# How to tell apart an Intuitive from a Sensor in real life?



## JLCR (Jul 15, 2017)

Hello everyone,

I am having a bit of trouble imagining what is the difference between Intuitive and Sensor types in every day life. I figured I'd ask here for some examples you've seen between others that outline that difference for me. I've researched, but I admit I just can't picture much definitively.

What I've gathered is this, Intuitives assume a lot correctly, and Sensors have all the facts. But you see, this is way too simple, I feel.

Help?


----------



## Bunniculla (Jul 17, 2017)

Well, from my experience, they say intuitives tend to look around a lot and sensors tend to maintain eye contact, when talking . Also, intuitives tend to zone out and get lost in their thoughts often (scatterbrained?). Not sure if any of this can actually be proven though.


----------



## shameless (Apr 21, 2014)

NFS seem pretty easy to spot, they often are talking about how they like to talk about ideas. :laughing: often I find if they find another NF they can get lost in just talking about their joy of talking about ideas. Usually though, they are often speaking about what would be ideal (not realistic).

NTs seem to have the ability to express possibilities concretely. Whether it's explaining an invention or a possible side effect. 

SPs to me can often be societies: gypsies, traveling circus performers, mercenaries, etc for sake of expression or comparisons. 

SJs usually do all come off as having an emphasis on maintaining pillars and stabilizing.


----------



## Catwalk (Aug 12, 2015)

Get to know the specimen(s) at hand. The average specimen should indulge in at least, 30-mintues of routine convsersation stimulus, nonsensical joke-telling and/or considerately exuberating _high-functioning _sarcasm/pessimistic wit to surrounding specimens to make [the day] a tad more tolerable.

Intuitive / sensor specimen(s) should respond accordingly to distinctive types of said stimulus. The first specimen to (laugh) at your eccentric sarcasm is an intuitive-humanoid; the specimen to laugh at strange facial-expression you make when you tell a joke, is a sensing humanoid. Afterward, you can ask them to join you at a nice Vegan™ bar for _deliciously-dangerous_ hummus.


Easy-typology method(s) *::*


* *





_Make another human smile._





Glad to assist. 

___________

Com.


----------



## ae1905 (Jun 7, 2014)

you can sometimes make a decent guess what type a person is just by observing him, eg:

1. where you meet him...types tend to congregate at distinctly different places, night clubs, the beach, a library, etc

2. how he is dressed/his grooming?...extroverts and judging types tend to be more fastidious about their appearance and look more put together...perceiving types often have a more carefree appearance, especially in their hair style...extroverts and esfps especially tend to be trendy in dress and grooming

3. who he is with?...is he with other people or alone?...if with others, is he animated, the leader of the group or more reserved?...what do the other people look like, what is their dress, grooming, appearance?

4. what he is carrying?...books, carry bags, backpack, other attachments?...are they fashionable, status conscious, utilitarian?...like his dress and appearance these can help you narrow his type

5. what does he look like?...facial expressions can sometimes tell you his type...sps, for example, often have a characteristic firmness in their expressions, especially in the set of the mouth and jaw...winston churchill had this in almost an exaggerated degree...so does donald trump...with most sps, it isn't as prominent but is still often detectable...introverts often have a reserved mien with eyes that appear cautious and withdrawn, like the personality...extroverts, in contrast, often have expressions that are animated and alive, with eyes that are alert and set forward...it's better to judge facial expression when people are alone but glancing about their environment

6. does he look like a genius, like einstein?...that's easy: he's an intp




these are just some of the things you can look for, but you get the idea...a person's personality is normally reflected in his appearance...put your sherlock hat on and start sleuthing!


----------



## charlie.elliot (Jan 22, 2014)

I usually get a sense of whether someone is Sensing and Intuitive by talking to them and noticing their conversational style. But I don't really know how to explain it in words... its just an impression I get. Intuitives seem to draw from an "underground" source of ideas when they talk, and often say unusual things that you've never really heard before. Sensors just talk about what's already there, what's already agreed-upon reality. 

