-colored glasses... your "privilege". It's rampant around here... but NOT in the world at large.
> 
> Three very common statements (or variations thereof) that make my skin crawl:
> 
> 
> You're an S, so you couldn't possibly understand.
> You seem too intelligent to be an S... you MUST be mistyped.
> An intelligent ISTJ can appear to be an INTJ
> The last one really gets to me... because they seem to think they are saying it in a non-offensive PC way. 'Ya know what an intelligent ISTJ *REALLY* looks like? An intelligent ISTJ!


Yeah, that is a very silly attitude and simply pure snobbery by certain "special snowflake" intuitives. Intelligence isn't determined by type, it's determined by aptitude. MBTI doesn't measure aptitude, it only measures preference. 



> *You're an S, so you couldn't possibly understand.*


It's not a secret, though, that intuitives and sensors have trouble understanding how the other's brain works. But that goes both ways. The hardest types for me personally, as an Ni-dom, to grasp are those that lead with Ne. They exhaust me.


----------



## something987

AmandaLee said:


> Yeah, that is a very silly attitude and simply pure snobbery by certain "special snowflake" intuitives. Intelligence isn't determined by type, it's determined by aptitude. MBTI doesn't measure aptitude, it only measures preference.
> 
> 
> 
> It's not a secret, though, that intuitives and sensors have trouble understanding how the other's brain works. But that goes both ways. The hardest types for me personally, as an Ni-dom, to grasp are those that lead with Ne. They exhaust me.


And you, us


----------



## Coburn

jcal said:


> Either you haven't looked very far or you're view is distorted by your N-colored glasses... your "privilege". It's rampant around here... but NOT in the world at large.
> 
> Three very common statements (or variations thereof) that make my skin crawl:
> 
> 
> You're an S, so you couldn't possibly understand.
> You seem too intelligent to be an S... you MUST be mistyped.
> An intelligent ISTJ can appear to be an INTJ
> The last one really gets to me... because they seem to think they are saying it in a non-offensive PC way. 'Ya know what an intelligent ISTJ *REALLY* looks like? An intelligent ISTJ!


Actually, now that you mention it, I have seen that last one somewhere. Although I didn't catch the implied superiority in it until you mentioned it. 

I wonder where it was I saw that...


----------



## AmandaLee

Ksilva said:


> And you, us


What about Ni-doms confuses/annoys you the most? For me, with Ne-doms, it's their tendency to be flighty in their thoughts.


----------



## AmandaLee

Dumaresq said:


> Actually, now that you mention it, I have seen that last one somewhere. Although I didn't catch the implied superiority in it until you mentioned it.
> 
> I wonder where it was I saw that...


Honestly, you can see a glimpse of it just by looking at how the Keirsey temperament forums here on PerC are labelled. 

The NT subforum is named "NTs Temperament Forum - The Intellects". 

A label like this is going to spur on the notion that NTs are "more intelligent" than the other types and might encourage snobbery or unsavory attitudes from some less mature NTs. Very inaccurate, obviously, as intelligence is not determined by the order of your cognitive functions.


----------



## Worriedfunction

Ego is a funny thing.

It professes to be unique, individual and important. All people, even the most humble or self-loathing, have this to some extent because it wants to survive and thrive.

It's basically important to itself. By the way I'm as culpable, I'm not trying to preach being above this in any way.

But if you remove descriptions and blatantly biased interpretations *cough* Keirsey *cough*, then you are just left with the cognitions and of course Jung's original work. 

He never gives any indication of ability or of a type being better than another, (or rather he never indicates that he perceives any focus to be more important than another), he also never mentions statistics or percentages of type, that was the work of Isabel Briggs-Myers and her mother Katharine Briggs. In fact in my version of Gifts Differing there is this line in the introduction:

"Isabel Myers, on the other hand, while not trained as a psychologist, devoted the entire second half of her life to interpreting and adapting Jung's theory to help ordinary, healthy, normal people understand that it is all right to be unique individuals, often quite unlike those around them."

So straight away we see it is just one interpretation, not a be all end all tome of proof or evidence. We also see that inherent bias in the notion of it being "all right to be unique individuals" because for there to be unique individuals it would imply that there are those who are not and SOMEONE has to be the majority here.

