# Do you think that the anti-Sensor bias in the MBTI community will decrease over time?



## Mr Castelo (May 28, 2017)

Are we becoming more accepting of Sensors? Or do people just like to argue against stereotypes due to a feeling of self-righteousness? If you're a Sensor, have you ever felt "rejected" by the MBTI community, or had your opinions treated as less worthy due to your type? Have you noticed any changes at all since you entered this community/forum? I would like to read your opinions.


----------



## LegendaryBoobs (Sep 1, 2010)

I'm thinking


----------



## Maybe (Sep 10, 2016)

Perhaps one day sensors will reign supreme and be our righteous overlords.

But yea, I've seen more sensor hate than intuitive.


----------



## LegendaryBoobs (Sep 1, 2010)

Ok. I'm done thinking. Thanks!


----------



## Zeta Neprok (Jul 27, 2010)

> Are we becoming more accepting of Sensors? Or do people just like to argue against stereotypes due to a feeling of self-righteousness?


There will always be people who want to use MBTI as a means to feel superior to others but I think that it's related to immaturity. They will either grow up and mature, or lose their interest in MBTI. 



> If you're a Sensor, have you ever felt "rejected" by the MBTI community, or had your opinions treated as less worthy due to your type? Have you noticed any changes at all since you entered this community/forum? I would like to read your opinions.


I can't say I have. I think as far as sensor types go, ISFPs have it a lot easier than say ESTJs though. The anti-sensor bias doesn't really bother me. If someone wants to look down on me because I'm a sensor then that says more about them than it does about me.


----------



## shameless (Apr 21, 2014)

I think it's gotten much better at least from how I perceived some bias' a few years ago when I first joined. It seemed a lot more hostile and blatantly rude at times back then. More recent I guess I don't usually get those vibes as much. 

I have had a few people seem to resort to acting dismissive for what seemed under the basis of my being sensor (however it really hasn't been recent). In those few cases they really just appeared more unaware of their own lack of cognitive function knowledge than anything.


----------



## Turi (May 9, 2017)

Hope so, the bias is rampant on Facebook groups, this website is easily the least hostile place for typology I know of.

I for one am in awe of sensors - Si and Se.
Both functions fascinate the shit out of me.
Got like the shittiest most basic understanding of them atm.


----------



## Stevester (Feb 28, 2016)

Yup, we're the Justin Timberlake of the MBTI world.

We were initially seen as a joke but now considered legitimate artists, bitches.


----------



## Turi (May 9, 2017)

Stevester said:


> Yup, we're the Justin Timberlake of the MBTI world.
> 
> We were initially seen as a joke but now considered legitimate artists, bitches.


Well eh 20/20 wasn't amazing but it's got some killers on it like Mirrors, FutureSex/LoveSounds is tasty a.f arguably his best album ATM.. I'm one of those weirdos who dig Justified a lot too, cheesy name though.

How would you rank em?


----------



## Zeus (Oct 8, 2011)

Not so much with ESTPs, I've gotten from an INTJ that he admired me to the point of wishing he could be me. ISTJs on the other hand I see bearing the most brunt of it. Maybe a little biased, but their lack of strategic thinking makes them viable candidates.


----------



## Aluminum Frost (Oct 1, 2017)

It's easy to debunk, they rely too heavily on stereotypes to the point where anything remotely involving using your brain means intuition.


----------



## Turi (May 9, 2017)

Aluminum Frost said:


> It's easy to debunk, they rely too heavily on stereotypes to the point where anything remotely involving using your brain means intuition.


Wholeheartedly agree.
I see a lot of people getting typed as N types, and self-typing as such, when it's clear to see this isn't the truth.

N types are supposed to be rare. Shouldn't be every poster.
A little creativity doesn't make someone an N type.


For whatever reason, I haven't witnessed it the other way around, where an obvious N type is typed as an sensor, not people who self-type as S when they're really N.

Shows the bias is real, to me.
Completely unwarranted though.


----------



## TalNFJ (May 5, 2017)

I feel like there's bias towards every type, I haven't really noticed sensors as being the main victim. Everyone are getting haten on because of the dreadful MBTI general descriptions, either you spend time explaining over and over again what your type really is or you just ignore the hate.


----------



## Reila (Jan 17, 2017)

Turi said:


> N types are supposed to be rare. Shouldn't be every poster.
> A little creativity doesn't make someone an N type..


I don't disagree with that, but how would you differentiate a N user from a S user in an internet forums?


----------



## Stevester (Feb 28, 2016)

Turi said:


> Well eh 20/20 wasn't amazing but it's got some killers on it like Mirrors, FutureSex/LoveSounds is tasty a.f arguably his best album ATM.. I'm one of those weirdos who dig Justified a lot too, cheesy name though.
> 
> How would you rank em?


Ewwwww, heavy metal guy here actually. Was just using JT for a relatable analogy


----------



## jetser (Jan 6, 2016)

Witch of Chance said:


> But yea, I've seen more sensor hate than intuitive.


Online.
IRL you've been growing up with intuitive hate you just didn't know what it was.

OT: Sure, when we get more sensor scientists and inventors. Elon Musk is a good start.