Also, I get a different feeling personally talking to Intuitives and Sensors. When talking to Intuitives, I just express my ideas and they usually follow up with another idea and the conversation just goes from there, very naturally. When I mention some kind of abstract idea, they seem "hooked".
When talking to Sensors, they often will make concrete comments in response to my ideas that don't really move the conversation along (from my perspective, anyway). Often I feel like I talk and they don't even hear me at all. It can make me very self-conscious and even embarrassed in some cases.

Often I get a big "........" from SPs when I talk about abstract ideas, and SJs will naturally try to engage more, but often they'll mention something that my idea _reminded them of_, but that's not actually a comment on the actual idea.


----------



## JLCR (Jul 15, 2017)

charlie.elliot said:


> I usually get a sense of whether someone is Sensing and Intuitive by talking to them and noticing their conversational style. But I don't really know how to explain it in words... its just an impression I get. Intuitives seem to draw from an "underground" source of ideas when they talk, and often say unusual things that you've never really heard before. Sensors just talk about what's already there, what's already agreed-upon reality.
> 
> Also, I get a different feeling personally talking to Intuitives and Sensors. When talking to Intuitives, I just express my ideas and they usually follow up with another idea and the conversation just goes from there, very naturally. When I mention some kind of abstract idea, they seem "hooked".
> When talking to Sensors, they often will make concrete comments in response to my ideas that don't really move the conversation along (from my perspective, anyway). Often I feel like I talk and they don't even hear me at all. It can make me very self-conscious and even embarrassed in some cases.
> ...


This is something I'm familiar with. I have noticed there are two types of persons, the ones that are very wide-eyed, and the ones that are very down-to-earth. Intuitives and Sensors, respectively.


----------



## Turi (May 9, 2017)

Sensors only see the tiny little miniscule picture, they only see like the itty bitty grains of sand they don't see the beach.

They like to talk about gossip and then they get all nostalgic about times they used to talk about gossip with their friends.

They oppose new ideas and stick to traditions and the past 100%, impossible to budge them, even in the face of all logic they will definitely, absolutely, positively swear that the Earth is flat because that's what the first people thought which means that's history, that's the truth, that's as far back as reality goes.

They enjoy being salt of the earth people, real down and dirty, they always prefer to be tradies and like doing plumbing.. or fixing my car.

They enjoy classic rock exclusively, they vehemently deny all other music as possibilities.

They are easily brain washed, if you say something to them twice it becomes precedent - authority - a guiding light. This is because they denied it the first time as it was new but the second time, well now it has a reference point and is the truth.

They like kicking footballs and have no thoughts in their head.
They like watching reality tv shows.

They partake in "small talk" and think it's important, they like discussing the weather.

If you mention something intangible they shutdown, doesn't compute, literally collapse on the floor and have a meltdown trying to find a connection to something "real".

They legitimately have a ground cable in their back that must always be touching metal otherwise they feel their head is in the clouds.

They don't see hidden agendas or hidden meaning in anything they take the world at face value, they believe everything they're told, they like to pump weights and slap each other with towels in the gym, they like it when they stub their toe because it's real and legit and proves how human they are, they like mundane things like discussing how they're going to vacuum the lounge.

I'm right, aren't I sensors?
No?

Let me try again.

I'm right, aren't I sensors?
There we go. Much better.


----------



## Knave (Sep 9, 2017)

LOL @Turi. Good stuff.


----------



## Turi (May 9, 2017)

rpmcmurphy47 said:


> LOL @Turi. Good stuff.


Why aren't you getting all butthurt for them?
NF types love getting butthurt for other people.

I need to do more research.
This makes no sense.


----------



## Knave (Sep 9, 2017)

Turi said:


> Why aren't you getting all butthurt for them?
> NF types love getting butthurt for other people.
> 
> I need to do more research.
> This makes no sense.


I might be xNTP, or maybe something else entirely; who really knows about the actual validity to any of this theory. I'm not particalulary sensitive at all though.


----------



## charlie.elliot (Jan 22, 2014)

I like discussing the weather. It changes every day!


