# Dislike for ESXP's.



## monemi (Jun 24, 2013)

Another thread brought up something I've noticed. Many posters tend to think very little of ESXP. I think I know why. We aren't as worried about looking foolish in front of strangers as many other types are. ESFP will perform and willingly look like idiots to make people happy. For comic relief to bring harmony to a situation or what have you. ESTP aren't as willing to make fools of ourselves as ESFP's, but if it's to meet an objective, we'll do it. 

This means the odds are good people have seen ESXP's fail or look foolishly very publicly. People mistake willingness to look less than stellar in public for being unintelligent. But people rarely know WHY we did what we did. We don't explain to everyone why we did something. We just jump in with both feet when the moment calls for it. We might get into a fight we know we're going to lose to provide a friend a distraction to sneak past backstage security at a concert. We might embarrass ourselves in the process of embarrassing the person with us on purpose because we don't like them or because LOLZ. 

We're risk takers and with risk taking, comes failures. If you're naturally a risk taker, you have experienced failure. At times our ego's may seem large, but in truth we experience plenty of examples of our public failures to know we aren't all that. We just have a healthy self-esteem and know how to rebound from our failures. 

This also means, our failures and foolishness is out there where everyone saw it. That's what people remember. They conclude we're always loud, always high energy and always 'on'. They don't see ESXP's on their down time. I can understand that those with a high cringe factor and care too much what other people think, wouldn't want to hang out with ESXP's. When improvising no one is more surprised what comes out of our mouths than we are. But really, I think the people that dislike us the most, care too much what strangers think of them and take themselves too seriously. They need more of us. 

Those are my thoughts on the topic.


----------



## Mutant Hive Queen (Oct 29, 2013)

To be totally frank, in many ways I want to be more like you guys. You're the damn action-hero sorts. :tongue:

But then again, I also don't like screwing up in front of everyone. Good of you to take the blow. :tongue:


----------



## Kazoo The Kid (May 26, 2013)

My self esteem is not tied to how intelligence/deep people think I am.

I noticed on this internet being intelligent and deep seems to be like definition of "character".

You think I'm stupid. I don't really care. You can think whatever you want. I'm not a politician.


----------



## Mutant Hive Queen (Oct 29, 2013)

Kazoo said:


> My self esteem is not tied to how intelligence/deep people think I am.
> 
> I noticed on this internet being intelligent and deep seems to be like definition of "character".


Well, Intelligence is good. Being a deep thinker is also good. There is totally a reason to value them. 

_However_, refraining from the pursuits and habits of mere _plebians_ doesn't actually make you smarter, or more deep.


----------



## Kazoo The Kid (May 26, 2013)

Chained Divinity said:


> Well, Intelligence is good. Being a deep thinker is also good. There is totally a reason to value them.
> 
> _However_, refraining from the pursuits and habits of mere _plebians_ doesn't actually make you smarter, or more deep.


You know what I think is even better then being intelligent and deep? Being a good person. Being kind. Being tolerant.

I've met plenty of really intelligent people who are just cynical assholes who sit around all day in criticize. I've met plenty of really deep people who minimize everyone around them into being mindless idiots.

I don't think being an idiot or being simple is the worse thing a person could be. 

I don't value traits. I value how people apply traits. Being a genius is useless if you sit around in your house all day playing video games. Being a deep thinker is useless if you think your too deep to talk to other people about it. Any field has the potential to be a castle. But until you build the castle its still just a field. No matter how much potential it has. It is still just a field.


----------



## monemi (Jun 24, 2013)

Intelligence is good. Depth is good. But when you devalue other people if you perceive them for not sharing the "right" type of intelligence and you perceive people you don't even know as being shallow, you prove you aren't that intelligent and you aren't that deep. Intelligence and depth often come from unexpected places and often the people who believe they are highly intelligent and deep are mistaken.


----------



## Dragheart Luard (May 13, 2013)

I agree that those misconceptions happen when people don't bother to see beyond that shallow level. Personally I've talked more with ESFPs, and to be honest I find really interesting how driven they can be and how much energy they have for achieving their goals. Besides it's good to talk with people that's better grounded in reality, as Ni alone can become really whacky without any Se input that could ground it, and their ideas are a good complement in general. Maybe Ne-Si types may not appreciate this as much as Ni-Se types, specially as INXP can see Se doms as too abrasive and forceful.
Anyway I recommend to seriously talk with Se doms, as you can learn a lot from them.


----------



## napkineater (Mar 26, 2013)

I envy Se doms. Oh, to be able to look at the world and say "it is what it is", to have your body be an extension of your brain. I mean, I work myself into an existential crises weekly. I'm not smart enough to figure all this out, I'm not wise enough. Nobody is. I wish I could just accept reality around me and get on with it, it's the wisest way to live. Anyone who thinks otherwise is only fooling themselves. 

And anyone who thinks they're an intellectual while an ESxP is primitive can go shove one pineapple down their throats and another up their ass until they meet somewhere in the middle. Knobheads.


----------



## Mutant Hive Queen (Oct 29, 2013)

Kazoo said:


> You know what I think is even better then being intelligent and deep? Being a good person. Being kind. Being tolerant.


Morally speaking, sure. Although smart kind types can do more with that kindness than dumb kind types.



> I've met plenty of really intelligent people who are just cynical assholes who sit around all day in criticize.


Oh, I have as well, and I really dislike those people. But at the same time I have a truly _great_ respect for the intelligent individuals that can build--who rather than criticizing come up with good ideas. And to come up with good ideas consistently you need either brainpower or a crapton of effort in one field. Really more the first. 



> I've met plenty of really deep people who minimize everyone around them into being mindless idiots.


I actually wonder if they really are "deep"...



> I don't think being an idiot or being simple is the worse thing a person could be.
> 
> I don't value traits. I value how people apply traits. Being a genius is useless if you sit around in your house all day playing video games. Being a deep thinker is useless if you think your too deep to talk to other people about it. Any field has the potential to be a castle. But until you build the castle its still just a field. No matter how much potential it has. It is still just a field.


I don't agree with the idea that utility is the _sole_ deciding factor on the worth of something, but there's a part of this I agree with, I guess. At the same time, though, people can be incredibly smart and _not_ simply sitting there criticizing--indeed, coming up with plenty of ideas that should be applied--and be unable to implement all that due to other traits getting in the way, such as sticking to values or a stubborn refusal to change a certain thing, which I can also admire, because, well, sticking to your guns is a form of courage.


----------



## Kazoo The Kid (May 26, 2013)

I don't know. But sometimes I read post and people are just like "I LOVE ESFPS" and then they say a bunch of really ridiculous stuff.

Imagine if I said "I Love INTJs. Their so good at organizing stuff"

Its just kinda like_ what._


----------



## dinkytown (Dec 28, 2013)

monemi said:


> Another thread brought up something I've noticed. Many posters tend to think very little of ESXP. I think I know why. We aren't as worried about looking foolish in front of strangers as many other types are. ESFP will perform and willingly look like idiots to make people happy. For comic relief to bring harmony to a situation or what have you. ESTP aren't as willing to make fools of ourselves as ESFP's, but if it's to meet an objective, we'll do it.
> 
> This means the odds are good people have seen ESXP's fail or look foolishly very publicly. People mistake willingness to look less than stellar in public for being unintelligent. But people rarely know WHY we did what we did. We don't explain to everyone why we did something. We just jump in with both feet when the moment calls for it. We might get into a fight we know we're going to lose to provide a friend a distraction to sneak past backstage security at a concert. We might embarrass ourselves in the process of embarrassing the person with us on purpose because we don't like them or because LOLZ.
> 
> ...


Both are great. 

ESTPs can be dicks and are quite shameless but this bothers me less than others. I wish I had the audacity to do many of the things they do. They know what they want and they just go out and get it. But I can see why some people, especially introverted intuitives, get all butthurt over them. They're about the antithesis of the typical internet dweller. 

I don't get the angst over ESFPs. Hands down that's the type I would be if I had a choice in the matter. They're far less ambitious for ambition's sake than ESTPs and more chill. My brothers one and he can join literally any group of people and be the most liked person within minutes. They seem much more real and down to earth compared to the more slick ESTPs. Or maybe that's just my opinion; I guess Fe users might see things in reverse.


----------



## Kazoo The Kid (May 26, 2013)

Chained Divinity said:


> Morally speaking, sure. Although smart kind types can do more with that kindness than dumb kind types.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I'm sorry but why do people assume they are the authority on intelligence and deep thinking? I mean????????

Who is dumb? Who is smart. Who gave you the right to separate everyone on earth into those two categories?


----------



## LadyO.W.BernieBro (Sep 4, 2010)

l do find ESTP to have a calmer energy.

l am serious when l say, that l honestly do feel bad for not getting along with my ESFP older sister. 

l actually do admire her and have always thought she was 'able' and _extremely_ independent in a way l'm kind of not, even if l have a similar attitude. 

Like, she just gets things. l also wish l could explain this better so it doesn't sound like an insincere compliment-l mean to say that she just understands how to do things. 

lf that sounds redundant or obvious, like everyone should just understand how to 'do' things-it's really not. 

l don't seem have to have that adaptability-she very literally just does whatever she wants and makes it work without getting anxious. She pretty much schlepped me around from the ages of 17-18 and l would have had no alternative.

l get hung up on things she doesn't understand and l think she immediately interprets that as discouraging or stifling her.

lf you asked other people l know, they would tell you that l'm not the sort to get hung up on details and perhaps the opposite,but with her it's like our thinking styles can clash in the most specific ways.

l've noticed l've found a way to sort of turn-off my whatever-it-is-that-keeps-me-on-edge-around her more recently and just relax, but our time is limited and l sometimes feel like l'm being judged (lol, l know l'm ridiculous). 

l don't think she means to intimidate-she just is always 'on'.


----------



## BABYMETAL (Apr 4, 2014)

It's funny how some people can take one look at you and think they know everything about you. 

Others can belittle me however they want when they see me fail or look stupid. 
At least I had the guts to step up to the plate.


