# School subjects



## darude11 (Jul 6, 2011)

If you would have to describe every cognitive function (or combinations if it will help you) like school subjects, which would be for which? E.g.
Se - PE
Fx - Religion
TiNe - Maths
Ne - languages
Ti - something understandable
etc.

Thank you for all posts!


----------



## Moss Icon (Mar 29, 2011)

I'm pretty textbook when it comes to my INFPness. *smirk. (Yes, the Pness thing is infinitely amusing....:dry I excelled at English Lit. & Language, History, Art, Drama and Social Studies. I was kinda poor at Science and sucked ass at Maths and Technology. I was actually pretty good at PE whn it came to athletics, cricket and rugby (I'm English!) But I was pretty bad at tennis and hated football! I didn't take a foreign language back in school but ended up taking one (Japanese) as my degree at university. I'm not particularly good at it. 

Honestly I think Ni helps with language more then Ne. The people who picked Japanese up the easiest have all been Ni and, whilst correlation by no means indicates causality, speaking as a language major I can say that it's mostly the connections you can make in your head, the tying together of threads, meanings, applied linguistics, grammar points and phrase usage, etc. that really serves you. I'd go with Ni for that. A common-held misconception is that artsy types are more able at learning a foreign language. The mental processes actually resemble the same used for Maths more than anything else! 

As for the rest: 

PE: Se
Literature: Fi
Maths: Ti
Science: Te
Technology: Se
Social Studies: Ne
Music: Si
Religion: Fe
Art: Ne/Se (depending on your style)


----------



## MCRTS (Jul 4, 2011)

I'm ISFJ. I'm good at English, History, Social Studies. Sucked at Science. Math...don't even go there.


----------



## dagnytaggart (Jun 6, 2010)

ESTJ or ENTJ.

Despite being "right brained", my forte was definitely math and science. 

English involved too much redundancy, reading and time (essays). 

History and languages, I sucked at, because I've got the memory of a goldfish. Actually language was fun, as long as it was logical and organized. It's the goddamn irregularities and idioms that made me crazy.

Gym...is the only class I ever got a bad grade at in high school. That's because I skipped almost ever class and never wore uniform. I had no idea why they *required* uniform. If people want to get grass all over their tuxedos, that's their problem.

Music was great, I picked it up well. But I got kicked out of orchestra because my parents said something at a parent-teacher conference that pissed him off.


Math: Ti
Science: Ne
Foreign language: Te
English: Si
History: Si
Music: Se
Gym: Se


----------



## DeductiveReasoner (Feb 25, 2011)

I've always been great at language, foreign or otherwise. I am also good at math and science, provided I stay interested and don't zone out.

To be honest, I'd say math is more Te/Ni rather than Ti/Ne.


----------



## StrixAluco (Apr 8, 2011)

Ti = Linguistics. 

I kind of liked maths sometimes but was never really good at it and too inattentive and lazy for it not to be frustrating (you might say that I am not actually an INTP or a Ti user, I don't believe in this stereotype than NTs are alway math geniuses.). However, I absolutely love linguistic (analyzing sentences, the way words are constructed, syntax, verbs, guessing quickly, grasping everything naturally, it's amazing and incredibly fun for me. I also see something interesting in numbers as a language but have no knowledge about it to really think deeper about the system in itself, I love languages that exist only for the sake of existing rather than having a practical use, I love their importance, the way they shape our mind, I love languages.)

I also think that both Fi/Fe and Ti/Te can be interested in religion but have different way to approach the subject and like different specific areas (sciences, maths, literature, etc are not extremely narrow subjects and there are different reasons to like something).

The only thing I'd say is that Se is probably more likely to be athletic than Ne for obvious reasons.


----------



## AquaColum (Apr 11, 2010)

The way that maths is taught at schools is taught in a very SJ manner; rote memorisation of steps to come to a final answer etc. Si works well for this.


----------



## Linnifae (Nov 13, 2009)

I'm Ne dominant and suck horridly at math. I was good in every other subject though, especially writing, and including gym. I wasn't a natural athlete per se, but after I played a bit I got the hang of it and seemed to have potential in most athletic pursuits. I actually wasn't very good at art; drawing, painting, etc, but I have a good ear for music and can sing and match pitches easily even if I don't play an instrument. (Never got the opportunity to but I'd have liked to.)