----------



## Gilead (Oct 5, 2017)

Turi said:


> They enjoy being salt of the earth people, real down and dirty, they always prefer to be tradies and like doing plumbing.. or fixing my car.


Salt of the earth people are dangerous.


----------



## Agent X (May 23, 2017)

Interesting topic. When I am observing/analyzing others in an external environment, like another INFJ said before me, I tend to notice patterns in their speech. But if I were to put my impressions into a classification outlining how to spot an intuitive, here are some examples. I also would like @Turi's opinion on this.

General Dichotomy: 

Introversion/Extroversion: Perhaps the easiest to decide. Are they alone, socially withdrawn, keep to themselves and shy? Chances are they are introverts. Are they loud, in a group of friends, speak before they think, overly enthusiastic, brimming with energy? Then you have found an extrovert.

Intuitive/Sensing: It has been in my observations, intuitives tend to use metaphors (more specifically NF temperament), have a very floral vocabulary, always curious and wanting to know to more, prone to zoning out and overthinking. Sensors I see as simple. Here is a practical application: Ask a random person who you suspect to be intuitive something relative to the "big picture" such as time, the world, where one pattern leads on to another, items like those or a general philosophy question. If he responds rather enthusiastically, then you can be certain he is one, if not then you found another sensor.

Thinking/Feeling: This one is rather simple as well. Thinkers tend to have a stoic "feel" to them, and can manage their facial expressions rather well. A feeler would tend to change the topic into something relating to how they or you feel about the aforementioned topic. 

Judging/Perceiving: To this day, this classification has been difficult for me to perceive. A judging person would likely be organized, punctual, on time, very "switched" on. A perceiving user would likely be late, abhor the idea of order, scatterbrained. I do have a rather interesting theory in the sense that if I were to ask the idea of what the person would prefer in terms of order and chaos, a P user would say chaos, a J would prefer order. I have to test that theory out someday..
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I have been trying to judge people by their dominant functions lately. I find that has the most impact rather than what written above, although I use it in conjunction.

Functional stack essences:

Is the person relying on * past * memories too much, in the sense that those dominates his/her life? Si-Ne axis. 
Is the person making random leaps that make perfect sense and connects ideas together linearly? Ni-Se axis. (The last bit was Te.)
Is the person making random leaps that explores possibilities but bounce around the essence of the idea? Ne-Si axis.
Is the person concerned with your feelings/feelings of others? Fe-Ti axis.
Does the person have an internal framework of values/ethics that he never violates? Fi-Te axis.
Is the person good at planning and organizing the * external * enviroment? Te-Fi axis.
Is the person occupied with what his happening at the * present * time, seems overly energetic? Se-Ni axis.
Does the person reference facts that make are logically sound and proven by other stated already facts? Ti-Fe axis. (Last bit was Si as well).

It also has been my impression that in accordance to what their dominant function is, they would be fond of using words that appeal to said dominant function. For instance: An Ni user would be really fond of future-orientated responses in the form of: "In the long term, etc". 

A Ti (Internal Thinker) orientated user will ALWAYS have Fe (External Feeling) in their stack. 
A Te (External Thinker) orientated user will ALWAYS have Fi (Internal Feeling) in their stack.
A Si (Internal Sensor) orientated user will ALWAYS have Ne (External Intuition) in their stack.
A Se (External Sensor) orientated user will ALWAYS have Ni (Internal Intuition) in their stack.
A Fi (Internal Feeler) orientated user will ALWAYS have Te (External Thinking) in their stack.
A Fe (External Feeler) orientated user will ALWAYS have Ti (Internal Thinking) in their stack.
A Ni (Internal Intuition) orientated user will ALWAYS have Se (External Sensing) in their stack.
A Ne (External Intuition) orientated user will ALWAYS have Si (Internal Sensing) in their stack.

An extroverted persons stack would appear like this: External function - Internal function - External function - Internal function.
An introverted persons stack would appear like this: Internal function - External function - Internal function - External function.