----------



## Mutant Hive Queen (Oct 29, 2013)

Kazoo said:


> I'm sorry but why do people assume they are the authority on intelligence and deep thinking? I mean????????


Ahm...were you using a definition distinct from mine? I was sort of going by "ability to understand how things work and why they are the way they are, plus ability to generate new ideas about how to work things and making things that work differently."



> Who is dumb? Who is smart. Who gave you the right to separate everyone on earth into those two categories?


I'm sort of simplifying a bit, I guess, in that people can be excellent at understanding and creating in one area (The physical world), while being terrible in another (the social realm, for example). But people do have varying levels of talent, yeah.


----------



## Kazoo The Kid (May 26, 2013)

Chained Divinity said:


> Ahm...were you using a definition distinct from mine? I was sort of going by "ability to understand how things work and why they are the way they are, plus ability to generate new ideas about how to work things and making things that work differently."
> 
> 
> 
> I'm sort of simplifying a bit, I guess, in that people can be excellent at understanding and creating in one area (The physical world), while being terrible in another (the social realm, for example). But people do have varying levels of talent, yeah.


I do not think it is nesseccary or helpful to divide people by intelligence levels.


----------



## Mutant Hive Queen (Oct 29, 2013)

Kazoo said:


> I do not think it is nesseccary or helpful to divide people by intelligence levels.



Well, I'll admit that getting self-important is a problem that those who've demonstrated greater intelligence should be aware of--being smart is _not_ the same as having the right answer all the time. You are _going_ to be wrong about some things. People you think are dumber than you can be _right_ about some things. And there are all kinds of reasons for that. 

So the important thing is to always judge the idea by the quality of the idea, not the perceived quality of the person supplying it.


----------



## monemi (Jun 24, 2013)

Lady O.W. Bro said:


> l do find ESTP to have a calmer energy.
> 
> l am serious when l say, that l honestly do feel bad for not getting along with my ESFP older sister.
> 
> ...


I've always gotten along with my ESFP father. My relationship with my ISTP mother has been rockier. Not bad. She is good. She's just not a soft place to land. I've always been amused how my father can be suave and charming and masculine and tough. But as a father he is all warm and squishy and pliable. It's hard to see why anyone would clash with ESFP as a personality type. I've seen him on intimidate mode and yeah, it's affective. But he rarely brings that out. The only times he has used it was when he perceived a threat. I guess he doesn't perceive many threats.


----------



## Laxgort (Apr 12, 2014)

Well, I think I only met one or two ESTPs in my life and more ESFPs. Personally, I usually have envy about their Se and I find ESTPs more comfortable to me. At least they have logic, and no a valor-function subordinated to a Se who makes ESFPs irritate me and too spontaneous for me. Despite ESFPs never start a discussion with me and they never try to disturb me, I really don't obtain a good vision of them. I see them as a group of full... usually idiots who are all day bothering in general. And the same time, ESFPs I know usually are in a constant try to "have sex" with someone. Sorry if an ESFP get angry with this, It's not my intention offend anyone, maybe only "my" ESFPs are too "kind" and "warm", or maybe the general picture of them don't let me have a good and clearly vision. At the same time, the ESFPs usually fake or make believe that they're sad only because they want attention. For someone like me (I don't know other INTJs) this is one of the worst thing you can do. "You want attention? Okay, let's talk about something interesting. Oh, what's the problem? You can't talk about anything? Try again". This is my problem with ESFPs. For example, one ESFP I met in a "party" in a friend's house, began to hit the wall with the head only because the guy she liked was talking to me. 
It's true that ESxPs I know usually are 20~ or less, and maybe when they grow up (or maybe when I grow up) I have a better image.

Sorry if you don't understand something, I don't have the best level of english. Take the liberty of correct me, please.


----------



## monemi (Jun 24, 2013)

Laxgort said:


> Well, I think I only met one or two ESTPs in my life and more ESFPs. Personally, I usually have envy about their Se and I find ESTPs more comfortable to me. At least they have logic, and no a valor-function subordinated to a Se who makes ESFPs irritate me and too spontaneous for me. Despite ESFPs never start a discussion with me and they never try to disturb me, I really don't obtain a good vision of them. I see them as a group of full... usually idiots who are all day bothering in general. And the same time, ESFPs I know usually are in a constant try to "have sex" with someone. Sorry if an ESFP get angry with this, It's not my intention offend anyone, maybe only "my" ESFPs are too "kind" and "warm", or maybe the general picture of them don't let me have a good and clearly vision. At the same time, the ESFPs usually fake or make believe that they're sad only because they want attention. For someone like me (I don't know other INTJs) this is one of the worst thing you can do. "You want attention? Okay, let's talk about something interesting. Oh, what's the problem? You can't talk about anything? Try again". This is my problem with ESFPs. For example, one ESFP I met in a "party" in a friend's house, began to hit the wall with the head only because the guy she liked was talking to me.
> It's true that ESxPs I know usually are 20~ or less, and maybe when they grow up (or maybe when I grow up) I have a better image.
> 
> Sorry if you don't understand something, I don't have the best level of english. Take the liberty of correct me, please.


Maybe some really are like that. But you aren't friends with them and wouldn't know their motives. If you don't know them, you don't know why they did or do these things.


----------



## Xenograft (Jul 1, 2013)

Anyone who says they hate Se dominants haven't really experienced one. 

In Socionics Se is the function that is least compatible with me, that I work the worst with, and yet I find myself enjoying Se doms. While they can be a bit startling, forward, aggressive, loud, obtuse, excitable, gogoogogoogogo mentality swinging, what have you, they're so much fun. When you get a smart Se dom in your midst, shit really hits the fan. People talk about how they're hateful, violent, selfish, but in my experience Se doms just want to have a good time when they hang out with you. They want to live in the world and be with everything, they want connection in a different way than, say, Fi wants connection. I live such a timid and capricious life, it's so great to find a human who has a sense of direction and is grounded. Sure, they may not always be the most practical type, but all types have flaws just like them. No type should be looked on as lesser than another, doing that is just as bad as extreme patriotism, and bigotry of any kind shouldn't be tolerated. Just because someone's mind is oriented elsewhere from yours does not mean that they are stupid or that they are less than you, it means that they are different. 

People need to get off their fucking high horses.


----------



## Laxgort (Apr 12, 2014)

monemi said:


> Maybe some really are like that. But you aren't friends with them and wouldn't know their motives. If you don't know them, you don't know why they did or do these things.


Okay, it's true. But I don't know them because if someone hit her head to a wall to catch attention I don't want that person to be my friend. I understand that judge someone that you don't know maybe it's something stupid, but I think you can try to understand why ESFPs make me angry. Each person has a life and reasons for his/her behavior, but the picture you show to the world is important. 
Anyway, my friend INTP is (or was) friend of the ESFP girl and he defended her behavior with fire, but... No. She maybe is a good girl, she maybe is sweet, but at the same time she isn't very "inteligent", she doesn't reason... You can't have a serious conversation with her. I tried and I though was better for me the suicide.


----------



## LadyO.W.BernieBro (Sep 4, 2010)

monemi said:


> I've always gotten along with my ESFP father. My relationship with my ISTP mother has been rockier. Not bad. She is good. She's just not a soft place to land. I've always been amused how my father can be suave and charming and masculine and tough. But as a father he is all warm and squishy and pliable. It's hard to see why anyone would clash with ESFP as a personality type. I've seen him on intimidate mode and yeah, it's affective. But he rarely brings that out. The only times he has used it was when he perceived a threat. I guess he doesn't perceive many threats.


l think it's that she sees me as needing something constantly-unfortunately it's been somewhat true.

lt makes me seem a bit dorky and childish in comparison (although a bit of that hardass attitude probably rubbed off on me so l could seem similar to her to very dorky people).

We didn't grow up together and then when l did have more contact with her-l needed something.

She can be a tad martyrish which is more commonly associated with Fe doms, she doesn't really guilt people to an extreme degree, but she will always let you know that she was the first to step up and do something before anyone else.

The thing is, it's kind of hard to beat her to the punch, but she's becoming more laidback (43, l think).

Hmm...sometimes l'm not sure that she and Courtney Love aren't long lost siblings. She really is that hardcore.


----------



## athenian200 (Oct 13, 2008)

I thought I disliked ESPs before I actually met one. The reason was because of the descriptions I read. They were basically described as unscrupulous people who go around cheating others, and lacking morality. Highly competitive and needing constant stimulation, needing to be the center of attention at all times. Not caring about rules, constantly creating chaos and making a mess of things.

I also kind of got the impression that they were kind of... perverted. Like, they constantly needed to have sex, would hit on attractive people all the time, try to be seen with them, and never care about who these people were on the inside. 

Actual ESPs don't act this way... but that is how a lot of descriptions make them sound, and people internalize and exaggerate already exaggerated descriptions. So, people don't like ESxPs because the descriptions of them make them sound a lot worse than they really are.


----------



## monemi (Jun 24, 2013)

Laxgort said:


> Okay, it's true. But I don't know them because if someone hit her head to a wall to catch attention I don't want that person to be my friend. I understand that judge someone that you don't know maybe it's something stupid, but I think you can try to understand why ESFPs make me angry. Each person has a life and reasons for his/her behavior, but the picture you show to the world is important.
> Anyway, my friend INTP is (or was) friend of the ESFP girl and he defended her behavior with fire, but... No. She maybe is a good girl, she maybe is sweet, but at the same time she isn't very "inteligent", she doesn't reason... You can't have a serious conversation with her. I tried and I though was better for me the suicide.


You concluded that she was banging her head against the wall for whatever reasons you interpreted. But you're not her friend. It's highly unlikely you know and likely you wouldn't understand why she did that. 



Lady O.W. Bro said:


> l think it's that she sees me as needing something constantly-unfortunately it's been true. We didn't grow up together and then when l did have more contact with her-l needed something.
> 
> She can be a tad martyrish which is more commonly associated with Fe doms, she doesn't really guilt people to an extreme degree, but she will always let you know that she was the first to step up and do something before anyone else.
> 
> The thing is, it's kind of hard to beat her to the punch, but she's becoming more laidback (43, l think).