We can't all be unique and special can we? So exactly who isn't? So we find that the prejudice leads on from there, step by step, habitual until it becomes engrained and the unconscious ends up adopting an instant division of type that the person isn't aware of.

But so far, so snore, it's been talked about ad nauseam and I'm sure people are sick of hearing about poor S's and their online N oppressors, but I think I'm also tired of hearing about poor N's and their offline S oppressors.

Here is a bit of a tip that people can take or leave.

Do you find yourself thinking in terms of X group as an object of blame for personal experiences and issues? 

If so then I have to say:

You....are....fucking...lazy. Make some effort to differentiate. Grouping is useful, but not in that context.*

*As a disclaimer to smart arses I'm talking in the context of every day issues and clashes amongst people in a first world setting which is what is most relevant to this forum.


----------



## something987

AmandaLee said:


> What about Ni-doms confuses/annoys you the most? For me, with Ne-doms, it's their tendency to be flighty in their thoughts.


Mostly that I never understand the thought processes going on, it's a very elusive function and...yeah, I don't get it at all. I can't follow the train of thought behind it. I can completely see why people would be annoyed by out of control Ne though, hah.


----------



## AmandaLee

Ksilva said:


> Mostly that I never understand the thought processes going on, it's a very elusive function and...yeah, I don't get it at all. I can't follow the train of thought behind it. I can completely see why people would be annoyed by out of control Ne though, hah.


And I can't see the connections that Ne makes, either. Some of them seem totally random to me. :s They say Ne is like a supernova (explosion of ideas) while Ni is like a black hole (absorbing information but not projecting any of it), so I can see why these two functions can clash pretty violently.


----------



## something987

AmandaLee said:


> And I can't see the connections that Ne makes, either. Some of them seem totally random to me. :s They say Ne is like a supernova (explosion of ideas) while Ni is like a black hole (absorbing information but not projecting any of it), so I can see why these two functions can clash pretty violently.


Yeah, I read a description of Ne, it was something like, if you think about our thoughts as an alphabet, they would be A, C, F, K, M, S, Z. So in other words we skip a lot of steps in our head and don't explain them thoroughly. But then Ni does all of this in their head, so like we can't see any of the steps, only the starting point (possibly) and the conclusion.


----------



## Aiwass

Mollusk said:


> Judging by this forum it appears that NT and NF are the most successful in getting things accomplished and in situations like work, family etc. But that has not been my personal experience. I'm looking for any input into this. I think certain healthy sensors can be successful and very well liked. What I read here does not match up to what I have been very closely observing.


Your concept of "success" is funny. According to your statements, success is the same as meeting society's expectations, such as looking "nice", achieving a high status in career or being wealthy. 
You do realize that sensors are statistically the majority of the population and as such, most of the values diffused out there [i.e. "sucess"] are created by them, right? What if I say I reject your concept of sucess?
And of course, sensors - especially the extrovert ones - feel more comfortable in social contexts. Again, they're _majority_, so most people are like them and are able to comprehend their behavior.


----------



## something987

hannahdonot said:


> Your concept of "success" is funny. According to your statements, success is the same as meeting society's expectations, such as looking "nice", achieving a high status in career or being wealthy.
> You do realize that sensors are statistically the majority of the population and as such, most of the values diffused out there [i.e. "sucess"] are created by them, right? What if I say I reject your concept of sucess?
> And of course, sensors - especially the extrovert ones - feel more comfortable in social contexts. Again, they're _majority_, so most people are like them and are able to comprehend their behavior.


What is your concept of success?


----------



## Coburn

Ksilva said:


> Yeah, I read a description of Ne, it was something like, if you think about our thoughts as an alphabet, they would be A, C, F, K, M, S, Z. So in other words we skip a lot of steps in our head and don't explain them thoroughly. But then Ni does all of this in their head, so like we can't see any of the steps, only the starting point (possibly) and the conclusion.


See, that Ni part is how Ne works IMO. Yes, Ne runs through a hundred steps to get to the end conclusion. But Ne users (or at least me?) just give the conclusion. Which can appear to come from absolutely nowhere if all the steps aren't explained (and oftentimes, for brevity, they aren't).