Then just modify the above axes in fit them into the extroverted/introverted person stack as described above.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now while I do recognize a person is a dynamic creature, and not necessarily fit the above stereotypes that I posted, in essence, about 70-80% would appear to be categorized with what is written above. 

Side-note: I just realized something.. I had a dream about writing this post...deja vu indeed.


----------



## ae1905 (Jun 7, 2014)

here's an example of N vs S irl, specifically Ne vs Se

I was talking to an istp about beauty and I asked, "why are some faces beautiful?"....he thought about it and said, "some faces are rare, like unusual eye hair colors, so they are more highly valued"....I thought about it and said, "I think it's cuz of the symmetry in the facial parts, their shape and position"

you can see his answer relied on what he could see, the colors of the eyes, hair, etc, and he compared beautiful faces to less attractive faces, all very concrete Se perceptions

I, otoh, didn't bother noting concrete details or comparing one face to another...I just thought about a face and abstracted the qualities I thought make some beautiful, like symmetry, proportions, and relative position, etc

that's Se direct, concrete perception vs Ne indirect, abstract perception:

Se sees what can be seen with the five senses

Ne sees what can't be seen with the senses

in this case, my Ne compared a real face with the geometric objects and noticed its similarities...his Se compared real faces



note: science has studied this and concluded the perception of beauty is the result of symmetry and the geometric properties of faces...so this is an example of where intuitive perception got closer to the truth than sensory perception


----------



## 00Hikaru00 (Jul 28, 2017)

Generally speaking, I find sensors not interested in discussing anything that's not _real_ to them, and what's real to them are concrete things in their environment - what they can see, hear, taste, smell and touch. I also quote my ISFJ-friend who said "Intuition is useless". She doesn't trust it at all. 

Intuitive types are more willing and able to entertain abstract ideas, or wild ideas (I call them).

Some sensor types may entertain such conversations but they won't do a marathon with you.


----------



## jetser (Jan 6, 2016)

Throw a ball towards him/her.
The one who catches it is a sensor. *mild sarcasm


----------



## Coburn (Sep 3, 2010)

Sensational said:


> SJs usually do all come off as having an emphasis on maintaining pillars and stabilizing.


I, too, often talk about pillars and stability.


----------



## JLCR (Jul 15, 2017)

Agent X said:


> Interesting topic. When I am observing/analyzing others in an external environment, like another INFJ said before me, I tend to notice patterns in their speech. But if I were to put my impressions into a classification outlining how to spot an intuitive, here are some examples. I also would like @Turi's opinion on this.
> 
> General Dichotomy:
> 
> ...


Ah, this was very nicely written! I have a clear picture of everything now. Thank you.

And isn't deja vu so strange? Yesterday I sat on a chair, thinking about a dream I had, then today I did the same with the same dream, but it was like, "WHOOOAAAA, what a ride." It was so strange, it's like your head starts spinning and you have 10 seconds of free future-seeing. My dog walked in seconds later and yawned, but I knew she was gonna do that. I wonder why that happens. I swear all that has happened to me before. 

Anyway, thanks so much again, I was just unsure if I'd been typed correctly in the N/S area, since I didn't understand them too well and all the questions about them were asking things like, "Do you get lost in nature? Do you like art?" So I wasn't sure, can't sensors like art too? Haha. Anyway, I'm Intuitive for sure, though.


----------



## Bunniculla (Jul 17, 2017)

Hmm...eh...I don't know. I'm not sure if the common notion that sensors won't really be interested in abstract concepts prove true or not. Also, as far as future thinking, this seems to be a trait in opportunistic people. As in if you are opportunistic, you're thinking of taking that risk to get to the better outcome in the future. However, it can't really appropriately be applied that sensors aren't also opportunistic. They definitely can arrive at that conclusion, but in the sensor way. So, I'm still pretty much not convinced whether you can tell a sensor apart from an intuitive using behavior as a guide. If they both come to the same outcome, that's all you see. You don't get to see the exact process that went on in their mind. I don't think we can use behavior to answer the opening question. There are just too many exceptions to the common notions and stereotypes.