Ah. I have a half sister that I didn't grow up with. I REALLY don't like her. (Her mother is awesome, I can see why my father was friends with her.) I'm sure much of our dislike for each other started from circumstances and we got off on the wrong foot. Still, she was unnecessarily nasty to me as a young child and generally, I can't get past what a bully she was. It didn't matter what anyone said or did, she saw me as the enemy the day I was born. I'm 7 years younger and every time I tried to offer an olive branch, she just got bitchier. It's hard to type someone with such a spiteful personality. The only side of her I get to see is the megabitch.


----------



## tanstaafl28 (Sep 10, 2012)

@monemi

This comes up from time to time. Typism isn't your fault, and you should make no apologies for who you are. Anyone who is silly enough to run down an entire personality type (quite likely based upon very limited personal experience) has already demonstrated that they are the fools who have failed far worse than anything you could ever possibly imagine. 

Do not let such people "...live in your head rent free..." kick them to the curb and avoid them. I suspect you have far more important things to do.


----------



## monemi (Jun 24, 2013)

tanstaafl28 said:


> @_monemi_
> 
> This comes up from time to time. Typism isn't your fault, and you should make no apologies for who you are. Anyone who is silly enough to run down an entire personality type (quite likely based upon very limited personal experience) has already demonstrated that they are the fools who have failed far worse than anything you could ever possibly imagine.
> 
> Do not let such people "...live in your head rent free..." kick them to the curb and avoid them. I suspect you have far more important things to do.


Faulty opinions left undisturbed are mistaken for unspoken agreement from the majority.


----------



## tanstaafl28 (Sep 10, 2012)

monemi said:


> Faulty opinions left undisturbed are mistaken for unspoken agreement from the majority.


Your choice. IMHO, deeds are more important than words. Let your example speak for itself.


----------



## monemi (Jun 24, 2013)

tanstaafl28 said:


> Your choice. IMHO, deeds are more important than words. Let your example speak for itself.


It's a forum. There aren't actions here. Just words.


----------



## FearAndTrembling (Jun 5, 2013)

The internet descriptions aren't doing them any favors. I was looking up INFJ-ESTP compatibility. And this is the first link that popped up about ESTP in relationships. To be honest, it isn't far off from the last ESTP I dated.

Being so practical and action oriented the ESTP will want to jump in and solve problems, which is what they’re built for, impervious to their environment *which means emotions don’t really feature.

*The ESTP draws great energy from moving swiftly from problem to problem, coming up with practical solutions and moving on. *They are great company, friendly and chatty, but don’t really ‘get’ emotions.

**The ESTP does not like a slow or steady pace and will want to make sure everyone is doing stuff rather than thinking
*
I think they are good casual friends. Not somebody I would open up to, even platonically. I could never picture one being in my innermost circle. *
*


----------



## tanstaafl28 (Sep 10, 2012)

monemi said:


> It's a forum. There aren't actions here. Just words.


And yet you are taking those words as serious as if they weren't just part of a forum. All typism is wrong, not just one flavor.


----------



## Kintsugi (May 17, 2011)

I think those people who truly care and want to understand various typology theories will eventually persevere and get there. It's true there is a lot of bullshit out there and it's easy to make mistakes when you're new to this stuff. I know that from experience myself. There are a bunch of contributors on this forum who I really respect and I feel truly know their shit. It's refreshing to read their comments and insights. I find myself getting annoyed with all the stereotypes and the S/N BS, but these days I just try and tune out the rest of the noise and focus on the stuff that I really think is valuable, and try to promote that. It's a journey after all, and finding your true type requires a lot of introspection and self analysis, which can be quite hard and painful at times. We humans are experts at deluding ourselves after all.


----------



## Angina Jolie (Feb 13, 2014)

The only reason I haven't had luck with any reltionships with ESXPs is because of the communication style. My somewhat ex was an ESXP (leaning towards T, he really didn't care for morals much) and he excited me, but in a momentary way. He helped me enjoy the moment. But I wasn't looking forward to big talks with him that I am usually drawn to, because our perceptions are so different. If I worked with myself and tried to focus on the moment more, it could have been a different story.


----------



## FearAndTrembling (Jun 5, 2013)

SplitTheAtom said:


> The only reason I haven't had luck with any reltionships with ESXPs is because of the communication style. My somewhat ex was an ESXP (leaning towards T, he really didn't care for morals much) and he excited me, but in a momentary way. He helped me enjoy the moment. But I wasn't looking forward to big talks with him that I am usually drawn to, because our perceptions are so different. If I worked with myself and tried to focus on the moment more, it could have been a different story.


I wouldn't quite go as far as to say, they don't have morals, but, there are some issues which they just seem absent on. Serious ones. 

I just kind of see them as on their first lives. NFs are born old. ESxP are eternally young. They never grow up. So, in the reincarnation process, they are on their first lives. We are on our last. That is why they are so obsessed with novelty, and being in the moment. Novelty can never hold an NF. But it is the currency of the ESTP. ISTP and ISFP are different, btw. They can be more old souls.

THE FIRST and the simplest emotion which we discover in the human mind, is Curiosity. By curiosity, I mean whatever desire we have for, or whatever pleasure we take in, novelty. We see children perpetually running from place to place, to hunt out something new: they catch with great eagerness, and with very little choice, at whatever comes before them; their attention is engaged by everything, because everything has, in that stage of life, the charm of novelty to recommend it. But as those things, which engage us merely by their novelty, cannot attach us for any length of time, curiosity is the most superficial of all the affections; it changes its object perpetually, it has an appetite which is very sharp, but very easily satisfied; and it has always an appearance of giddiness, restlessness, and anxiety. Curiosity, from its nature, is a very active principle; it quickly runs over the greatest part of its objects, and soon exhausts the variety which is commonly to be met with in nature; the same things make frequent returns, and they return with less and less of any agreeable effect. In short, the occurrences of life, by the time we come to know it a little, would be incapable of affecting the mind with any other sensations than those of loathing and weariness, if many things were not adapted to affect the mind by means of other powers besides novelty in them, and of other passions besides curiosity in ourselves.


-Burke


----------



## FlaviaGemina (May 3, 2012)

@_monemi_
I only know one ESTP and I don't really have anything to do with him, but he seems like a cool bro. He used to wear tons of bracelets and had a big main of hair. Unfortunately, he's cut it off. I suspect it's because he's a teacher and we are supposed to set an example to our kids so that they can become as boring and superficial as us.

ESFPs.... I do admire the qualities that you mentioned, like putting themselves out there and making a fool of themselves. However, they tend to interfere with my own ESFPness. I don't need them to "dualize" (socionics) me, because I can be silly and daft whenever *I* feel like it, much to the chagrin of my INTPs and INFJ. I can have really interesting conversations with ESFPs, but they seldom tell me anything I don't already know and vice versa. Yeah.. I realize that was a contradiction in terms. What I mean by 'interesting' is that I find them easy to understand. By that I don't mean "simple" or "dumb", I just mean that I get the way they think and we tend to agree on lots of things. But somehow I prefer to make my life more difficult and mess with creatures who are more different from me.


----------



## Kazoo The Kid (May 26, 2013)

To be honest I feel like Jung and alot of the people who came up with these theories had an obvious favor and bias towards Ns.


----------



## FlaviaGemina (May 3, 2012)

FearAndTrembling said:


> I wouldn't quite go as far as to say, they don't have morals, but, there are some issues which they just seem absent on. Serious ones.
> 
> I just kind of see them as on their first lives. NFs are born old. ESxP are eternally young. They never grow up. So, in the reincarnation process, they are on their first lives. We are on our last. That is why they are so obsessed with novelty, and being in the moment. Novelty can never hold an NF. But it is the currency of the ESTP. ISTP and ISFP are different, btw. They can be more old souls.


What about NTs? Are we aliens?
LOL, sorry. It's a serious question, I am interested in all that stuff about souls. ESFPs sometimes shock me because they are supposed to be extraverts, yet some of them slobber over every new person as if they had never seen another human being before.  I guess "young souls" is a nicer way of putting that and I have often found myself admiring their "youthful enthusiasm".


----------



## miuliu (Nov 3, 2013)

I have an ESFP cousin. We grew up together, I love her and I always spend time with her. Like young adults we are, we share troubles, some interests, culture, family... We know each other like sisters would for neither one of us has a sister. But we don't have anything in common beyond our dedication to one another and superficial fief interests. 
When she starts talking, I accommodate her and adjust to whatever she wants to talk about, mostly people I don't know. When I start talking about things that interest me, she listens, sometimes enjoys, but she shuts down as a conversationalist. She understands, she's not stupid, only she doesn't care about the things I do, and vice versa. 
We also don't think similarly. Our ideas about life, identities, values are very different. 

When we were younger, she would yell at me a lot if we fought and I would avoid her.
We use to play together, she would lift me up and get me moving out of the house. But our worlds have moved further and further apart as we've grown. 

It's not that I hate her, it's not that I can't hang out with her, that I can't have fun, it's not that she's stupid. She's just.. Uninteresting. 
As for ESTPs. I actually find them a bit more interesting. They don't shut off around me when I speak and I actually enjoy hearing what they have observed. Also all ESTPs I've ever met were guys who flirted with me. So I could be biased here. But they did make the whole thing very playful and fun. Bit inappropriate at times, but they tend to tone it down if they push it too far. They would play around me and got me moving and laughing. I enjoyed it.


----------



## Psychopomp (Oct 3, 2012)

Kazoo said:


> I don't know. But sometimes I read post and people are just like "I LOVE ESFPS" and then they say a bunch of really ridiculous stuff.
> 
> Imagine if I said "I Love INTJs. Their so good at organizing stuff"
> 
> Its just kinda like_ what._


This. Even as an INTP I wince at posts that start with 'I LOVE ESxP..' because I know it is going to be awful stereotypes that are now suddenly and ostentatiously valued. It's no better. I am sure I do it too but it still makes me sigh.