----------



## B-Con (Dec 24, 2010)

DeductiveReasoner said:


> To be honest, I'd say math is more Te/Ni rather than Ti/Ne.


I would disagree. It's about modeling concepts, which is a Ti thing.

Te is good at math, but the higher you go the more conceptual it is. I got a B.S. in math and I would label it more of a Ti/Ne than Te/Ni. So for Ti alone or the Ti/Ne pairing, I would say it's the math subject.

Regardless, those are both the two best at it.



AquaColum said:


> The way that maths is taught at schools is taught in a very SJ manner; rote memorisation of steps to come to a final answer etc. Si works well for this.


Yeah, our system kind of sucks at teaching math. At high levels it's more of an NT or TP thing, but in middle/high school its taught in an SJ way. The subject isn't best taught that way for most students, IMO.


----------



## AquaColum (Apr 11, 2010)

B-Con said:


> Yeah, our system kind of sucks at teaching math. At high levels it's more of an NT or TP thing, but in middle/high school its taught in an SJ way. The subject isn't best taught that way for most students, IMO.


I definitely agree. Telling them 'do this to get to your answer. Don't do it differently. Just do it.' is a surefire way to put kids off the subject forever. (This coming from an SJ )

It _is_ my best subject and I think I've got Si+Ti to thank for that. I happen to be one of the lucky ones who the system works well for... but that doesn't mean I enjoy it or agree with the way it's taught. Following step after step is very boring, mindless, repetitive and it's easy to see why so many people hate it. (Or they might just hate school in general, meh.)

As well as that, even if you do follow the steps and know how to get from a to b, I don't think that's real learning. You don't know what you're doing, you don't understand it, all you know is that it works. You'll pass your exams but you won't have a clue what any of it means. It's like tracing a picture without knowing how to draw.

But teachers do have pressure to just make sure the kids pass the exams they need to pass, and most people wouldn't really _need_ to understand how it works as long as they can do it. It seems like a shame to me, but really, with the current system it'd be impractical and just about impossible to tailor teaching to each student's learning style. How much time would that take, with what 20 to 30 students in each class? (The reason people get tutors!)

So it's taught the SJ way because it's most likely to work, as the largest chunk of the population is SJ, and it's true that no matter what type you are, if you do follow each step correctly you _should_ be able to get the answer. In theory.

/rant /derail S:


----------



## TAHTGUY (Jun 19, 2011)

ENTP - I'm absolutely in love with science, math, philosophy, psychology, I understand English well, but it's not that interesting for me, I hate literature and linguistics, history is okay for me, I've never been good at sports, always were average.


----------



## dagnytaggart (Jun 6, 2010)

B-Con said:


> I would disagree. It's about modeling concepts, which is a Ti thing.
> 
> Te is good at math, but the higher you go the more conceptual it is. I got a B.S. in math and I would label it more of a Ti/Ne than Te/Ni. So for Ti alone or the Ti/Ne pairing, I would say it's the math subject.
> 
> ...





AquaColum said:


> I definitely agree. Telling them 'do this to get to your answer. Don't do it differently. Just do it.' is a surefire way to put kids off the subject forever. (This coming from an SJ )
> 
> It _is_ my best subject and I think I've got Si+Ti to thank for that. I happen to be one of the lucky ones who the system works well for... but that doesn't mean I enjoy it or agree with the way it's taught. Following step after step is very boring, mindless, repetitive and it's easy to see why so many people hate it. (Or they might just hate school in general, meh.)
> 
> ...


If the little brats don't like the method of instruction, they should teach themselves.

That's what I did. Math was always too slow-paced/boring in the class, and I suck at rote memorization.

So I just skipped every class (except exams) and taught myself, by using common sense and references to outside sources. I never ONCE asked for help. Yet I still aced every exam, ended up as the top math student, etc.

So when lazy kids blame the class format for failing, I bite my thumb at them, good sir...