----------



## jetser (Jan 6, 2016)

Reila Nimu said:


> I don't disagree with that, but how would you differentiate a N user from a S user in an internet forums?


He wouldn't, he's just making false claims, that's what he is. He is butthurt because he doesn't get to be the special snowflake like he's used to be in real life. (with more people being N types here on internet forums)


----------



## Reila (Jan 17, 2017)

jetser said:


> He wouldn't, he's just making false claims, that's what he is. He is butthurt because he doesn't get to be the special snowflake like he's used to be in real life. (with more people being N types here on internet forums)


Did Turi kill your dog? Stole your girl/boyfriend? What is with the drama?


----------



## 460202 (May 22, 2017)

jetser said:


> Online.
> IRL you've been growing up with intuitive hate you just didn't know what it was.


Whenever somebody mentions the anti-sensor bias there is one intuitive saying, "But society is sooo anti-intuitive!" or something like that. I am genuinely curious - where are these societies that are filled with intuitive hate?


----------



## Endologic (Feb 14, 2015)

Witch of Chance said:


> Perhaps one day sensors will reign supreme and be our righteous overlords.


You're kidding - Sensors make up the vast majority of humanity and have done so ever since the dawn of mankind.

On average, Sensors are generally more competent and successful in survival while Intuitives are generally more competent and successful in prosperity. Given that the common people lived under conditions in which they had to act for their survival, _Sensors thrived while Intuitives suffered_, and sensors have historically been psychologically more biased towards Sensation while Intuitives had to be more perceptively balanced (as in they developed their weaker S) to get by because of this.

Where there is prosperity, there are Intuitives.
I predict that automation, whenever it's going to happen, will cause a mass psychological shift, with the number of Intuitives increasing and the Sensors decreasing, the Intuitives getting to thrive while the Sensors will have to adapt and become more perceptively balanced (as in develop their weaker N), with Intuitives eventually becoming the majority.



> But yea, I've seen more sensor hate than intuitive.


You might've seen more particularly _on this website_ and other typology and psychology communities since they're pretty much _dominated by Intuitives_. Typology (psychology in general) is a very theoretical field, so of course it'll attract more Intuitives than Sensors if it appeals to Intuition.

Tying into my previous point, I've observed, and I bet many here have done so as well, that the Sensors on this site are generally much more balanced in perception than the average Sensor, while the Intuitives here are more extremely intuitive.

*((Disclaimer: Correlation does not equal causation. These are the trends of collectives, averages, and don't inherently apply to individuals.))*


----------



## Turi (May 9, 2017)

Typical shitpost in INxx Facebook pages..









:/


----------



## jetser (Jan 6, 2016)

Gilead said:


> So far, the only one saying that sort of thing has been you and another intuitive who linked sensing to survival skills.
> 
> It isn't bias against sensors as such (rather it is bias against intuitives to think they are unable to function "in the real world") but it would become extremely biased you were to assume that sensors must help and serve you in those areas to make ourselves of some use even if we can't hold a civilized and intelligent conversation with you. This is exactly why I think the automatisation example previously was bad but I guess inevitable one if you link sensing with manual labor and intuition with innovation.


I link intuition with clumsiness and sensing with a weak understanding of problems.



> I am pretty sure no one feels inferior to you because you have depth and feelings (and they supposedly don't?)


Good. Because I sure as hell don't feel superior to anyone. Still, the thread title and many other titles claim so.


----------



## Gilead (Oct 5, 2017)

jetser said:


> I link intuition with clumsiness and sensing with a weak understanding of problems.


And you don't see why "weak understanding of problems" is more of a general disadvantage and clumsiness is a disadvantage only if you have to frequently deal with dangerous situations (e.g. hunting) or specific tasks that require precision - which can also be learned. Nowadays you can pretty much avoid those situations entirely, whereas problem solving has been and remains to be the key to our survival as a species.



> Good. Because I sure as hell don't feel superior to anyone. Still, the thread title and many other titles claim so.


No it doesn't.


----------



## Inveniet (Aug 21, 2009)

Isn't that a constant?


----------



## jetser (Jan 6, 2016)

Gilead said:


> And you don't see why "weak understanding of problems" is more of a general disadvantage and clumsiness is a disadvantage only if you have to frequently deal with dangerous situations (e.g. hunting) or specific tasks that require precision - which can also be learned. Nowadays you can pretty much avoid those situations entirely, whereas problem solving has been and remains to be the key to our survival as a species.


As a species yes. As an individual though, you don't really face problems that take more understanding than what you would pour into everyday problems.
Whereas clumsiness affects your whole childhood, your everyday life, your individual challenges (like finding a partner, finding a job).
That's 80% of your life.


----------



## Agent X (May 23, 2017)

Here is another perspective, from the "intuitives are special snowflakes" scenario. Where I am from, our education system is specifically tailored to SJ types, as the system values quick and fast memory recall, and expecting a "traditional" (something that isn't out of the ordinary) answer. Where as if you ask a NP or NJ type the same question, they would say something quirky, original, that at some deep level would makes much more sense than a traditional answer (Don't expect me to come up with an example off the bat). 