Kazoo said:


> To be honest I feel like Jung and alot of the people who came up with these theories had an obvious favor and bias towards Ns.


It's almost impossible not to. It is excruciatingly difficult to even comprehend one's own lens much less work to unravel it. It is a grand feat just to comprehend that we don't comprehend our lens and all that it affects.


Anyway, STORY TIME. This is why I love ESFPs.... well, at least one particular ESFP

ESFP: I am 14 years old, and painfully, troublingly socially backward and shy. I am standing someone's bedroom that I don't know, as my brother is rifling through someone else's closet to assemble me a super sleek yellow suit get-up. It didn't fit perfectly, but my brother thought it looked cool. We walk back out of the bedroom to a group of 19-20 year olds wondering what in the hell this kid is doing here... if my brother is even aware of this it is clear he gives fewer than 0 fucks. I am his brother and he wants to share experiences with me and, well, be my big brother. This does not and never will take form into words. My brother is anything but a sappy cheek pinching 'feeler'. It is not just that the personal relationship or 'bond' trumps all... it is more that there is nothing else in his mind for it to trump. 

We went to a dance club. My brother's friends sat on the sidelines of his attention that night because I was there. He got it stuck in his head that this was some sort of coming of age thing.. that it was a moment and some sort of imperative drove him. I would be introduced to in such a way that... it felt very much like he was very aware of what sort of nonsense and fakeness he had had to navigate himself and he was going to cut that out for me. He had navigated a path and discovered certain nuance along the way and he had come back to pull me through it. It appears that this act was a deeply important one for him.

He said things like "Dude, you go out there and have a blast... and if someone bothers you or laughs at you or has an opinion about you... Fuck 'em. You don't have to listen to that shit. Just do what you are doing and let em wish they were you." Then we just got out there and made fools of ourselves. I mean absolute fools. We were doing that 'footloose' dance and trying to moonwalk and all sorts of stupid stuff. All these people around us trying to look cool and my brother put me in the middle of them in the most 'fuck all' way possible. Most of his friends got into it, or laughed from the sidelines... and of course none of them were embarrassed or judgmental or trying to pull my brother away... 

My brother in his life has started exactly two fights. Once when someone slandered my sister, and once when his best friend smacked me in the head and told me to shut up because I was being annoying (I was, in fact, being very annoying). Both fights started with my brother walking up to them and punching them square in the face. That he was burning a bridge wasn't the last thing on his mind... rather, it never even entered his mind. There is a right and a wrong deep in his chest. When that also involves someone he has bonded with, it is time to leave the country. 

So, yes, when I hear ESFP is a 'vapid party grrl' but that's just GREAT!!!! WE LOVEZ FUN PARTY GRILS... I am not moved. You can't just say the stereotypes but put a happy spin on it. It's still the same ugly ignorant thing, but with a spritz of confetti to cover it up.

I have a few really great stories for ESTPs in this same vein, but this is becoming a novel. Maybe I'll post something later.


----------



## TheINFJ (Apr 12, 2014)

I generally get a long well with ESFP/ESTP types, despite being the polar opposite. I'm inspired by their tendency to be go with the flow and not overthink things so much, as I find myself constantly stressing and overthinking. I do envy them quite a bit.


----------



## FlaviaGemina (May 3, 2012)

EthereaEthos said:


> Actually, I can agree with this. He typed himself as a Ti-Ni type, which would translate to ISTP in MBTI.


There are various quotes that seem to indicate ISTP.
For me what clinches it is that he wields Ni with the same hyperbole that an INTJ wields Fi. INTJs aren't known to be emotional, but when they are it's a huge cosmic drama. Jung's Ni is the same in that respect, it's exaggerated and uncontrollable in a way that an Ni dom's Ni isn't. INTJs are able to impose some semblance of structure on their insights by means of Te. INFJs try to use Ti to structure Ni. If their Ti is too weak, they enthuse loudly through Fe and get frustrated if nobody understands them. But they don't promote the validity of their insights with the same relentlessness as Jung did.


----------



## Tranquility (Dec 16, 2013)

FlaviaGemina said:


> There are various quotes that seem to indicate ISTP.
> For me what clinches it is that he wields Ni with the same hyperbole that an INTJ wields Fi. INTJs aren't known to be emotional, but when they are it's a huge cosmic drama. Jung's Ni is the same in that respect, it's exaggerated and uncontrollable in a way that an Ni dom's Ni isn't. INTJs are able to impose some semblance of structure on their insights by means of Te. INFJs try to use Ti to structure Ni. If their Ti is too weak, they enthuse loudly through Fe and get frustrated if nobody understands them. But they don't promote the validity of their insights with the same relentlessness as Jung did.


Interesting.


----------



## FlaviaGemina (May 3, 2012)

EthereaEthos said:


> Interesting.


This is just my personal hunch, though.


----------



## Tranquility (Dec 16, 2013)

FlaviaGemina said:


> This is just my personal hunch, though.


I understand. I can actually see him using both Ni and Ti, but he seems to have very strong Ti. This to me would indicate either ISTP or an INFJ in a loop.


----------



## tangosthenes (Oct 29, 2011)

My Se dom friends/relatives/whatever have a theme of inciting me to say fuck it and do stuff that you really have to do to get true joy out of life... but sometimes that same attitude has me thinking "wtf is wrong with you? you literally don't learn." Yeah, so they are stubborn in the pursuit of ...pursuit, but eventually everyone's ass gets raw if it's smacked enough. Really, I think if I could inject some Se in me, and therefore be less concerned and nervous with other things, life would be easier.

Dislike, though... as pointed out earlier, they have a higher concentration of being neurotically sensate idiots. The good ones aren't like that... but by their nature, it's easy to fall into. It's just the bad side of that type, as all types have bad sides. But, there's also a lot of Se-doms, so you sort of learn your lesson a lot quicker than you do than say, dealing with the bad side of a less common type like INFJ or ENTP.

I suppose I'm thinking more about the ESxPs who fit the common image of enneagram 7... but like 1 out of 8 people you meet is ESxP, so there's bound to be a shit ton of variation.


----------



## FearAndTrembling (Jun 5, 2013)

FlaviaGemina said:


> There are various quotes that seem to indicate ISTP.
> For me what clinches it is that he wields Ni with the same hyperbole that an INTJ wields Fi. INTJs aren't known to be emotional, but when they are it's a huge cosmic drama. Jung's Ni is the same in that respect, it's exaggerated and uncontrollable in a way that an Ni dom's Ni isn't. INTJs are able to impose some semblance of structure on their insights by means of Te. INFJs try to use Ti to structure Ni. If their Ti is too weak, they enthuse loudly through Fe and get frustrated if nobody understands them.


But what do you know about Jung, the man? He was a medicine man. I mean the guy wrote books about his visions. He scared Freud with telekinesis. He was a counselor. He was a very complex man, you can't just type him on one quote where is he trying to appeal to a certain crowd. It was calculated. Nobody took Freud or Psychoanalysis seriously. And Freud and Jung did everything they could to construct a scientific basis for it. Sensing is scientific. There it is. Jung isn't gonna come out and say he did his science through intuition. He constantly went out of his way to make his work look scientific, even though it really wasn't. 

The mystical element of Jung was repressed, till he finally broke with Freud. That is actually why we broke with Freud. 



> But they don't promote the validity of their insights with the same relentlessness as Jung did


I do. Jung wasn't even dogmatic. Tons of Fe users and INFJ are much more dogmatic. Freud was much more dogmatic than Jung. Nearly everybody was.


----------



## FlaviaGemina (May 3, 2012)

FearAndTrembling said:


> He was a very complex man, you can't just type him on one quote where is he trying to appeal to a certain crowd.


I'm not typing him on one quote. I am typing him on the general impression I've got of his work and I'm too lazy to give a whole list of quotes because I'm not at home and haven't got his books at hand.

Nevermind. His type doesn't really matter because it doesn't make his work any more or less valid.
I'm just trying to play devil's advocate and keep the options open. E.g. he describes the Ni dom as a mystic/ artsy crank. You are an INFJ. Therefore you conclude that Jung was an Ni dom because he was a mystic. Fair enough. But did he ever describe himself as a mystic? Are you aware that mysticism has a long history and mystics came in all sizes, shapes, flavours and types including ISFJs, bipolars, extraverts and all sorts of non-INFJs?


----------



## Kintsugi (May 17, 2011)

FlaviaGemina said:


> The problem isn't so much that there is a lot of bullshit out there, but that some people try to live their lives according to a theory. If their personal experience contradicts the theory, they'll bend over backwards to make themselves fit the theory.
> 
> E.g. I've got no idea who I _am_ and couldn't care less. I'm a kitty with a pointy tail and a lantern.
> However, I test as INTJ in MBTI, as INTp in socionics and I'm fairly sure that I'm an Enneagram 6. Also, I think "duality" in socionics is overrated and limiting. Doesn't bother me at all.
> ...


In terms of valuable typology sources, I have to disagree; there most certainly_ is_ a lot of bullshit out there. Another thing I might add is that certain theories require much more time and effort to understand and I genuinely think a lot of people are just looking for a quick-fix kind of thing. Which is fair enough; it just means that I am less inclined to take their views/opinions on the subject seriously. 

I agree that there are issues with people trying to "fit" a theory/model and trying to mold their identity to how they perceive certain types. I don't think that's an issue with typology though; I'd say it's just a very complex human problem. That is tied more to the self-actualization process than anything else, I'd argue. Some people are just more in tune and self aware than others. 

In terms of theory, I'm most interested in Socionics. IMO, it's more of a solid model and I like the complexity of it. MBTI I gave up on a while a go, but it was my starting point, so I can't say that it's complete bullshit. I just moved on to other things. Enneagram I've flirted with for a while. As a model/tool I find it fascinating, I'm just not sure agree with the mainstream popular ideas on how it should be applied. I don't feel I know enough about it to offer a proper opinion on it, atm. I'm still a newbie.