----------



## Wild (Jul 14, 2014)

Knave said:


> From an intuitive perspective, when you're digging in conversation and your shovel hits concrete. There's a moment of discontentment, a surface you can't quite get beyond, and you're left with a silent sigh. Not to say it's always like this, but there's a certain depth (not necessarily a practical or beneficial depth) that's unmistakable that intuitives seem to have more so than sensors--not all sensors, though. From a sensor perspective, I probably just come across as a ridiculous, whacked-out buffoon.


I think this is a shitty way of determining it. It's just wrong in my opinion. Even as someone who types as a distinct as fuck Se-dom, my "deep talk" shovel has hit concrete with intuitives. I know what you're talking about, I just think there's so much more to it than sensor vs. intuitive, and I think the fact that people have started making it out that way lays a very erroneous foundation for distinguishing the two.

If we're talking about hitting concrete, I'd argue that has a lot more to do with interests than sensor vs. intuitive. I could talk all day about certain topics that some intuitives wouldn't give a shit about, and vice-versa. Not only that, but many intuitives don't want to ramble all day about the same things. Some have much more practical leanings. My dad's an ENTJ, but if I go up to him and try to go all "meaning of life" conversation on him, he's gonna look at me like "what the fuck are you getting from this?" Meanwhile I have INFJ/P friends who eat that stuff up.

In my experience, the difference seems to be what I can offer. One of the people I have the best conversations with is an INTJ. He comes up with theories in my field of study (which he's interested but not as educated in), and I can offer facts on them. I can agree/disagree based upon what I've seen, tell him whether or not I think something is a good idea, etc. Our interests in conversation line up really well, we just have different forms of input. The conversations can really be great, but you won't see me spitting outrageous theories left and right (if at all). It tends to look more like him putting a theory out and me reinforcing/tearing it down with hard knowledge, which we both get something out of.


----------



## OliveBranch (Aug 30, 2017)

It truly depends on the type of sensor... I always start with the cognitive functions, not "are they a sensor or intuitive?" That way you will get a more accurate result. If you figure out their functions, but not the order...then it's all about what they focus on. What do they find important? What will they be interested in and how do they communicate those interests? Then maybe look at more nuanced things such as body language, eye contact, etc. But those are not the most reliable. It's really not as simple as "these people are sensors" and "these people are intuitives," we all have sensing and intuition.


----------



## Turi (May 9, 2017)

Chatshire said:


> Also I've noticed that a big indicator that someone's a sensor is restlessness, especially when sitting down i.e. shaking their leg, fidgeting with things, flicking and tapping pens


Well this makes me an *S *dominant then. Si, Se, or both, _*bruv*_?


----------



## Chatshire (Oct 12, 2017)

Turi said:


> Well this makes me an *S *dominant then. Si, Se, or both, _*bruv*_?


I don’t think you can deduce someone’s dominant function from one characteristic.


----------



## Turi (May 9, 2017)

Chatshire said:


> I don’t think you can deduce someone’s dominant function from one characteristic.


You said it was a big indicator.
I'm gonna *need *those big indicators.


----------



## Chatshire (Oct 12, 2017)

Turi said:


> You said it was a big indicator.
> I'm gonna *need *those big indicators.


From what I’ve observed, my sensor friends tend to be restless when sitting in tedious environments like classes or assemblies. I think it can be attributed to Se since a lack of external stimuli can cause sensors to involuntarily generate their own movement and keep themselves occupied.


----------



## Turi (May 9, 2017)

Chatshire said:


> From what I’ve observed, my sensor friends tend to be restless when sitting in tedious environments like classes or assemblies. I think it can be attributed to Se since a lack of external stimuli can cause sensors to involuntarily generate their own movement and keep themselves occupied.


This fits me perfectly though bruv.
I'm restless a.f.
I can't sit still for 5 seconds.
At work I'm swinging in my chair constantly, so much so someone actually put a divider in front of them, so they can't see me, because it's distracting.
I constantly have something in my hands too, fidget spinners, pens, whatever - anything.

I can't just sit still like everybody else somehow does.
Doesn't work.