And because the intuitive is (no offense sensors) different, (let's assume the intuitive was in middle school), being in a community of sensors, that could leave him feeling vulnerable and exposed, and that alone heralds some of the big school issues found in our society today in the form of abuse and bullying. 

In an ideal world, a wise intuitive would accept the sensor as someone that offers him stability and details, while a wise sensor would see that the intuitive capacity for original, big picture thinking would transcend his viewpoint (yes my viewpoint is biased, as I am intuitive myself) in the form of "the sum is bigger than the whole of it's parts". Another factor that can be considered, even though the data says <insert what @Turi wrote> the MBTI test is viewed through your lens, and therefore viable for personal bias. Statistically speaking the percentages are even more skewed in the intuitives favour (by that I mean that there are less intuitives then the data suggests) as people do want to see themselves as different. 

How is this wall of text relevant to this conversation? Going back to the original question:



> Are we becoming more accepting of Sensors? Or do people just like to argue against stereotypes due to a feeling of self-righteousness? If you're a Sensor, have you ever felt "rejected" by the MBTI community, or had your opinions treated as less worthy due to your type? Have you noticed any changes at all since you entered this community/forum? I would like to read your opinions.


Given to what I wrote above, I would say we have a long way to go before both parties treat the other party the same, as that is the current trend. But this issue is also a double edged blade, as whereas a Sensor is hurt as being seen as ordinary, an Intuitive as misunderstood and not accepted because of his uniqueness. Just my proverbial two cents.


----------



## Turi (May 9, 2017)

Agent X said:


> Here is another perspective, from the "intuitive are special snowflakes" scenario. Where I am from, our education system is specifically tailored to SJ types, as the system values quick and fast memory recall, and expecting a "traditional" (something that isn't out of the ordinary) answer. Where as if you ask a NP or NJ type the same question, they would say something quirky, original, that at some deep level would makes much more sense than a traditional answer (Don't expect me to come up with an example off the bat).


The education system here in Australia prefers xSTJ traits.

They want attention to detail, data, they want you to cite other people and include your sources.. you are measured according to what boxes you tick - graded by points with regards to how well you cite, what you cite, formatting, grammar etc etc.

The whole system screams Te-Si.

For some people this is natural, for me, I find it incredibly restrictive and suffocating. 

I don't want to regurgitate facts and opinions from other people, I don't care about any of that.
Ideally, I would be free to create my own hypothesis without requiring any facts or evidence to prove other people have said similar things. 
It's just bullshit and extremely irritating.

I imagine INTJs have an easier time due to auxiliary Te, they'd probably have a more natural tendency to seek external evidence and opinions etc and be more inclined to want to prove their points in this fashion as their logic is objective.

My logic is subjective. My worldview and inner perceptions are subjective.
The education system here is terrible for someone like me.

But, I know what to do, so need to roll with the punches, to succeed in an institution that seems to directly oppose my way of thinking. It's on us to adapt and get a career that lets us be ourselves. Same for anyone imo.


I imagine INTPs have an easier time as their tertiary Si probably provides them some stability and a little respect for what we've learnt so far, so they're more well equipped to succeed in that environment, in conjunction with being Ti doms.. they'd be good to form their own understandings and arguments in a logical way.


Overall though, yes, our system heavily favours xxSJ types but imo xSTJ types the most.

I truly believe it's on the INxx types to adapt though, rather than have a cry about it, just drill down and get it done, then you're out of the system and in a career you chose.

...and don't pick a career that favours things you don't appreciate, more fool you if you do, i.e an INFJ with a heavy preference for Ni getting into accounting.. just a stupid life choice.. haha.

TL;Dr we should all just adapt to succeed and think about the decisions we make and how those decisions will affect us in the future.


----------



## Gilead (Oct 5, 2017)

jetser said:


> As a species yes. As an individual though, you don't really face problems that take more understanding than what you would pour into everyday problems.
> Whereas clumsiness affects your whole childhood, your everyday life, your individual challenges (like finding a partner, finding a job).
> That's 80% of your life.


There you go again, assuming what kinds of problems other people face.

Of course, these are both NTR so it isn't really relevant for the conversation, I was simply curious as to why you would be so biased against your own type you practically self-sabotage yourself like this.

Also @Agent X and @Turi with the "education system favors SJs" - where I am from, most people who ended up alienated by the school system would be considered sensors by this forums' standards. With the "traditional", "stability-oriented" , "small-minded", "rejection of the new" etc. tendencies. Did not help them. Practical thinking - highly unhelpful when you are expected to be a generalist / social networker / "innovator". You see, at some point you need to start taking responsibility for your own learning, become more conceptual and ambitious; and if you are unwilling to do that - no matter your type - you will not succeed. And don't think I don't know how people get left behind. But these issues are fundamentally not caused by typology, and they cannot be fixed by learning the "wisdoms" of typology. No offense.

Edit. Except that this was funny as hell:


> But this issue is also a double edged blade, as whereas a Sensor is hurt as being seen as ordinary, an Intuitive as misunderstood and not accepted because of his uniqueness.


Directly from Jung's mouth!