----------



## FearAndTrembling (Jun 5, 2013)

FlaviaGemina said:


> I'm not typing him on one quote. I am typing him on the general impression I've got of his work and I'm too lazy to give a whole list of quotes because I'm not at home and haven't got his books at hand.
> 
> Nevermind. His type doesn't really matter because it doesn't make his work any more or less valid.
> I'm just trying to play devil's advocate and keep the options open. E.g. he describes the Ni dom as a mystic/ artsy crank. You are an INFJ. Therefore you conclude that Jung was an Ni dom because he was a mystic. Fair enough. But did he ever describe himself as a mystic? Are you aware that mysticism has a long history and mystics came in all sizes, shapes, flavours and types including ISFJs, bipolars, extraverts and all sorts of non-INFJs?


A lot of people actually refer to Jung as a mystic/crank, and consider him a cult leader. I don't know if he ever called himself one, but he is one by definition. That was the fundamental disagreement between Freud and Jung. Jung believed in that shit, Freud didn't. Freud didn't want Jung hurting the credibility of Psychoanalysis with his mysticism. So Jung left. And Freud cried. 

Jung actually said there would be no prophets without Ni doms. Jung was a prophet and revealer. He couldn't have done his work otherwise.


----------



## FallingSlowly (Jul 1, 2013)

I can't answer that question from personal experience, because I never felt like that about any type in general. Individuals who annoy the fuck out of me - absolutely 

On a more abstract level, I think it's down to the same reasons people dislike other types, functions, what have you:

a) They only looked at the theory behind it very superficially.
b) They simply search for a reason why they don't get along with people they personally know, and all of a sudden, "that guy who I am sure is a xyz" becomes "all xyzs".

It's all immature drivel. Fe hating on Fi, Ti hating on Te, T hating on F, N hating on S, and extroverts hating on introverts. Some people, I reckon, just need to get a grasp on the fact that conflict is a part of life. Trying to resolve conflict isn't done by always pointing the finger at others and their functions, but I guess that insight is not all that spectacular (still, frequently underused ).

Some of the negative stereotyping of other types I read on here makes me a bit sad at times (although it makes me laugh most of the time if I'm honest), but then I think it's part of the human condition, too. Someone who wants to believe these things will cling on to them anyway. It's some sort of comfort when other explanations aren't available, or the person in question isn't ready to see them yet. The more you argue against it and try to hammer your message home, the more defensive some people become - fact of life, too.

What I thought about with regards to your question:
When I still studied psychology, we had a discussion on what character traits are universally most hated. I can't recall them all, but domineering behaviour, rudeness, arrogance, dishonesty, dependent traits, whininess/moodiness and pessimism ranked pretty high (and some of them are coincidentally on the opposite end of the spectrum). 

Now measure them up against the (untrue) stereotypes that are attached to functions and/or types. I'm pretty sure you'll find at least part of the answer why almost every of functions or 16 types gets hate on here: 
The stereotypical Se dom is domineering and blunt/rude; add T to the mix, and you have arrogance, too (which is more often attributed to T than F).
The stereotypical Ni dom is moody. Add Fe, and you have dependency and dishonesty ("fake Fe"), add Te, and you have arrogance. And the (nonsensical) list goes on...

On that note: It is a much bigger problem on Internet forums than it is in real life, which always puts things back into perspective I guess 


* *





Exercise done with us in that context:
Write down the three traits you detest most about a person. Then remove those traits from that person completely, just have a good look at them and answer honestly:
a) Is it something you also hate about yourself, or can you really and honestly say you're free of it?
b) Is it something you wish you had, even if just on a more balanced level (e.g. arrogance rubs me up the wrong way, but I'd like to be more confident)?


----------



## moonlight_echo (May 15, 2011)

Everybody is amazing and wonderful.
The end.


But in all seriousness, it seems to be human nature to claim superiority over anything that differs.


----------



## monemi (Jun 24, 2013)

FearAndTrembling said:


> A lot of people actually refer to Jung as a mystic/crank, and consider him a cult leader. I don't know if he ever called himself one, but he is one by definition. That was the fundamental disagreement between Freud and Jung. Jung believed in that shit, Freud didn't. Freud didn't want Jung hurting the credibility of Psychoanalysis with his mysticism. So Jung left. And Freud cried.
> 
> Jung actually said there would be no prophets without Ni doms. Jung was a prophet and revealer. He couldn't have done his work otherwise.


Freud was right. It would have hurt the credibility of psychology. Personality theory can't get a respectable foothold within the scientific community after all these years.


----------



## FlaviaGemina (May 3, 2012)

monemi said:


> Freud was right. It would have hurt the credibility of psychology. Personality theory can't get a respectable foothold within the scientific community after all these years.


Whether he was right or not depends on his aims. If he wants personality to be credible within the scientific community, then he was right.
Jung, whatever his type, might have taken great pains to reiterate how his theory was 'scientific', but as a mystic he would have been prepared to work outside the framework of the scientific community and do his own thing.


----------



## Faunae (Mar 14, 2014)

All people have depth and intelligence of some sort. It's immature to believe otherwise, in my opinion - I've never had a relationship with someone, romantic or otherwise, that didn't teach me something very important. A lot of the time, the lesson has come from words that person themselves has said.


----------



## LadyO.W.BernieBro (Sep 4, 2010)

Well, maybe you could give some tips Monemi:kitteh:

l will try to explain my sister's behavior, which l think is heavily Fi influenced so you might not relate.

-she's big on ''tough love''-like, she doesn't really understand how to approach personal subjects so she'll make sort of brash comments to get conversation about something Elephant-in-the-room-like between us and l just never how to respond to it. 

We've never had a deep conversation, it isn't because she's shallow, she just doesn't -pause-.

-she kind of treats me like l'm autistic or something. She think l'm A LOT smarter than l am. 

l could be an asshole and take it as a compliment or try to lord some sort of superiority over her but l know she just says those things because she thinks l should be smart. She sees me as a bit weird, and doesn't know what else to call it.

There are other things that are not so important but l guess my question is if you've known anyone who you've thought of this way, how would you like them to be to just...have a normal conversation?

l've tried to act 'hardass' but l don't pull that off very well.

Maybe she's not that bothered by awkward silences, and l overanalyze it? l tend to hyperaware of things like that.


----------



## FlaviaGemina (May 3, 2012)

Just a random thought: Ernest Hemingway was an ESTP and he invented the iceberg method. He managed to convey a lot of symbolism by showing the Se-surface. Shallow?


----------



## Girlinthedark (Aug 1, 2013)

Just wondering, is there anything wrong with not being deep? I know people who don't like to take life too seriously and would rather be out there making jokes than discussing theories or reading books, its their preferance, what's wrong with it?


----------



## VIIZZY (Mar 22, 2014)

Girlinthedark said:


> Just wondering, is there anything wrong with not being deep? I know people who don't like to take life too seriously and would rather be out there making jokes than discussing theories or reading books, its their preferance, what's wrong with it?


It really comes down to how one defines depth....for instance people like you describe have depth in the honesty they hold in how they portray themselves and have depth in how connected they are to others and their abilities to understand others; there's a depth their that I'm envious of. They seek happiness in it's rawest forms and I don't see how that is particularly shallow, it might not be the depth I possess but it's not shallow either, it's their truth and there's no reason for them not to have it. 

Or it's possible I have a skewed concept of depth and shallowness; I never understood the distinction much.


----------



## monemi (Jun 24, 2013)

FlaviaGemina said:


> Whether he was right or not depends on his aims. If he wants personality to be credible within the scientific community, then he was right.
> Jung, whatever his type, might have taken great pains to reiterate how his theory was 'scientific', but as a mystic he would have been prepared to work outside the framework of the scientific community and do his own thing.


Freud appeared to be working towards credibility within the scientific community. 



Lady O.W. Bro said:


> Well, maybe you could give some tips Monemi:kitteh:
> 
> l will try to explain my sister's behavior, which l think is heavily Fi influenced so you might not relate.
> 
> ...


I'm not all knowledgeable on your sister but I recommend doing stuff with her. I've never had a deep conversation with someone I didn't have a close relationship with. Being siblings doesn't automatically make for a close relationship. Remember that actions speak louder than words. An action that shows interest is time spent with someone building a relationship. Building trust. She doesn't appear to be that good with her words. Odds are high that she is expressing herself with her actions. Being an extravert doesn't mean you're good at using words beyond social interactions. Just my thoughts. 



Girlinthedark said:


> Just wondering, is there anything wrong with not being deep? I know people who don't like to take life too seriously and would rather be out there making jokes than discussing theories or reading books, its their preferance, what's wrong with it?


There isn't anything wrong, but to look at an entire type and inform them that they aren't deep, is a bit much. Our interests vary. MBTI just explains how we think. It doesn't tell anyone what we think, what we think about or how deep our thoughts are. The subject matter that ESXP's go into depth about aren't usually going to be on the same topics that others think deeply about. What bugs me is that because it's not the same topics, people conclude we aren't deep. 



VIIZZY said:


> It really comes down to how one defines depth....for instance people like you describe have depth in the honesty they hold in how they portray themselves and have depth in how connected they are to others and their abilities to understand others; there's a depth their that I'm envious of. They seek happiness in it's rawest forms and I don't see how that is particularly shallow, it might not be the depth I possess but it's not shallow either, it's their truth and there's no reason for them not to have it.
> 
> Or it's possible I have a skewed concept of depth and shallowness; I never understood the distinction much.


I question the depth of people who wrestle with "deep topics" but then describe life experiences as shallow. I've read them describe their bodies like they were separate from themselves. As though exhilarating or serene experiences lack depth. How can anyone look at the experience of their own bodies as anything but spectacular? 