I'm going to try the ol' ISTP hat on again for teh lulz.


----------



## The red spirit (Sep 29, 2015)

Chatshire said:


> From what I’ve observed, my sensor friends tend to be restless when sitting in tedious environments like classes or assemblies. I think it can be attributed to Se since a lack of external stimuli can cause sensors to involuntarily generate their own movement and keep themselves occupied.


I do that when I lack sleep or when I'm nervous.


----------



## The red spirit (Sep 29, 2015)

Turi said:


> I'm going to try the ol' ISTP hat on again for teh lulz.


Too bad your lulz typing is better than the serious one. Embrace your ISTPness!


----------



## ewdenore (Nov 16, 2017)

For whatever it's worth, I tend to do these fidgety things while thinking. It seems to help for some reason. For a long time I would roll a pen around my fingers. Actually practiced it just so I could do it without dropping the thing. Today I keep a deck of cards on my desk just so I can pick them up and shuffle them while in deep thought.


----------



## Stevester (Feb 28, 2016)

I recognize intuitives by their constant need to push through _''what is''_. They need question everything, how to make it bigger, better etc. They are never content with facts as they are. This is why they are stereotypically seen as smarter/wiser. BUT they fail to see the virtue in dealing with what's in front of you. They have a tendency to contemplate way too much for their own good and as a result can end up going nowhere. 

It's like if you have intuitive kids running a lemonade stand. They'll wonder about marketing strategies, what novelty they can come up with to bring bigger masses of people. Long term there's a good chance they'll be successful and have the last laugh, but meanwhile the sensor kid's' stand already made lots of profits using lemons, sugar and water.


----------



## Leahomme (Dec 2, 2015)

I'm not sure if this is an issue that Sensors deal with or if it's just the ST's but if I am explaining a concept and I leap from A to C, they are not able to fill in the gaps that obviously B is the connection between A and C even though the topic at hand is B, so it's not necessary to point out the obvious. Quite the contrary for Sensors, they do want you to point out the painfully obvious or they may have no idea where you are going. Has anyone encountered this before?


----------



## ewdenore (Nov 16, 2017)

Leahomme said:


> I'm not sure if this is an issue that Sensors deal with or if it's just the ST's but if I am explaining a concept and I leap from A to C, they are not able to fill in the gaps that obviously B is the connection between A and C even though the topic at hand is B, so it's not necessary to point out the obvious. Quite the contrary for Sensors, they do want you to point out the painfully obvious or they may have no idea where you are going. Has anyone encountered this before?


Repeatedly in software work with nontechies. For a while I would try to lead them through these inferences explicitly thinking they would start doing it on their own, but it just never happens. Their mind just works differently. Another thing this kind of person does is fixate on the visible interface. It's like it's all they can see. Anything not in the interface just doesn't seem to exist in their mind, even after we spent all this time talking it through.

In software the interface is always the absolute smallest piece. There's a large stack of purely abstract things happening behind the interface. The majority of the work is spent considering, discussing, and refining these abstract concepts. You have to be very comfortable spending large amounts of time in that arena, and you have to be able to discuss these things readily. It's a night and day experience depending on how comfortable someone is with abstract thought.

Today I quickly stop taking work from clients that display this disposition. It's impossible to build software with someone that can't construct a web of complex abstract concepts in their mind.



Stevester said:


> Yes, I am often blown away at how insightful Intuitives can be. But at the end of the day I wonder _''Can we make it happen?''_ If so, then you are in fact dealing a with a pioneer, if not, us sensors will often feel like you're just blowing beautiful smoke at us.


Have to counterpoint what I said above by saying I respect this view. You do have to get to the physical world eventually. I've also worked with people that can never seem to get there. You can't build anything if you can't eventually get it down into physical constraints.

Maybe the difference is the starting point. Do you start from physical constraints and go up a bit from there, or do you start from pure abstractions and work down toward the physical.