I also think you all have seriously misunderstood Si when you link it to SJs, tradition, what we have learned so far... it is pretty much the most personalized and subjective function you can get. So no collective "lessons-learned" there. Perhaps it links to certain expectations of the world but that is the extent of it.


----------



## Turi (May 9, 2017)

@Gilead - what country are you from? I need to know which education system values innovation, haha.

The problems absolutely can be caused by typology.
Some education systems are set up in a way that benefits certain ways of thinking, this is a fact.

Here in Australia, kids have to do NAPLAN assessments on certain years.
This is all about remembering the answers, basically, and kids get forced into studying specifically for these standardised tests.

No room for anything else - they are taught in order to pass specific tests.
What part of this system promotes individuality and creativity? No part, that's what.

I'm not saying every Si-Te user loves this shit and will always succeed, I'm saying the system by its nature is more supportive of an xSTJ mindset above all others.

Literally forced to recall information and data rather than create your own solutions and it's all graded, kids lives shapes by, how they measure up according to a national standard.

It doesn't accommodate for INxx types the same way it does xSTJ types.

People of every type can and do succeed, and can and do fail. It's simply geared towards xSTJ types.

I never suggested, nor would I ever, that Si is "small minded" or rejects the new.

The entire point of my post was that everyone needs to take responsibility for their lives, make the right decisions now for a better future, I even had a little TL;DR that said as much haha.


It goes beyond just the NAPLAN assessments, it goes into University as well - the whole thing where teachers require citations and sources is Te straight up, the whole thing where we get graded according to certain criteria is Te.

I oppose the whole thing, I don't want to cite anyone, idgaf what other people said about the subject or what some author wrote in a book - I want to offer my entirely subjective perspective with absolutely no requirement to provide external, objective evidence to support my arguments and/or position.

I want to go full Ni-Ti and rattle off my own understandings and perspectives/takes on issues.

I don't appreciate being graded on how well I can regurgitate other peoples points of view (and provide citation of what I'm regurgitating).

At the same time, I'm well aware of how the system is and how one needs to be, to succeed.
So I smile and wave, pass everything, and get into a career I want to be in.


We can't blame our own shortcomings on "the system" even if the system IS geared against your natural tendencies.

We need to adapt, tough it out, and get on with it.


----------



## Gilead (Oct 5, 2017)

Turi said:


> @Gilead - what country are you from? I need to know which education system values innovation, haha.


Finland. Did you notice I was using scare quotes tho? As I usually do when referencing someone else's words.



> The problems absolutely can be caused by typology.
> Some education systems are set up in a way that benefits certain ways of thinking, this is a fact.


No, it is caused by bad politics.



> Here in Australia, kids have to do NAPLAN assessments on certain years.
> This is all about remembering the answers, basically, and kids get forced into studying specifically for these standardised tests.
> 
> No room for anything else - they are taught in order to pass specific tests.
> ...


Did I say small-minded... sorry, I meant "detail-oriented".

But once more, Si doesn't really recall data like that, on command. So I think you are still misattributing there.

Standardized tests exists for them to have some comparative tool to estimate learning, that is all. You can critique them all you want but it is not some grand conspiracy to undermine intuitives.


> The entire point of my post was that everyone needs to take responsibility for their lives, make the right decisions now for a better future, I even had a little TL;DR that said as much haha.


I never read the tl;dr bits.



> It goes beyond just the NAPLAN assessments, it goes into University as well - the whole thing where teachers require citations and sources is Te straight up, the whole thing where we get graded according to certain criteria is Te.
> 
> I oppose the whole thing, I don't want to cite anyone, idgaf what other people said about the subject or what some author wrote in a book - I want to offer my entirely subjective perspective with absolutely no requirement to provide external, objective evidence to support my arguments and/or position.


Lol, the point of that is to link things to a larger scientific framework. You are hardly inventing anything for nothing, so you use reference points to proceed to support your own argument or disagree with previous findings. Our uni definitely encourages own perspectives as long as they are well-reasoned.



> We can't blame our own shortcomings on "the system" even if the system IS geared against your natural tendencies.
> 
> We need to adapt, tough it out, and get on with it.


I agree. Do you think I've had it easy being a female ISTJ? I am pretty much a social failure at this point.


----------



## Turi (May 9, 2017)

Gilead said:


> Standardized tests exists for them to have some comparative tool to estimate learning, that is all. You can critique them all you want but it is not some grand conspiracy to undermine intuitives.


Nobody said it was.
I disagree with having any kind of comparative tool in the first place.




> Lol, the point of that is to link things to a larger scientific framework. You are hardly inventing anything for nothing, so you use reference points to proceed to support your own argument or disagree with previous findings. Our uni definitely encourages own perspectives as long as they are well-reasoned.


I studied law for like 3 years, and having to cite articles, cases, statutes, legislation etc irritated the shit out of me.

I don't care what the precedents are.
Don't care what judges have said in the past.
Could not give two shits. Means nothing to me.

I want to chime in with an entirely subjective perspective and still be able to receive the same grades as everyone else.
This isn't the case. Need to cite. Need to regurgitate.