----------



## B-Con (Dec 24, 2010)

dagnytaggart said:


> If the little brats don't like the method of instruction, they should teach themselves.
> 
> That's what I did. Math was always too slow-paced/boring in the class, and I suck at rote memorization.
> 
> ...


The method is _wrong_. It's like teaching basketball using only a whiteboard. It's just plain not the way it should be done. The system is wrong, and that's what we were pointing out. The solution is to fix the system, not ignore it. I'm not sure why you think your comments fit into that trail of conversation.

However, it's not always the kid's fault if they don't learn _properly_ -- how are they supposed to know any better? They show up, get taught math in a way, learn it that way, pass the test, and leave. But the point isn't learning the material, it's understanding it. I've seen A students in high school completely unable to cut the mustard in college because they don't _get_ it -- and they never knew there was anything wrong with how they learned it. Essentially, they were lied to their entire scholastic career. Some kids learn well regardless of their teaching method -- kudos to them, they're generally the naturally talented -- but not everyone does.

Regardless, that has nothing to do with the original topic nor the original side topic.


----------



## ItsAlwaysSunny (Dec 17, 2010)

ISFP here.

I've always been awesome at math. I would skip my classes all the time and still get one of the highest grades. Although I must admit that once I started taking higher level courses in college, I lost interest in it. I like learning about numbers, but I didn't like how abstract it was getting. My favorite was always trigonometry and calculus.

I'm also a beast at learning languages and I loved my linguistics class. I think learning a language is kind of like doing math, but with words.

My least favorite subjects in school were art and english, actually. I didn't like art because i didn't think it was fair to grade people's artistic abilities and I didn't like English because I hated analyzing the novels. English and art are so subjective that I never understood why we were being graded on it. And it never seemed fair to me since I could never indentify what the metaphors and everything was _supposed_ to symbolize.

Btw, I don't think the functions have all that much to do with academic performance or even subjects, but if I had to choose:

Ti and Te-math/language
Ni- English lit., maybe higher levels of math too
Ne- maybe chemistry or physics;
Si -history and music
Se- p.e, music, science, art
Fe- English
Fi- English, art


----------



## MCRTS (Jul 4, 2011)

ISFJ. 

Back in high school, I prefer English and the Humanities subjects, like History, Geography, Literature and so on. I wish I could have taken more of the Humanities subjects, as I was more arts inclined, but here, math and science are more important than humanities. I also wish other subjects were offered, like philosophy, religious and cultural studies.


----------



## Fleetfoot (May 9, 2011)

Se - Arts/Gym
Si - Math/History
Te - PoliSci
Ti - Science/Language
Ne - Social Studies/World Cultures
Ni - English 
Fe - Religion
Fi - Literature

Just from what I've seen, but people teach things differently everywhere in different ways that would attract different functions. I for one love the sciences, and I'm an Se dom, but I can't stand sitting in a class listening to a lecture the whole time. I need to experiment and do things in order to get the most of my learning experience in a class. I'm also very good and enjoy math and arts (not necessarily music, however) I'm okay with languages, and I never really cared for anything else...I was probably also very good at English at my school, but the SATs told me I was basically illiterate. I don't like that foggy area of what is right and wrong, and I don't like that there isn't a clear cut right or wrong in the first place, so how can you grade such things? I just don't like Literature/English classes.


----------



## Figure (Jun 22, 2011)

For kicks, business school:

Accounting: Si
Finance: Ne, Se
Derivatives/Hedging: Ne, Te
Quant/Business Stats: Ti, Ne, Se
Productions: Ti, Si
Organizational Behavior: Fe, Fi, Si
Strategy: Ni, Ne, Te
Management Info Systems: Ni, Te
Legal: Te, Se
Marketing: Ne, Fe
Economics: Ne


----------



## Eric B (Jun 18, 2010)

darude11 said:


> TiNe - Maths





StrixAluco said:


> kind of liked maths sometimes but was never really good at it and too inattentive and lazy for it not to be frustrating





AquaColum said:


> The way that maths is taught at schools is taught in a very SJ manner; rote memorisation of steps to come to a final answer etc. Si works well for this.