My understanding of Ni is that they see the conclusion immediately, but generally have to go back and trace the steps to understand what led to it. At least that was how it worked for me and my INFJ friend.


----------



## something987

Dumaresq said:


> See, that Ni part is how Ne works IMO. Yes, Ne runs through a hundred steps to get to the end conclusion. But Ne users (or at least me?) just give the conclusion. Which can appear to come from absolutely nowhere if all the steps aren't explained (and oftentimes, for brevity, they aren't).
> 
> 
> My understanding of Ni is that they see the conclusion immediately, but generally have to go back and trace the steps to understand what led to it. At least that was how it worked for me and my INFJ friend.


Could be. I don't know, I don't understand Ni, as I said, but that makes sense. My ENFJ friend says it's like he sees archetypes and auras in everything, and everything has some sort of metaphysical connection, so he will make these connections between seemingly random things because he sees this link between them. Sounded pretty far out to me but I'll believe it.


----------



## AmandaLee

Ni is my dominant function, and for much of the time, it's relatively unconscious on my part. It doesn't show on the outside, and I can't always explain its workings or processes even if I was asked to. I wouldn't say there's anything metaphysical about it, it's more like putting together random bits of seemingly unrelated information to form a conclusion.


----------



## Frenetic Tranquility

Because lots of Ns speak in hyperbole - that is the best answer. We all have our favorite sensors.


----------



## something987

Frenetic Tranquility said:


> Because lots of Ns speak in hyperbole - that is the best answer. We all have our favorite sensors.


Who are you answering?


----------



## niss

jcal said:


> An intelligent ISTJ can appear to be an INTJ
> The last one really gets to me... because they seem to think they are saying it in a non-offensive PC way. 'Ya know what an intelligent ISTJ *REALLY* looks like? An intelligent ISTJ!


Slow down a tad. I've made this statement. It is a statement of how people type based on behavioral observations. I've had people tell me that I was too intuitive to be an ISTJ. That attitude is what drives this statement. It is a statement about how they misunderstand the use of intuition to be limited just to those with intuitive cognition as a preference.


----------



## Coburn

niss said:


> Slow down a tad. I've made this statement. It is a statement of how people type based on behavioral observations. I've had people tell me that I was too intuitive to be an ISTJ. That attitude is what drives this statement. It is a statement about how they misunderstand the use of intuition to be limited just to those with intuitive cognition as a preference.


No slowing down, sir. Speed limit on this thread is 95 mph or higher.

All slow downs will be prosecuted under the full force of the law.


----------



## StunnedFox

niss said:


> Slow down a tad. I've made this statement. It is a statement of how people type based on behavioral observations. I've had people tell me that I was too intuitive to be an ISTJ. That attitude is what drives this statement. It is a statement about how they misunderstand the use of intuition to be limited just to those with intuitive cognition as a preference.


It's the implication that arises from it - that a natural 'N'-preference "looks intelligent", and a natural 'S'-preference, by necessary implication, looks less so. That, in some way, it would be breaching certain norms for a sensor to be intelligent, or an intuitive to be not intelligent. The mistake you raise - that people mistake the use of intuition for an intuition preference - is a different matter, and like you allude to, it shows up some of the difficulties with typing using behaviour, in that not every atomised action we take reflects our true preferences. But the conflation of 'N' with intelligence is the problem I think is relevant for this point.


----------



## something987

You know, you could've said that with a lot less words.

"The point is that people on this board assume ISTJs are less intelligent than INTJs."

Brevity. Embrace it.


----------



## StunnedFox

Ksilva said:


> You know, you could've said that with a lot less words.
> 
> "The point is that people on this board assume ISTJs are less intelligent than INTJs."
> 
> Brevity. Embrace it.


To do that would be to miss out on relevant nuance (such as the discussion on behaviour-centric typing, or even just the added point that this seems to hold true across all S/N divides, not merely ISTJ/INTJ). Nevertheless, point taken.