Obviously we are able to provide our own take on things but it absolutely has to be supported by shit from other people, precedents, etc.. can't have a completely unique take on anything.

Obviously, we need to take responsibility for our poor choices - law is a terrible choice for someone like me to study, lol, so I mean that's just on me.

I oppose any and all grading systems though.



> I agree. Do you think I've had it easy being a female ISTJ? I am pretty much a social failure at this point.


I wouldn't have a clue, I don't know how it is over there.


----------



## sippingcappucino (Sep 23, 2017)

Hm, I have yet to find an education system who legitimately prefers N-oriented settings as well. I have been in the system who attempted, but it never turned out the way it should. It goes back to the details and test scores.

But it's interesting to think about it as who has it harder and easier, because I graduated school before I knew about mbti and did just fine. Pretty well, actually. Of course I complained about school all of the times, but who doesn't? Repetitive work annoys most people. I have yet to meet who enjoys that. And I am not saying in a topic you enjoy studying and researching--that is a different matter. The system in the end, is about persistence and details. And I do not think it will or should change, because it is not effective otherwise. Of course there are teachers or students who prefer abstract "innovative" classes, but it is impossible to grade or record it into the system. Everything becomes subjective. Before I knew mbti, I wouldn't even had an idea that I had a shortcoming in the education system. I knew the system wasn't perfect and I had negative opinions on it, but I feel that way about any systems. I hate them, but it's called being 'responsible.' Anyone needs to suck it up.

The only reason I felt alienated was in social settings. Yes, the percentages are high, and the ones to fall into the "minority" is just 'complaining.' However, no matter how much one attempts to ignore, social norms exist. And depending on what culture and environment you grew up in, people you prefer may or may not have been available. If they were not, you are pointed out every-so-often. It is definitely harder to be comfortable yourself, because so many are trying to 'fix' you. I was surrounded by extroverted sensors as I grew up, and was made to believe that was the "right answer" to socialize and live. I felt as an outcast. I didn't know anything else existed. Even if I will witness those who were different, I didn't know what to make of them.

It is as you get older and have various experience that you learn to find different people. In that way mbti helped for me, because I became more comfortable being me, and finding my kinds of people to spend the time without worrying about others' judgments. I finally had the courage to go "you are you, and I am me."


----------



## sippingcappucino (Sep 23, 2017)

,


----------



## Gilead (Oct 5, 2017)

Turi said:


> Nobody said it was.
> I disagree with having any kind of comparative tool in the first place.


Then how would you estimate whether students have learned anything?


> I studied law for like 3 years, and having to cite articles, cases, statutes, legislation etc irritated the shit out of me.
> 
> I don't care what the precedents are.
> Don't care what judges have said in the past.
> ...


Why on earth did you study law lol. It isn't exactly supposed to be too open for interpretation...

Social sciences are not as by the book but you still need to cite unless you are talking about common knowledge or bringing something entirely new to the table. Of course you will give someone credit for the explanations they came up with. Of course you'll look into research to be able to reach the most reliable conclusions and provide sources so other people can know you weren't just talking out of your ass. But I suppose you know all of that. If you don't like the method, maybe the academia isn't for you.


> I wouldn't have a clue, I don't know how it is over there.


Well, take a wild guess.


----------



## The red spirit (Sep 29, 2015)

Asks about hate, thread drowns in arguments


----------



## sippingcappucino (Sep 23, 2017)

,


----------



## Coburn (Sep 3, 2010)

jetser said:


> Not true.
> In fact, it's been said many times that intuitives are clumsy on their own, often having no skills and possibly couldn't make a living on their own.
> That's why they need HELP.
> How is that bias against sensors?


Both perspectives are not mutually exclusive.


----------



## Agent X (May 23, 2017)

Turi said:


> The education system here in Australia prefers xSTJ traits.
> 
> They want attention to detail, data, they want you to cite other people and include your sources.. you are measured according to what boxes you tick - graded by points with regards to how well you cite, what you cite, formatting, grammar etc etc.
> The system is a mess. It leaves no room for originality. I remember how much I disliked school.
> ...


SJ = STJ in my opinion, but I leave a bias for SFJ in terms of the more "humanitarian" based subjects (we are both Australian). Otherwise I agree with about 95% of what you said. 

@Gilead, I am genuinely curious to what is so amusing and why?


----------



## Gilead (Oct 5, 2017)

@Agent X because it was exactly what Jung (an INXX) would say. 

He pretty much stated that EFs think of themselves as the most unique thinkers and ITs believe no one suffers like them - the thought of being proven wrong on this is intolerable because it breaks the illusion of individuality.


----------



## Gilead (Oct 5, 2017)

The red spirit said:


> Asks about hate, thread drowns in arguments


What is so bad about arguments? People disagreeing on something? I don't mind if you don't.


----------



## Agent X (May 23, 2017)

Gilead said:


> @Agent X because it was exactly what Jung (an INXX) would say.
> 
> He pretty much stated that EFs think of themselves as the most unique thinkers and ITs believe no one suffers like them - the thought of being proven wrong on this is intolerable because it breaks the illusion of individuality.