I enjoy meditating. When my breathing and heartbeat slow. My mind is focused on one central part of myself and I am alive and I feel good. I can have this moment of absolute peace. I've enjoyed teaching my children how to meditate and I've been making progress with my oldest who has had difficulty coping with stress. I have spent a lot of thought connecting my body with my mind. So that when I see something in my head I can duplicate it. I hear music and there is movement that flows with it. Much like peoples supposed deeper thoughts that aren't going to accomplish anything, I don't see how this is shallow. People enjoy watching me dance and when I was in martial arts, I've had instructors say they enjoy watching me train and spar. I've put a lot of thought and work into dance and sports. I don't see why others get to tell me these things are shallow. I find the world and my body a deep and inspirational place. I am full of life and hope. 

You get out what you put in. People who don't put a lot of thought into spirituality, won't find much depth in it. People who don't put much thought into science, won't find much depth in it. People who don't put much of themselves into life, won't find much depth in it. It seems rather arrogant to assume that anything that isn't abstract can't be deep. I don't live in my head. I live in the world. And the world is a vibrant, colourful and fascinating place filled with absolute truths and lessons to be learned.


----------



## LadyO.W.BernieBro (Sep 4, 2010)

Ah, well.

l figured it had to be related to her personality because l never saw any reason she just wouldn't like me.


But, she probably does just hate me . Which is fine :happy:


----------



## Girlinthedark (Aug 1, 2013)

VIIZZY said:


> It really comes down to how one defines depth....for instance people like you describe have depth in the honesty they hold in how they portray themselves and have depth in how connected they are to others and their abilities to understand others; there's a depth their that I'm envious of. They seek happiness in it's rawest forms and I don't see how that is particularly shallow, it might not be the depth I possess but it's not shallow either, it's their truth and there's no reason for them not to have it.
> 
> Or it's possible I have a skewed concept of depth and shallowness; I never understood the distinction much.


I don't know about their ability to understand others, the people I'm talking about think everyone including their best friends are stabbing them in the back haha (not type related). I don't think their qualities, however, are in way shallow. Guess it does depend on perception. Their perception of dept doesn't match with mine but it doesn't mean shallowness. I also think there're tons of grey areas between depth and shallowess, people aren't either or, just like good and bad.


----------



## VIIZZY (Mar 22, 2014)

Girlinthedark said:


> I don't know about their ability to understand others, the people I'm talking about think everyone including their best friends are stabbing them in the back haha (not type related). I don't think their qualities, however, are in way shallow. Guess it does depend on perception. Their perception of dept doesn't match with mine but it doesn't mean shallowness. I also think there're tons of grey areas between depth and shallowess, people aren't either or, just like good and bad.


The best way to hurt someone is too understand them. This doesn't necessarily mean the group you're talking about does but it's something to ponder on. 

I agree with your post entirely by the way, depth and shallowness are vague ideas and there's a ton of grey area involved.


----------



## Girlinthedark (Aug 1, 2013)

VIIZZY said:


> The best way to hurt someone is too understand them. This doesn't necessarily mean the group you're talking about does but it's something to ponder on.
> 
> I agree with your post entirely by the way, depth and shallowness are vague ideas and there's a ton of grey area involved.


I agree with your statement but yeah, its not really relevant incase of the group of people I mentioned considering they think I'm one of those people who try and hurt them while its something I never even think about.


----------



## monemi (Jun 24, 2013)

Lady O.W. Bro said:


> Ah, well.
> 
> l figured it had to be related to her personality because l never saw any reason she just wouldn't like me.
> 
> ...


What makes you think she hates you? At worst, given what you've shared it looks like you just don't have a close relationship. I didn't see anything in there that indicates that she doesn't like you.


----------



## Khiro (Nov 28, 2012)

I hadn't actually noticed a lot of dislike for ESXPs on the net. I certainly don't feel any. The best man I know is an ESTP. He's been one of my closest friends for almost three years. His resilience and strength of character are beyond admirable and I consider him to be as smart a man as ever I've met. He's one of very few people whose advice I listen to and I'm incredibly proud that he feels the same. He's defended me when I've deserved it and I've done the same for him. He's who I think of when I think of ESTPs and I've never met one who's given me reason not to. I feel sorry for anyone without such a friendship. 

I also know an ESFP, though not tremendously well. We've always gotten along, save a single drunken misunderstanding that never came up again. He's a fun guy, unpredictable and exciting, good to his friends, if perhaps a little too much for some. He once donated so much money to charity that he couldn't eat for a few days. I like depth. I like to sit and talk about the impossible and the personal. You won't always get that from him, but he's far from a fool. And I'd take a man that kind over a purely deep man any day.


----------



## Brian1 (May 7, 2011)

I think to a large extent, I'm really not interested in type theory. It's a real pain in the ass. I think a lot of people who are interested in it, are "IN" people, and I think a lot of IN people feel they are morally superior to their fellow human beings. I know I've been on the receiving end of this. I also believe IN people are not the best at improvising, so when they're around ESXP, they need to reason away their inferiority complex, so they say"ESXP is acting out, I would never act out, they could learn wisdom from me." So it starts with something like that. Just my two cents.


----------



## 0+n*1 (Sep 20, 2013)

Kazoo said:


> I don't know. But sometimes I read post and people are just like "I LOVE ESFPS" and then they say a bunch of really ridiculous stuff.
> 
> Imagine if I said "I Love INTJs. Their so good at organizing stuff"
> 
> Its just kinda like_ what._


This. A 100+ times. I've seen it too and without being an Se-dom, I think WTF humanity! Are you truly thinking you're complimenting? Or even understanding?


----------



## Girlinthedark (Aug 1, 2013)

Brian1 said:


> I think to a large extent, I'm really not interested in type theory. It's a real pain in the ass. I think a lot of people who are interested in it, are "IN" people, and I think a lot of IN people feel they are morally superior to their fellow human beings. I know I've been on the receiving end of this. I also believe IN people are not the best at improvising, so when they're around ESXP, they need to reason away their inferiority complex, so they say"ESXP is acting out, I would never act out, they could learn wisdom from me." So it starts with something like that. Just my two cents.


And its not a generalisation at all, right? I've been abused by some ESXPs in real life, so does that mean ESXPs in general feel they're socially superior to everyone and need to take out they're inferiority complex for not being in touch with their self by harassing people who stand out? Does that make any sense whatsoever?


----------



## Brian1 (May 7, 2011)

Girlinthedark said:


> And its not a generalisation at all, right? I've been abused by some ESXPs in real life, so does that mean ESXPs in general feel they're socially superior to everyone and need to take out they're inferiority complex for not being in touch with their self by harassing people who stand out? Does that make any sense whatsoever?


wtf are you talking about? I'm saying all these stupid excuses to segregate people, with these tests are usually IN driven. I shied away from saying INFP should stop with the moral high horse of saving the world,precisely because I wanted to avoid typism and generalizing, however, since you're going to pick at a scab, INFPs usually are over represented on these boards, because, these tests like myers briggs are your search to bring meaning in your life, and you always navel gaze. They're usually winning first prize here. The next over represented types are INFJ, INTP. Since I am an ESTP, there's under representation of ESTPs, and for that matter ESFPs on these boards, and I just want to shoot the company computer every time I apply for a job, because, they have a myers briggs section, asking me how I feel, if someone made more money than I did, or would I say I work super fast, fast, moderate, slow but thorough, I think the reason I don't try out for more jobs, is just that I'd have to deal with another stupid myers briggs section. But the INFP, and INFJ, Feeling is their superior function, so they breeze by that section.  ESXPs, like my example of having trouble fill out a myers briggs job application, would not be caught dead trying to compose a psychological test system, that determines brain structure,because, we have better things to do with our life. So the INs come in and write everything about everybody. As it was I'm proud to say I came to myers briggs, because, I got an awesome high off of some girl's website who promotes the usage of entheogens for spiritual growth. And I continue to be in a psychedelic state of mind ever since. And that leads into this next part, INs have a harder time experiencing experiences, but it's like a second language to us ESXPs. So it makes sense that I used my Se to find my way on to a personality forum, rather than do it academically.

I just think the reason why you were probably bullied, is that your type is a big teacher's pet. the INs are the Brainy Smurfs of the world, and the running gag on the Smurfs would be that Brainy gets tossed overboard. 

The question now needs to be raised how are you at improvising,because the thread is about dislike of ESXPs? I also said, this was only my opinion, with just my two cents, and yet you're taking my words to heart.


----------



## Bahburah (Jul 25, 2013)

Yea but what about times when you have to act/be smart?

I've found quite the intellectual _resistance_ from ESxP's.

How come?


----------



## Girlinthedark (Aug 1, 2013)

Brian1 said:


> wtf are you talking about? I'm saying all these stupid excuses to segregate people, with these tests are usually IN driven. I shied away from saying INFP should stop with the moral high horse of saving the world,precisely because I wanted to avoid typism and generalizing, however, since you're going to pick at a scab, INFPs usually are over represented on these boards, because, these tests like myers briggs are your search to bring meaning in your life, and you always navel gaze. They're usually winning first prize here. The next over represented types are INFJ, INTP. Since I am an ESTP, there's under representation of ESTPs, and for that matter ESFPs on these boards, and I just want to shoot the company computer every time I apply for a job, because, they have a myers briggs section, asking me how I feel, if someone made more money than I did, or would I say I work super fast, fast, moderate, slow but thorough, I think the reason I don't try out for more jobs, is just that I'd have to deal with another stupid myers briggs section. But the INFP, and INFJ, Feeling is their superior function, so they breeze by that section. ESXPs, like my example of having trouble fill out a myers briggs job application, would not be caught dead trying to compose a psychological test system, that determines brain structure,because, we have better things to do with our life. So the INs come in and write everything about everybody. As it was I'm proud to say I came to myers briggs, because, I got an awesome high off of some girl's website who promotes the usage of entheogens for spiritual growth. And I continue to be in a psychedelic state of mind ever since. And that leads into this next part, INs have a harder time experiencing experiences, but it's like a second language to us ESXPs. So it makes sense that I used my Se to find my way on to a personality forum, rather than do it academically.
> 
> I just think the reason why you were probably bullied, is that your type is a big teacher's pet. the INs are the Brainy Smurfs of the world, and the running gag on the Smurfs would be that Brainy gets tossed overboard.
> 
> The question now needs to be raised how are you at improvising,because the thread is about dislike of ESXPs? I also said, this was only my opinion, with just my two cents, and yet you're taking my words to heart.