----------



## niss

StunnedFox said:


> It's the implication that arises from it - that a natural 'N'-preference "looks intelligent", and a natural 'S'-preference, by necessary implication, looks less so. That, in some way, it would be breaching certain norms for a sensor to be intelligent, or an intuitive to be not intelligent. The mistake you raise - that people mistake the use of intuition for an intuition preference - is a different matter, and like you allude to, it shows up some of the difficulties with typing using behaviour, in that not every atomised action we take reflects our true preferences. But the conflation of 'N' with intelligence is the problem I think is relevant for this point.


Hidden within my post is something that I did not convey very well: It is my opinion that intelligent ISTJs mis-type as INTJs because of this tendency to focus on behavior, which clouds the difference between being an intuitive and merely having intuition.


----------



## StunnedFox

niss said:


> Hidden within my post is something that I did not convey very well: It is my opinion that intelligent ISTJs mis-type as INTJs because of this tendency to focus on behavior, which clouds the difference between being an intuitive and merely having intuition.


I don't know that that really clarifies things. A focus on behaviour certainly clouds accurate typing, but why would it specifically be a problem for intelligent ISTJs?


----------



## something987

An ISTJ will use his brain. An INTJ will take his brain out and slap it on the dinner table for everyone to see.

Is this the behavioral difference you're alluding to?


----------



## 90626

hannahdonot said:


> Your concept of "success" is funny. According to your statements, success is the same as meeting society's expectations, such as looking "nice", achieving a high status in career or being wealthy.
> You do realize that sensors are statistically the majority of the population and as such, most of the values diffused out there [i.e. "sucess"] are created by them, right? What if I say I reject your concept of sucess?
> And of course, sensors - especially the extrovert ones - feel more comfortable in social contexts. Again, they're _majority_, so most people are like them and are able to comprehend their behavior.



I never mentioned wealth. I work in non-profit and wealth is my last objective. Therefore, the success I am referring to has nothing to do with wealth. In terms of status...I don't care for that either, I took a position that is not high status because I care about the cause. It has nothing to do society's expectations it is about setting and achieving personal goals. Looking "nice" to me is a reflection of hygiene and overall health.

You say you reject my concept of success...I don't know that you know what it is.


----------



## somnuvore

I actually like ESXJs, ESTJs in particular; it's hard to identify with other types as much as I identify with them. I recently had a conversation with one, he offered a great deal of insight about culture and ethnicity that a group of NTPs failed to answer in any meaningful way (what's up with Fe and taking those things for granted anyway?)

One thing you'll notice is this: people who have a dominant judging function tend to get along worse with people who have a dominant perceiving function, even among those who share the same function preference. It's a fundamental difference in approach: one takes on problems a step at a time, the other flows around problems and seems nearly aimless. Take into account a difference in perception, a difference in judging, and major over-representation, and you get the recipe required for typism; of course, INJs are the primary culprits for ESJ hatred, which is unfortunate but true. Perhaps it's so that, given the reverse scenario where the ESJ is severely overrepresented, INJs would complain about criticism, but I don't believe it would be fruitful in any case to criticize any type as this presupposes that a person can actually help who they are. An artist can resolve to improve his painting; an opposing personality cannot resolve to change his personality.


----------



## niss

StunnedFox said:


> I don't know that that really clarifies things. A focus on behaviour certainly clouds accurate typing, but why would it specifically be a problem for intelligent ISTJs?


Because everyone "in the know" will continually point them in the direction of INTJ, due to errors in their own understanding of cognitive functions.


----------



## jcal

niss said:


> Slow down a tad. I've made this statement. It is a statement of how people type based on behavioral observations. I've had people tell me that I was too intuitive to be an ISTJ. That attitude is what drives this statement. It is a statement about how they misunderstand the use of intuition to be limited just to those with intuitive cognition as a preference.


I understand your point... but not every instance I've seen was made with the same "spirit". Most were sugar-coated variants of "you're too intelligent to be an SJ... you surely must be mistyped".


----------



## Coburn

jcal said:


> I understand your point... but not every instance I've seen was made with the same "spirit". Most were sugar-coated variants of "you're too intelligent to be an SJ... you surely must be mistyped".


This happened to me more IRL. A INFJ I knew (who was getting into MBTI after I'd introduced it to her), said I was too intelligent an creative to to be an S. And not anal enough to be an ESTJ. 

Despite me explaining cognitive functions, she continually insisted I was an ENTP.