Hmm, you learn something new everyday indeed.


----------



## BranchMonkey (Feb 23, 2017)

Turi said:


> Absolutely, which is why I study for a career that will suit someone like me, was law, shifted to counseling though as it's more along the right lines.
> 
> Sales, hospitality, retail etc, the places you would find most people in, regardless of type, are very much ESxx positions - they can excel and kick the shit out anyone in those positions.
> 
> ...


I'm late to the discussion.

I wanted to add that I have two ISFP sisters, one ISTJ parent; one ISTJ brother; one ISTJ half-brother (same mother). 

The sisters? One breeds dogs and otherwise is a stay-at-home grandmother (now); the other would never have taken on sales or hospitality and so on. She (babiest sis) was a phlebotomist, then an LPN, and last I heard because of back problems she left the LPN work (she had wanted to go on to become an RN) and is now an optician. She also, on her own, trained her beagle to respond to American Sign Language, no speaking commands given after the training was complete--very impressive to watch her work with "Shiloh." 

My ISTJ father wanted to sell real estate because of the money--after he retired from dock work and then worked for a bank as a go-fer and light-weight handyman; he was raised in the 30s and 40s, born on a farm, so this is the kind of work he was introduced to, and for other reasons, stuck with like pension plan; he made it through to full retirement.

My father is a workaholic, always busy, even now at 82, but he never did anything with the real estate license once he had it because he is extremely introverted; it was not realistic at all as a new career, so he abandoned the idea after getting the paper in hand.

My oldest ISTJ brother is very persuasive and sold used cars he fixed up some for a profit, similar work. 

Interesting to me is that my younger brother who was given up for adoption at birth and found us when he was in his late 20s, runs a small business buying up cars sold at police auctions and then has someone else do the minimal work, and he makes a decent living at it, but he could never do hospitality or sales outright.

My husband, an ESFP hates sales, and is poorly suited in many ways to the job he's doing now: Getting housing for vets, other disabled people. He likes to help but it's too much paperwork, drone, sit at the desk all day--and he needs feedback, regularly, that he's doing an adequate to better than adequate job but the kind of government position he holds doesn't give that. 

What you wrote about job interviews and extraverts--all else like intelligence being equal--compared to introverts for many jobs is true: 

I excelled at interviewing, so much so I beat others more suited to the positions, but I did that to support my son, out of necessity, worked hard to get or improve skills I had for the job, and moved on when the anxiety of being ill-suited to it temperamentally got to me. I had back to back jobs through the years in every area except running my own preschool and working as a teacher's assistant in the Sociology department of a JC. [I don't think of 30 plus years of writing and publishing as 'a job' so I had to come back and add that for longevity.]

I think enneagram comes into play here. My husband is a 'helper' and an 'idealist' so the jobs you mentioned for extraverts won't work for him. And as for interviewing well, he doesn't if he doesn't like the one doing the interviewing or the job description spelled out--he just lets his people skills go in the interview, i.e. doesn't try to get the job.

I also have ISTP relatives, and some friends who could never do the jobs you mention like hospitality and sales. I'm smiling inside imagining my ISTPs even going for an interview in those areas.

I, on the other hand, got hired to go through training for car sales--the company invested a lot of money in whom they trained, but I ended up thinking it over--again, having sold myself well in the interview, and done so in order (as a single parent) to support my son, but I knew I couldn't do it 'really' as selling someone something I didn't think they needed, e.g. bells and whistles for bigger bonuses, went against what I value 'too much' to do it at all.

My second husband is an ISTJ who went to Webb Institute for engineering; was a merchant marine, and got his Masters in geography, then went to teach Math in The Dominican Republic. He rarely smiled, worked as hard as my father, and played harder--wrestler in high school, Ultimate Frisbee in college (weekend tournaments) full scholarship and 4.0 for classes, and so focused on what he wanted that smiling on cue was something he had to learn to do to get along with fellow teachers before he left that job and moved out of the country. He could never have got through an interview for sales, and he never would have attempted it. Hospitality? Heck, he wasn't very hospital to me sometimes. Very blunt, and wow, competitive!!!

My ESTP sister, on the other hand, fits what you describe: She could sell anything and made, albeit did not keep, friends easily. 

I modeled my interview style to some extent from watching my ESFP and ESTP relatives in action, but it wasn't what I valued, and thankfully, I could do other things better, naturally, at ease, focused and successfully because it was one thing to fake it to put some food on the table for a time and move on, and quite another to stick something out for the long haul for which I was temperamentally so unsuited.

Glad you weighed in with this. You helped me--and more than me I'd think--sort through our impressions, experiences, and yes, prejudices, regarding sensors and intuitives in certain situations.


----------



## Gilead (Oct 5, 2017)

Agent X said:


> Hmm, you learn something new everyday indeed.


I know right... maybe you are Jung reincarnated
Or similar Ni ideas, idk.


----------



## The red spirit (Sep 29, 2015)

Gilead said:


> What is so bad about arguments? People disagreeing on something? I don't mind if you don't.


Just that there is an irony about this thread. I personally not against that, but arguments are seen as being a more of the negative thing.