You clearly misread my point, I was trying to point out that you can't generalise about a type just because you had bad experiences with a few of them just like I don't like to generalise because I had bad experiences with some ESXPs. And on what basis did you assume I was taking your opinion to heart? I was expressing my opinion in response to your opinion (this is after all a "discussion board" right?) I might be wrong but from what you wrote, it seems like you have some issues with INs and the test in general. Speaking of better things to do in life, the term "better" completely depends on the individual's perspective. If you think you have better things to do in life, good for you, then why complain about other people who have different interests. Funny how you give your two cents about why I was bullied inspite of the fact that you don't even know me or anything about my life and again you go on to generalise about all the INFPs.


----------



## Brian1 (May 7, 2011)

I have had problems with INs, I'm not going to lie. Okay, I was reading this earlier in the week:INFP Personal Growth

Ten Rules to Live By to Achieve INFP Success


*Feed Your Strengths!* Encourage your natural artistic abilities and creativity. Nourish your spirituality. Give yourself opportunities to help the needy or underprivileged.
*Face Your Weaknesses!* Realize and accept that some traits are strengths and some are weaknesses. Facing and dealing with your weaknesses doesn't mean that you have to change who you are, it means that you want to be the best You possible. By facing your weaknesses, you are honoring your true self, rather than attacking yourself.
*Express Your Feelings.* Don't let unexpressed emotions build up inside of you. If you have strong feelings, sort them out and express them, Don't let them build up inside you to the point where they become unmanageable!
*Listen to Everything.* Try not to dismiss anything immediately. Let everything soak in for awhile, then apply judgment.
*Smile at Criticism.* Remember that people will not always agree with you or understand you, even if they value you greatly. Try to see disagreement and criticism as an opportunity for growth. In fact, that is exactly what it is.
*Be Aware of Others. Remember that there are 15 other personality types out there who see things differently than you see them. Try to identify other people's types. Try to understand their perspectives.*
*Be Accountable for Yourself.* Remember that YOU have more control over your life than any other person has.
*Be Gentle in Your Expectations.* You will always be disappointed with others if you expect too much of them. Being disappointed with another person is the best way to drive them away. Treat others with the same gentleness that you would like to be treated with.
*Assume the Best.* Don't distress yourself by assuming the worst. Remember that a positive attitude often creates positive situations.
*When in Doubt, Ask Questions!* Don't assume that the lack of feedback is the same thing as negative feedback. If you need feedback and don't have any, ask for it.


----------



## SoulRefugee (Jan 27, 2014)

In the end, no fucks should be given. Let's be realistic here, we're all on a forum for a personality theory, guarantee that majority of the world doesn't know about this stuff. So even if some types try to claim they're superior to others, it has no value in reality, because not many would take it seriously. Figure a lot of us are here to develop our weakness, no need to even put effort into giving haters attention. Sure there is some antagonizing against ESP's, but does it really matter since its a 99% chance you won't run into these people in the real world.


----------



## Brian1 (May 7, 2011)

Number 6, INFPs can act,not saying all do, some can act as if they're the adults in the room. ESXPs try not to take life seriously, we have to have fun. This drives INFPs up the wall to no end, we've got to act responsible here, can't have too much fun, and this is where they don't like our Se,because we're outer people, we experience the here and now, we thrive on people for stimulation. INFPs thrive in their inner world, they are withdrawn, their weakest function is Sensing, that's why they get into pissy fits with us ESXPs. Thus leading them to dislike ESXPs, which is what this thread is about.

By the way, everything I said here is in an article on this site, right down to INFPs not having a good grasp of Se.


----------



## Girlinthedark (Aug 1, 2013)

^Please mention this to my ESFP brother. He always gets mad at me because I eat too much junk food and I'm not very responsible. I'm the adult here according to the description and he's the one who doesn't take life seriously. So I should be the one screaming at him haha. INFPs and ESXPs do have their differences and do clash from time to time but so does everyone, that's one side effect of being human.


----------



## monemi (Jun 24, 2013)

Bahburah said:


> Yea but what about times when you have to act/be smart?


What about those times? 



Bahburah said:


> I've found quite the intellectual _resistance_ from ESxP's.
> 
> How come?


I've found quite the fitness _resistance_ from INxP's. 

How come? 
















(Pssst ESxP's and INxP's aren't resistant to either. Maybe it's a cultural thing where you are. But as a group, I haven't seen intellectual resistance from ESxP's. Why do you type people who are intellectually resistant as ESxP's?)


----------



## monemi (Jun 24, 2013)

SoulRefugee said:


> In the end, no fucks should be given. Let's be realistic here, we're all on a forum for a personality theory, guarantee that majority of the world doesn't know about this stuff. So even if some types try to claim they're superior to others, it has no value in reality, because not many would take it seriously. Figure a lot of us are here to develop our weakness, no need to even put effort into giving haters attention. Sure there is some antagonizing against ESP's, but does it really matter since its a 99% chance you won't run into these people in the real world.


If you don't give any fucks, why bother participating on the forum? If everyone always ignores these shitty attitudes, why would they change? How much growth is actually happening if opinions go unchallenged? I don't need help remembering that this is just a theory and nothing to get worked up about. I'm not sure why you and others feel the need to tell me not to take it too seriously. You choose to ignore bullshit. Go ahead and ignore it. Just because it isn't a particularly serious matter doesn't mean everyone should ignore it with you.


----------



## Satan Claus (Aug 6, 2013)

I like a healthy, mature ES*P. Those people are cool and fun to hang around with. I'm 15 so I don't often meet a mature ESTP but when I do I'm very lucky and love to be around them! Sometimes they lack depth though and the ESFPs don't think and it can be frustrating.


----------



## monemi (Jun 24, 2013)

Satan Claus said:


> I like a healthy, mature ES*P. Those people are cool and fun to hang around with. I'm 15 so I don't often meet a mature ESTP but when I do I'm very lucky and love to be around them! Sometimes they lack depth though and the ESFPs don't think and it can be frustrating.


They lack depth in areas that you are interested in. And ESFP's most certainly do think.


----------



## SoulRefugee (Jan 27, 2014)

monemi said:


> If you don't give any fucks, why bother participating on the forum? If everyone always ignores these shitty attitudes, why would they change? How much growth is actually happening if opinions go unchallenged? I don't need help remembering that this is just a theory and nothing to get worked up about. I'm not sure why you and others feel the need to tell me not to take it too seriously. You choose to ignore bullshit. Go ahead and ignore it. Just because it isn't a particularly serious matter doesn't mean everyone should ignore it with you.


I like that reply , I apologize for not taking your perspective into account. I should have rephrased that(this is where my impulsiveness kills me lol). Adding to your concern about types getting antagonized, it creates bias which could then defer newcomers from finding their true type. That is a definite reason why we should learn to not "hate" on each other's functions and instead see one another's strengths that compliment ours. This all is a bad thing, I'm just wondering HOW? are we going to change it? I'm not trying to discredit you at all, just I need to know a gameplan before I put more thought into it. Cause we should be attempting to create solutions to dissolve this ongoing "rivalry" there seems to be between the types.


----------



## ponder (Dec 7, 2013)

I didn't say you all were ONLY about concrete experiences, but rather that it's greatly preferred to abstracting. Ni is your last function after all. Maybe I worded my post poorly.

To put it simply, from my perspective, ESxPs aren't all that interested in abstract ideas. They might entertain them for a bit, but never even remotely to the extent that I prefer. ESTPs can follow along for a bit because of that secondary Ti, but every ESFP I've known has despised idea-oriented discussion.


----------



## Vermillion (Jan 22, 2012)

I have a big issue with people considering ESxPs incapable of depth and intellectual thinking and to some extent, even intelligence. Like... what? Type indicates cognition and not behavior. I can well see how an ESxP can be a social introvert and also dislike clubbing and mountain climbing every weekend with 10000 random friends. (oh yes, take your time to process it. It's true.) Nothing in their behavior and likes and dislikes indicates that they don't think and process information the way a stereotypical ESxP does. 

People seem to wrongly attribute "sensation" to the 5 senses. Which is kind of retarded because wow, everyone possesses senses and a healthy person with no impairments should be able to use them optimally. So some woefully misguided people think all Se doms can deal with is raw physical information processed by the senses, and plain facts, being completely unable to deal with abstract information or concepts. 

It's seriously necessary to stop attributing low abstract intelligence to sensation because any decently intelligent person is able to understand things beyond their carnal needs. Because of this, a lot of people who love life and are practically minded and enthusiastic are written off as ESxPs, while a lot of people who don't fit these behavioral stereotypes and can understand concepts are probably understood to be some other, more "intelligent" type because concepts = intuition, right?

I wonder how many people are hated on just because they, sadly, are looked at in an exaggerated, unintelligent light because of a type label, and how many people don't realize they are Se doms because they don't just live their whole lives being ebullient and engaging and are able to think through things independently and innovatively.



ponder said:


> I didn't say you all were ONLY about concrete experiences, but rather that it's greatly preferred to abstracting. Ni is your last function after all. Maybe I worded my post poorly.


Yes, you worded it pretty poorly because the idea is wrong. Ni is not "abstracting". Ni is perceiving meaning and symbolism and tying it back to a universal archetype; seeing the negative space or the field between objects -- what is not visible over what is visible. Perceiving data in this way doesn't automatically make you intelligent, and _intelligence_ is what is the ability to abstract information. If you're saying Se doms are automatically unintelligent, please go read some theory and "intuitively" understand it and come back.


