# Why are Ni dominants so rare?



## uncertain (May 26, 2012)

Title says it.

And why are there more Ne-type intuitives than Ni-type intuitives? What's about Ne that makes it more common? There seem to be more people using the Ne/Si pair than the Ni/Se pair, too, as there are more SJs than SPs, according to statistics.

What age do you think people start to pick up their dominant functions? And what might be the factors that affect an INxJ's choice of Ni as his/her dominant function?


----------



## 66393 (Oct 17, 2013)

Rare? The worlds population is 7.2 billion. The two Ni-doms make up 3 - 5 percent of the population. INFJ's make about 1 - 2 percent of the population and INTJ's 2 - 3 percent. For the sake of the argument we'll use the smallest possible percent these two types can make up - 3%. If we multiply 7 billion by .3 we get 300 million. Not as rare as you may think. And even with that number we're likely underestimating. To put it in perspective the whole Ancient Roman empire harbored 70 million people at its peak. The percents given to represent these types are deluding because they represent much more when put on a larger scale.

The only explanation I see for them being less common then other types is because evolution doesn't see having a large percent of those people beneficial to humanity. For centuries warriors, blacksmiths, and other vocations requiring dexterity were in high demand. INxJ are not excluded from such careers, although these are things where other types are more likely to excel. But as we continue to wade further into the sea of technology who knows what personality type will be the most successful in staying afloat.


----------



## JTHearts (Aug 6, 2013)

They aren't rare, those statistics are a bunch of lies


----------



## Amaryllis (Mar 14, 2014)

john.thomas said:


> They aren't rare, those statistics are a bunch of lies


Source?


----------



## JTHearts (Aug 6, 2013)

Amaryllis said:


> Source?


I don't have one, it's just the feeling I get when I see how horrible most people are at typing others, how inaccurate tests can be, and biases among the community. I guess I shouldn't have stated it like it's a fact, but I still don't think those statistics are real.


----------



## uncertain (May 26, 2012)

john.thomas said:


> I don't have one, it's just the feeling I get when I see how horrible most people are at typing others, how inaccurate tests can be, and biases among the community. I guess I shouldn't have stated it like it's a fact, but I still don't think those statistics are real.


I have read from several places that many people mistyped themselves as INxJs, so there might be less INxJs than what we see now.


----------



## malachi.holden.3 (Jul 2, 2014)

I haven't been cooked at all, so I guess that I'm rare.

More like Medium-Rare on a hot day.


----------



## sailaway (Aug 17, 2013)

INTJs and INFJs are everywhere, but ENTJs and ENFJs are really rare. The stats are wrong, I can't prove it and I don't care.

I seriously doubt that INTJs and INFJs are more uncommon than INTPs.


----------



## Grandmaster Yoda (Jan 18, 2014)

Because fewer people answer the questions that lead to that test result.


----------



## Ollyx2OxenFree (Feb 2, 2012)

Grandmaster Yoda said:


> Because fewer people answer the questions that lead to that test result.


This. 

Those statistics suck, I wouldn't use MBTI test results as a reliable source for the percentage of Ni or Ne doms.


----------



## Word Dispenser (May 18, 2012)

I dunno, the influx of INTJs on this forum alone is pretty astronomical. :kitteh:

More seriously, though, I've almost given up on the idea that typology is going to marry any system in particular, and make it consistently accurate.

The closest I've seen is Socionics, but most people lean MBTI because "Socionics is too complicated". Bah. Chickens, all of ya! :kitteh:


----------



## Quernus (Dec 8, 2011)

Grandmaster Yoda said:


> Because fewer people answer the questions that lead to that test result.


Funny, but actually a valid point. I think some functions, more than others, are better understood/explained by tests and descriptions. I know I personally sort of grapple to understand Ni, which could be because I am very decidedly an Ne/Si user, but it could also be the way it's commonly presented and portrayed. Maybe the wrong questions are being asked, or maybe it affects how people score/see themselves.

It kind of reminds me of that question some generic tests have, "Do you get absorbed/involved when watching soap operas?" It's supposed to imply that Yes = F and No = T, but that's a silly and probably inaccurate way to examine the difference between the two. This kind of thing often leads to me getting an INTP result, which is actually absurd. This stands out to me as an F-dom person, but I wonder what other functions or distinctions are being potentially misrepresented.

I tend to use statistics as a rough guideline only.


----------



## somnuvore (Sep 27, 2013)

Typologists say type is assigned at birth so you're asking the wrong people. But let's ignore them for now.

Going by the theory of evolution (as in "survival of the most adaptable", not that the types themselves are evolving), Ni-doms can't really make a living with their role in society; there's a lot of work involved in turning a profit on understanding the events occurring in the world (as in years and years of research with little hope of payment), and the vast majority of people don't want to hear it anyway, esp. in regards of the INFJ who really has a lot of shit to deal with. The INTJ is a little better off if he focuses on things which don't relate to the rotting crust and corpses upon which society is built on.

This lines up with the inverse: Si-doms are very prevalent in the world, they are the ones who adapted the best, and it just so happens that Si and Ni are at complete odds with each other. This supposes that people are tabula rasa, that they are blank and get their person filled in as they grow, which I do think is a far more valid theory than the assumption that type is just randomly assigned during fetal development by some unknown force. However, to understand how this happens, we would have to explore the childhoods of many Ni-doms to see if there's a pattern in, say, parenting. This can't happen until we can get a surefire way of typing people; last I heard, 40% of people are mistyped, so that's a no-go.


----------



## Inveniet (Aug 21, 2009)

In my opinion the statistics that put Ni at the top of the rarity list is utter bullshit.
Since that is so we do not really know if it is rare or not.
A much better question would be why people care so much about 
*who is the mathematically biggest snowflake, based on a narrow abstract view of human cognition.*


----------



## turbz11 (Aug 19, 2014)

Population sample on which the statistics are based on are too small. The tests are too inaccurate. People are too unaware of themselves. Ni could be a rare human quality. The small percentage as indicated by the statistics could be higher but not as high as the percentages the other functions have.


----------



## DAPHNE XO (Jan 16, 2012)

Ni-doms are introverts and by nature, they keep themselves hidden away for the most part.

And, I'm not sure how true this is but apparently there are less introverts in the world than extroverts. I doubt it... but some people do believe this wholeheartedly.


----------



## Satan Claus (Aug 6, 2013)

I'm sure there are a lot of mistypings. The tests are not accurate at all. The first time I ever took that test I got ESTJ. Wtf?

It could also be society. Society conditions us to live in the moment and not to think about the consequences of our actions. Some people buy into this I guess.


----------



## UnicornRainbowLove (May 8, 2014)

If we assume that the types have always been and that there is an evolutionary reason, i.e. that Ni-dom is somehow rarely selected for, but still is just to the extent that it exists, it could simply be that INJs have inferior extraverted sensing and are thus less physically adept and might fit in terribly with a hunter-gatherer tribe. Si on the other hand has many advantages in a tribal world without books to keep up a culture and know how to reproduce what already works and is safe. 

... It's far-fetched, but I don't have a better idea


----------