----------



## Carrots (May 22, 2017)

Let's all just hold hands and sing it out... but seriously I don't think looking down on someone for being who they are is a good idea ever


----------



## Agent X (May 23, 2017)

Gilead said:


> I know right... maybe you are Jung reincarnated
> Or similar Ni ideas, idk.


I highly doubt that, although your statement does you credit. Similar Ni ideas, perhaps. (There goes the idea I could be Si dom).

@The red spirit,I think this quote pretty much summarizes the essence of this problem. 

"That's the beauty of argument, if you argue correctly, you're never wrong. A mature society understands that at the heart of democracy is argument. Anger is never without an argument, but seldom with a good one." 

So in other words its expected, but it's a bit like iodine, stings at first, but it's for a good cause.


----------



## BranchMonkey (Feb 23, 2017)

jetser said:


> I link intuition with clumsiness and sensing with a weak understanding of problems.
> 
> 
> 
> Good. Because I sure as hell don't feel superior to anyone. Still, the thread title and many other titles claim so.


Great link here, although I already knew many of these athletes were INxx, i.e. not 'clumsy.'

https://brainballblog.wordpress.com/the-16-types/

I had 'fighter pilot vision' when I was much younger; taught myself to swim (terrible phobia) in my 40s and shocked lifeguards, fellow swimmers (at the YMCA) as well as myself by finding I had a natural backstroke; I really felt as though the water and I were one, but I would never have competed--even if I'd learned to swim as a kid.

For basketball, I was always chosen in gym class because my shot was so accurate. Teammates knew 'get her anywhere near the basket and guard her, she'll make the shot.'

That said, I didn't have stamina and I didn't like to be hit--very "sensitive" as my Dad always said with a sneer, so that was out.

For sizing up then making items like shelves for a closet, I did that--not my ESFP husband. 

He came home one day, saw shelves put up over clothes racks in our studio apartment (I was in my 30s) and he said, "What guy did you get to put those up for you?"

I was offended, and said, hotly, "I did that." He looked in my eyes, saw the truth there, looked back and examined the shelves then turned to me and said, "You did a great job."

My grandfather was a wood smith by avocation; perhaps it skipped a generation and I got it from him. I don't know... but no one else in our family--male or female--could do what I did, and it wasn't just shelves:

I could quite early, and still, size up a space and tell if something will fit or not fit, and I have, no exaggeration, 99% accuracy, whereas my father, husband, everyone else I know--especially men in my life, will be sure something will fit, say, in a car, in an alcove in our flat, and be dead wrong--ignoring me when I say, "That isn't going to work, do this..." until it doesn't work, then they listen. Or vice versa: "Do this, it'll work..." They ignore 'the woman,' do it their way, and then come around to my solution.

This is about 'functions,' and also includes 'outliers' not just rank-n-file or extreme sensors or intuitives.

Further, I am absent-minded, and as a kid got called The Absent Minded Professor, but after coming home from my last major foster care stint, by, say, age 12, I was no longer 'clumsy' for any reason except not paying attention to the outside, being so absorbed in a book for instance I would bump into walls.

It just isn't so black and white.

That link again--although this is a very short list and only one example; there are so many, many more out there, verifiable, too:



https://brainballblog.wordpress.com/the-16-types/


----------



## Agent X (May 23, 2017)

*edited post as it is rather off topic*


----------



## BranchMonkey (Feb 23, 2017)

Agent X said:


> Here is another perspective, from the "intuitives are special snowflakes" scenario. Where I am from, our education system is specifically tailored to SJ types, as the system values quick and fast memory recall, and expecting a "traditional" (something that isn't out of the ordinary) answer. Where as if you ask a NP or NJ type the same question, they would say something quirky, original, that at some deep level would makes much more sense than a traditional answer (Don't expect me to come up with an example off the bat).


Given enough time, sleep, I could come up with so many personal examples, better than this one but it'll have to do:

6th grade math class--up till then, and only once after (geometry class, 8th grade, female teacher) I loved and excelled at math. 

We had long division, and I worked out the problem, took my time, double-checked the answer, and when the teacher, Mr. Petrie came by he told me it was wrong, and I quote, "You got the right answer but you went about it the wrong way." 

I was stunned.

So my answer is correct yet because you don't like how I arrived at it, it's--to your unimaginative mind--incorrect?!?

That would recur with math teachers except for the 8th grade geometry class, through every math class afterward, and funny? The either/or there was same as this argument here: 

Those good at math cannot be good at creative writing, and then the fighting--who was more intelligent and important in society, blehblehbleh.

I've always come up with what others saw as quirk ways to solve problems, and by always I mean routinely, early on, and I got called 'backward' and 'weird' and worse for it... until college and the profs--so many (no math ones) became my friends. They recognized what the teachers at lower levels did not:

I may have arrived at the correct answer in an non-orthodox way but that didn't make me any more wrong than the answer. Just different.

We all count... Collectively we simply add it all up in our own ways but the till isn't short, so who cares.