DeductiveReasoner said:


> To be honest, I'd say math is more Te/Ni rather than Ti/Ne.





B-Con said:


> I would disagree. It's about modeling concepts, which is a Ti thing.
> 
> Te is good at math, but the higher you go the more conceptual it is. I got a B.S. in math and I would label it more of a Ti/Ne than Te/Ni. So for Ti alone or the Ti/Ne pairing, I would say it's the math subject.
> 
> ...


 The formulaic aspect of Math is TeSi (agreed upon, set standard of logic with internal storehouse of tangible facts, including the directions for solving the formulas). Hence, it jibes with the prevailing mindset of education, at least in the US.

I know that this is the aspect of math I always had problems with, and basically put me off. TeNi will be more about the theory of math. 
So all I needed was to see Carl Sagan's brief description of the tesseract on Cosmos, and then I was able to figure out how the fourth dimension works, and by comparing with the steps up from the lower dimensions to the 3rd, follow the patterns to figure some of the other "regular" (isogonal) 4D solids, and even the 5D and higher analogues of the triangle and square "families". (It also made the black hole and worm hole "embedding" diagrams make more sense).

When I went to the library to look up more on 4D, I found a book that dismissed that method of figuring objects, and wanted to do it with math formulas instead (most of which I still can hardly make heads or tails with). To me, there's nothing worse than a page full of variables and symbols. Perhaps, that was what screwed Einstein up in school, though he of course eventually had to master all the formulas. 
I didn't seem to need that stuff, using concept and patterns; though that book did point out that you can figure a wider gamut of objects with the formulas. Like stuff I would have never been about to put together, such as the duocylinder.


----------



## nevermore (Oct 1, 2010)

INTP and English and Philosophy were my best subjects. I was also very good at the social sciences, drama, and music (vocal; I took instrumental for a while but I was too lazy to keep up the practice), good at languages, and extremely good at writing (particularly creative nonfiction/essays that were not too rigid). I wasn't good at math or hard science, but it could have either been because a) it wasn't taught right, as others have said or b) I found these subjects boring, so I wasn't motivated to do work in them. Though I really love reading about science now and then, in school I found them cold and dry.

Even so, I found a lot of the literature we had to read in English class boring, and yet I did better at English than every other student in my cohort, so I suspect it has more to do with math and science requiring more work. You don't need to 'practice' for English as much. Philosophy, while very logical, doesn't really require practice either. You can just sort of leap into it and use your own intellect. My head always ached whenever I finished writing a math exam, but never for an English exam. It is my honest opinion that math and science are simply more intellectually challenging than English is (and this is coming from someone who never excelled at math and science).

Really, the reason I ended up being an arts student was because I was lazy and unambitious (typical INTP I guess).


----------



## Nomenclature (Aug 9, 2009)

ISTP

I'm fail at P.E. as my school offers it. I'm fine with P90X. I'm fine with pilates. I'm fine with dance. But FFS, do not put me in a class with sports and expect me to be good at it or enjoy it.

Stunning at math but it's often too intangible for my taste EXCEPT for applied/discrete math and engineering; science all the way, especially when I'm given room for relatively unsupervised experiments (I go to an NTP-oriented research school). Science is my forte; I'll be majoring in biophysics.

Literature? I'm fine with synthesis, but digesting the information takes me a while. I take meds for ADD... it does nothing for me to sit there and read, much less when I don't have the focus for it. Same goes for history; I was by far the best at making connections, but sucked at memorizing facts if I didn't read primary sources for myself.

Foreign language is easy for me; I was raised bilingual, so throwing another language to further develop the set of skills I've been using all my life is nothing. Not just that, but Vietnamese (what my parents speak) is a tonal language, which places more emphasis on stress and the little nuances of learning a language.

Higher algebra: Ni-Te
Discrete math: Ti-Ne or -Se
Statistics: Te
Biology: Ti, Ne, Se
Bioethics: Fi, Ne
Physics: Ti-Se
Phys. Ed: Se
Literature: Ni, Fi
History: Ti-Fe and any perceiving functions; it's not necessarily Si at the higher levels imo

Languages could be any function combination.


----------