----------



## Epicyclic

Ksilva said:


> Where are the sensors being bashed? I mean, sure, if you hang out in the N boards you'll probably see it, but that's just their problem...people like to establish group identities when they don't have one of their own, and part of that is establishing those outside of the group as bad.


Every group gets criticised. ENFPhedgehog puts it far better than I can: 



ENFPhedgehog said:


> The last piece of advice I will give here is this: Both of you feel like weirdos. ENFP feels like a weirdo in the world because the world is dominated by SJ and ESTJs feel like weirdos because the media (movies, tv, art) world is dominated by FP. So the amount of tension you (ENFP) feel because you get your feelings hurt all the time is the same amount of tension they feel not being able to be "truthful". This is a deep concept, not one that is easy to get your head around because the ESTJ and ENFP think SO differently it consistently surprises me.


As for me, having been surrounded by Ns for a long time, I've trained myself to care less about discrimination when I need things done.....



Ksilva said:


> Maybe I am blinded by my own N privilege


I hope that's an impulsive phrase, but if you sincerely meant it, well done. And note the sarcarsm.


----------



## Epicyclic

Dumaresq said:


> This happened to me more IRL. A INFJ I knew (who was getting into MBTI after I'd introduced it to her), said I was too intelligent an creative to to be an S. And not anal enough to be an ESTJ.
> 
> Despite me explaining cognitive functions, she continually insisted I was an ENTP.


Been in your shoes plenty of times. Mistaken for a N type. They get really surprised when they see I'm quite practical and organised. 

No point convincing these kind of people.


----------



## Epicyclic

repeat. delete please.


----------



## Coburn

Epicyclic said:


> Been in your shoes plenty of times. Mistaken for a N type. They get really surprised when they see I'm quite practical and organised.
> 
> No point convincing these kind of people.


Yeah, I try not to let it bother me. But one of my pet peeves is people insisting they know me better than myself.


----------



## Epicyclic

Other people's opinions generally don't matter in how I want to get things done in the short term, however they matter in terms of collateral damage and finding people to work with, which are long term things. 

Actions speak louder than words. Sometimes, all the feelings and sentiments about wanting to change something is no substitute for deliberate, well thought out action. Let me quote Theodore Roosevelt:

_"It Is not the critic who counts, not the one who points out how the strong man stumbled or how the doer of deeds might have done them better. *The credit belongs to the man who is actually In the arena, whose face Is marred with sweat and dust and blood; who strives valiantly*; who errs and comes short again and again; who knows the great enthusiasms, the great devotions, and spends himself In a worthy cause; who, If he wins, knows the triumph of high achievement; and who, If he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who know neither victory nor defeat."_

Of course, a rigid, one track mind approach to doing things is a guaranteed path for failure. It requires one to be brutally objective with himself to face the facts.


----------



## Brian1

I have no problem with ESxJs, we're practically cousins. Unhealthy ones can be domineering, but I think if they are parents, they want the best for you, and they see their own vision as the best one with love. I do think it can get too business transaction on their part, not concerned with the human factor. Recently my ESTJ dad forced me to change doctors. It was easy for him, because he didn't have to deal with the doctor. That left me in the position of playing bad guy, and, telling my doctor who I had formed a very big relationship with, that it may be over. I cried for a week. And I'm really having doubts whether changing was a good idea. But, by and large I don't see the problem of ESxJs?


----------



## Brian1

AmandaLee said:


> You don't think there's a reason as to why most people on this forum are self-proclaimed intuitives? Especially there seems to be a high ratio of INTPs and INFPs. Gross generalization, I know, but on the whole, intuitives are dreamers while sensors are doers. The sensors are out there in the world, doing things, making sure society is staying intact. The ESXJ is not likely to find it rewarding to hang around here. They're busy planning yet another boisterous dinner party to host for their group of friends.
> 
> 
> 
> Regards,
> 
> ~The INTJ with a sensor partner of 6 years


"More wine? Who would like some more wine?"-my ESTJ dad entertaining his friends at my childhood house.


----------



## Coburn

Brian1 said:


> But, by and large I don't see the problem of ESxJs?


We're evil. _Can't you see it?_ *EVIL, I TELL YOU!*


----------