----------



## Agent X (May 23, 2017)

HallowedHydraNess said:


> Given enough time, sleep, I could come up with so many personal examples, better than this one but it'll have to do:
> 
> 6th grade math class--up till then, and only once after (geometry class, 8th grade, female teacher) I loved and excelled at math.
> 
> ...


I can actually relate to this matter, but not directly as that. Recently, while studying Chemistry, I was able to explain Le Chauters principle without knowing about it later. The theory in my mind made sense, but I had no idea how to go about proving it. Imagine my reaction when the exact same principle was brought up the next day in the lecture.

Another matter is the haiber effect, and the effect it has on greenhouse gases. While I did have some help in the form what is the end result of it, I was able to success reverse-engineer the process to find the equation (it sounds more impressive than what it is). My INTP friend was stunned for lack of a better word. (I still remember his reaction on his face, poor guy).


----------



## The red spirit (Sep 29, 2015)

Agent X said:


> @The red spirit,I think this quote pretty much summarizes the essence of this problem.
> 
> "That's the beauty of argument, if you argue correctly, you're never wrong. A mature society understands that at the heart of democracy is argument. Anger is never without an argument, but seldom with a good one."
> 
> So in other words its expected, but it's a bit like iodine, stings at first, but it's for a good cause.


You wrote it like an artist. Thumbs up for that. I can only hope, that this thread won't become a deathmatch or perC'ers.


----------



## Agent X (May 23, 2017)

The red spirit said:


> You wrote it like an artist. Thumbs up for that. I can only hope, that this thread won't become a deathmatch or perC'ers.


While I do appreciate the sentiment, the quote was not of my doing. You are welcome to it regardless, as I feel this summarizes the issue perfectly.


----------



## Kay dash (Jul 12, 2017)

when I first came across this I was like WTF anti-sensor bias?
but after reading through it a little this does seem to be a thing :shocked:

Honestly both sensors and intuitives have their ups and downs and it doesn't depend the slightest on the MBTI it just depends on the person and how they decide to utilize their strengths and weaknesses 

I've seen sensors with higher IQ's than intuitives MBTI is just a software what makes the difference is the hardware not the other way around

and if you're talking about attitudes I think sensors have the edge here -_-
people mock ESTJs for being bossy well so are ENTJs both ExTJs sometimes just need a kick to their balls (or to their faces in case it's a female)
and the ENTJ Te-Se Loop only makes things worse (ironically :laughing: )


not to mention intuition usually comes with a slight dose of arrogance specially NTs but that doesn't exclude NFs either

and while both NFPs and SFPs are naive to some extend at least SFPs can back up their words in a fight :laughing: and so on

you see intuitives can be mocked too and they're generally lazy laid back assholes so yeah it doesn't make a difference


----------



## Bunniculla (Jul 17, 2017)

I think we live in a society that favors Se in the sensors group, not Si. So maybe this topic is more about the understatement of Si.


----------



## Eset (Jun 7, 2016)

> Do you think that the anti-Sensor bias in the MBTI community will decrease over time?


You shouldn't care about something like this, such is a waste of time.


----------



## jetser (Jan 6, 2016)

Agent X said:


> While I do appreciate the sentiment, the quote was not of my doing. You are welcome to it regardless, as I feel this summarizes the issue perfectly.


I would have been surprised if it was. _"if you argue correctly, you're never wrong"_ is a full Ti argument, would have been strange for a Te type.


----------



## AllyKat (Jan 24, 2014)

Mr Castelovania said:


> Are we becoming more accepting of Sensors? Or do people just like to argue against stereotypes due to a feeling of self-righteousness? If you're a Sensor, have you ever felt "rejected" by the MBTI community, or had your opinions treated as less worthy due to your type? Have you noticed any changes at all since you entered this community/forum? I would like to read your opinions.


I've heard those who've been around here longer than I have suggest that the anti-sensor bias isn't as severe as it once was, but I haven't noticed a major change in my time here. As I see it, it fluctuates as anti-sensor posters come and go. I suspect the most extreme individuals don't ever change their views substantially, though.

I can't say I understand the 'intuitive superiority complex' you get from some members. I think some examples come from people who've had a rough time in life and are simply looking for someone to blame rather than some self-righteous belief they have. I think we're all naturally geared towards thinking our own type is somewhat better in some ways anyway, it's our _preferred_ mode in any case. 

I can't say I've ever directly found my opinions on here 'rejected', but I wouldn't say I felt accepted by the MBTI community as a whole. To be fair, I don't really feel accepted anywhere, so maybe it's just me. There's a bit more to it though in this context. If I encounter a poster who shows a lot of anti-sensor bias, and repeatedly so, I'll avoid engaging with them and consequently post less than I would. I'm not the sort of person who is going to waste my time where I'm not wanted. I spend more time in the ISTJ forum, partly because I don't feel I will be judged by type, only by what I actually do.

In some ways I enjoy reading the negative perspectives - it helps self-awareness. Contrary to popular belief, I think many of the anti-sensor views expressed online are expressed in real life. Often not directly in MBTI terms (as people aren't aware of MBTI) and not to quite the extreme (things tend to be exaggerated like that online). But acknowledging those views goes some way to explain why some things you value are neglected by both society as a whole and particular individuals.


----------