----------



## Leahomme (Dec 2, 2015)

Is it just a stereotype or are Intuitives better than Sensors at handling abstract concepts? As an Intuitive with a non-science background, I always assumed I was not good at grasping or discussing abstract concepts. A few years ago, I realized that I can handle both concrete and abstract concepts without any difficulty. I'm thinking to a specific instance when some of my Intuitive friends and I were playing that game Codenames. I told them, "Please, give me abstract clues... that is how my brain works." We couldn't quite agree on what was or wasn't abstract. Anyhow, it went something like this... "Clue = Cool" and I pointed to Moscow. My friend who was not on my team said she would not have guessed Moscow for "cool" at all. The clue giver said his clue was "quite concrete" but considering all the other words on the table, it still required a leap from "cool" to Moscow... I believe one of the words was "penguin" and that was not one of the words he included in "cool". 

Another thing that people always say about me is that I have great "insights" which I assumed could be an Intuitive thing ... however, I also have very poor deductive reasoning skills. I was looking at a few riddles to see just how poor my deductive reasoning skills were and I just kept coming up with completely bogus answers and when I looked at the correct answer, I was like "ohh... well, I couldn't get that to save my life..."


----------



## atamagasuita (May 15, 2016)

When someone is a nerd > intuitive 

When someone is easy to talk to > sensor


----------



## atamagasuita (May 15, 2016)

When someone cannot stop talking > intuitive 

When someone just can stop and likely to be direct to the point > sensor


----------



## atamagasuita (May 15, 2016)

Most Americans i meet are mostly intuitives.. XD Because they just cannot stop talking xD i think asians are more likely to be sensors..

Thats why i can easily differentiate it.

It's like west people are mostly intuitives. I've met some brits too. And some French and some uhmm.. I forgot the country maybe poland? XD they seemingly looks like an intuitive because they just keep on talking and whenever they talk it's like you can observe how they think. Like whenever they talk they think. Like they're getting something from their head. XD 

Probably that's intuition i guess. ;p 

Sensors be like: normal people i guess that's just living in a normal world 
 like typical humans.

I can easily differentiate intuitives from the crowd.

And mostly intuitives have more opinions about something. XD 

And difference in a sensor friend group and intuitive group: 

Intuitive groups, they just keep on talking and sharing ideas. XD they will talk. Talk talk. Like for hours. They seemingly cannot be tired from it.

Whilst sensors: they just chill. I think sensors have this "comfortable silence" where being silent doesn't mean it's awkward. XD 

With intuitives they just keep on talking and they think silence is awkward. 

With sensors they just usually chill. Like listen to music, play instruments. And just plainly chill. Or well it also depends on the feelers.. Feelers are more talkative 

With feeler sensors: they talk about gossips and shit xD they love celebrities. The popular ones, the mainstream, what's trending. 

With intuitives they prefer independent music. Unconventional shit. And they mostly prefer instrumental and appreciate classic music  

Difference with Si and Ni: Si can just notice a lot of inconsistencies in their environment. Especially if it's Paired with Fe or Te. I hate Si because they always notice me.. XDD they're like parents that's always reminding me how to be polite, how to look good in society. 

Intuitives are more unconventional. They think differently. 

So there. It's basically the way they think 

You can notice the differences by talking with them.


----------



## Leahomme (Dec 2, 2015)

I don't think that all Sensors talk less than Intuitives. There are ESTJ's that won't shut up and just monologue for an hour and if you show the slightest sign that you are paying attention they won't even pause. And there are INFP's I've met who won't speak more than a short sentence at a time. It all just depends. Although, I saw a youtube video and I was pretty sure that all 3 of the girls were Sensors because they were just chatting and talking about old times and laughing and it just kept going as if it was a scripted thing only it wasn't. With Intuitives, it seems like they have to really "think" about what you're saying and maybe get back to you next time they see you before they have completely formulated a thought that they think will be meaningful/useful to contribute. 

And I don't think you can point to shyness or emotional unavailability and then conclude that an entire group of people are Sensors. Plenty of shy (non-talkative) Intuitives, it depends on what the topic is and how comfortable they are with you and their surroundings. Sometimes, I cannot get a peep out of an INTP and with others we can talk on the phone for 5 hours.


----------