----------



## ponder (Dec 7, 2013)

Amaterasu said:


> People seem to wrongly attribute "sensation" to the 5 senses. Which is kind of retarded because wow, everyone possesses senses and a healthy person with no impairments should be able to use them optimally. So some woefully misguided people think all Se doms can deal with is raw physical information processed by the senses, and plain facts, being completely unable to deal with abstract information or concepts.


But that's kind of the definition of what Se is.

ESxPs might occasionally engage inferior Ni to deal with abstract concepts, but it's sure as hell not something they're going to be great at. Just like how I'm not great with Fe.

You're also making a fatal flaw in assuming that everyone can use their senses optimally...I'm usually unaware of what's going on inside and outside myself.



> It's seriously necessary to stop attributing low abstract intelligence to sensation because any decently intelligent person is able to understand things beyond their carnal needs. Because of this, a lot of people who love life and are practically minded and enthusiastic are written off as ESxPs, while a lot of people who don't fit these behavioral stereotypes and can understand concepts are probably understood to be some other, more "intelligent" type because concepts = intuition, right?


The stereotypical definition of intelligence is more or less defined by Intuitive preferences. 'Intelligence' is a pointless word though, there are merely different strengths in different areas.

_“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein_



> I wonder how many people are hated on just because they, sadly, are looked at in an exaggerated, unintelligent light because of a type label, and how many people don't realize they are Se doms because they don't just live their whole lives being ebullient and engaging and are able to think through things independently and innovatively.


Se doms are amazing at being ebullient and engaging though, so why not be proud of those things? Why not be proud of the ability to just go out and DO shit? It's a trait I sure wish I had.



I guess my main question is; why do ESxPs feel so compelled to try to prove their supposedly deep and innovative personalities? Is it a defense mechanism to avoid accepting certain flaws and deficiencies?

I see a lot of parallels to my personal struggles with Si & Fe. I often try to ignore, or outright deny my inability to stay grounded and connect well with other people.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

ponder said:


> But that's kind of the definition of what Se is.


Nope. You don't understand what sensation is nor how perception works. Perception is simply the act of experience and focusing on the experience of experience. Se dominant types simply focus on the physical reality of experience and what things are which is not the same as being unable to abstract information because what things are could well be very abstract things in themselves. You should go read Jung's definition of Se which is not the same as being a concrete thinker. It's the cognitive focus maximizing sensory experience. 



> ESxPs might occasionally engage inferior Ni to deal with abstract concepts, but it's sure as hell not something they're going to be great at. Just like how I'm not great with Fe.


Ni has nothing to do with abstract concepts. Ni deals with abstract personal symbolism but that's different from abstract thinking. You don't understand how sensation and intuition work. 


> You're also making a fatal flaw in assuming that everyone can use their senses optimally...I'm usually unaware of what's going on inside and outside myself.


That's just because you don't pay conscious attention to the physical reality and that could relate to cognition but it doesn't in itself mean that you are not a sensor. Si doms may for example be very physically oblivious. 



> The stereotypical definition of intelligence is more or less defined by Intuitive preferences. 'Intelligence' is a pointless word though, there are merely different strengths in different areas.


Abstract thinking =/= intuition. Intuition is about being aware of archetype content but as even Jung himself points out, it can be in the form of concrete images. 



> “Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
> ― Albert Einstein


Now consider how that quote relates to your obvious bias and come again. 


> Se doms are amazing at being ebullient and engaging though, so why not be proud of those things? Why not be proud of the ability to just go out and DO shit? It's a trait I sure wish I had.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Orly because I don't think you do. You seem completely oblivious over how offensive it is to be considered stupid by default just by being typed as a sensor. It's systematic discrimination that has no grounding in reality. It's not about just appreciating one's strengths; it's clear and obvious belittlement of someone else simply based on their type label.

You don't understand what perception is or how it operates in people. You should go and get an understanding of what perception is first before you make any claims about how Se types operate.


----------



## ponder (Dec 7, 2013)

Interesting, you clearly know more about Jung and the functions than I do.

I never intended to say (and never actually said) that ESxPs are stupid. Hell, my ESTP father went through engineering school. But regardless, abstract conceptualizing is simply not their strong suit, something I've seen demonstrated repeatedly in real life.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

ponder said:


> Interesting, you clearly know more about Jung and the functions than I do.
> 
> I never intended to say (and never actually said) that ESxPs are stupid. Hell, my ESTP father went through engineering school. But regardless, abstract conceptualizing is simply not their strong suit, something I've seen demonstrated repeatedly in real life.


No you still don't get it. My girlfriend is clearly able to think abstractly and she's an ESFP. She has no problem understanding abstract concepts. Your thinking is so fucking offensive. You imply Se doms are stupid for being concrete thinkers and then they should simply accept that because that's their "strength". You're not anything near as abstract or smart as you think you are if you can't understand this. Here's a nice quote for you:

_"A stupid man's report of what a clever man says can never be accurate, because he unconsciously translates what he hears into something he can understand."_
-Bertrand Russell


----------



## monemi (Jun 24, 2013)

ponder said:


> Interesting, you clearly know more about Jung and the functions than I do.
> 
> I never intended to say (and never actually said) that ESxPs are stupid. Hell, my ESTP father went through engineering school. But regardless, abstract conceptualizing is simply not their strong suit, something I've seen demonstrated repeatedly in real life.


Some Se-doms do have a strong suit in abstract concepts. I have the ability to understand an abstract concept and find a real world use for it in ways the people around me often do not. It takes intelligence to take an idea and make it more than just an idea. I find often people have abstract concepts but have difficulty communicating them to other people in a relevant way. I find this especially with my mothers family who are all university educated and some work research and more theoretical fields. They have a lot of ideas but taking ideas and delivering a finished product is where they struggle. 

For example years back I met my cousins wife (they were still dating then) and she was struggling to get attention and funding for her biology research. I talked to her over the weekend about her research, asking questions until I had a full grasp of what it was she was trying to do. I then discussed with her how to make the premise of her research more palatable for her next application for funding. I brought her focus to what real world uses her research could have. She's been extremely grateful and she's not the first or the last person I've helped in this way. You want to make a good idea more than just an idea, you ask a Se-dom. We like good ideas as much as the next person and we want to make them happen. It takes creativity and innovation to bring about real change. 

I don't lack interest in abstract concepts. There is nothing about Se, Ti or Fi that would indicate a dislike for ideas or a weakness in this area. Preference is not ability. There are plenty of INxPs that are good at sports. There is nothing in their cognitive functions that would indicate a dislike for athletics or a weakness in this area. Only stereotypes. 

Just because your father has a weakness in this area and you've typed others that have a weakness in this area as being Se-doms has no bearing on what how strong suits are.


----------



## KraChZiMan (Mar 23, 2013)

ponder said:


> Interesting, you clearly know more about Jung and the functions than I do.
> 
> I never intended to say (and never actually said) that ESxPs are stupid. Hell, my ESTP father went through engineering school. But regardless, abstract conceptualizing is simply not their strong suit, something I've seen demonstrated repeatedly in real life.


Intuitives are not the special little snowflakes, only ones capable of abstract thinking, you know?



ephemereality said:


> No you still don't get it. My girlfriend is clearly able to think abstractly and she's an ESFP. She has no problem understanding abstract concepts. Your thinking is so fucking offensive. You imply se doms are stupid for being concrete thinkers and then they should simply accept that because that's their "strength". You're not anything near as abstract or smart as you think you are if you can't understand this. Here's a nice quote for you:
> 
> A stupid man's report of what a clever man says can never be accurate, because he unconsciously translates what he hears into something he can understand.
> -Bertrand Russell


Have to side with *@ephemereality *on this one.
*




*


----------



## ponder (Dec 7, 2013)

Of course ESxPs can understand abstract concepts, all humans who don't have a sub-par IQ can. It's just a matter of different skillsets. Most NTs will be better at abstract thinking, while most SPs will be better at experiencing.

I'd agree that it mostly comes down to individual preferences, but it's also a matter of capability, to an extent. It's not just chance that I'm vastly superior to my ESFP friends in math & physics while they're significantly better at connecting with other people and sharing experiences with them.


----------



## laura palmer (Feb 10, 2014)

ponder said:


> A lot of people can't handle strong extroverted sensing; it's irritating or, at the worst, frightening to them.


That kind of describes it really well!


----------



## KraChZiMan (Mar 23, 2013)

ponder said:


> Of course ESxPs can understand abstract concepts, all humans who don't have a sub-par IQ can. It's just a matter of different skillsets. Most NTs will be better at abstract thinking, while most SPs will be better at experiencing.
> 
> I'd agree that it mostly comes down to individual preferences, but it's also a matter of capability, to an extent. It's not just chance that I'm vastly superior to my ESFP friends in math & physics while they're significantly better at connecting with other people and sharing experiences with them.


I appreciate that you are willing to think along with us on this topic, and you are almost right, but not quite exactly.

Of course if you have studied math & physics, you will be more superior in that field than any others, but it is not related to MBTI. If an ESFP decided to study math & physics, and an INTP decided to study something else, the relationship would be reversed.

ESFP's strengths are not limited to sharing experiences and connecting with people only, ESFP is also a great type for a politician, businessman, artist, musician, singer, performer etc. because ESFP's have a great tendency (not predetermination, but tendency) for possessing excellent leadership skills, and being able to effectively influence people in a direct manner, making them great motivators for speeding up long and extensive processes (such as connecting the right people together for a protest event, confronting on people who appear indecisive in critical moments etc.) ESFP's are also fast to understand how business relations and organizations operate, and can keep up in a highly competetive environments like politics and business. Their confidence in self-expression is another one of their strengths, which gives them tendency to pursue some creative fields such as art and music (Elvis Presley and Pablo Picasso were both ESFP's).

That is why MBTI is not a set of stereotypes. 16 types involve a multitude of nuances in their descriptions, and "roads to success" are very different for each 16 types, based on weaknesses and strengths of each.


----------



## Bahburah (Jul 25, 2013)

SoulRefugee said:


> Care to explain a difference between your concept of Intellectual and Smart? I've always been curious why others refer to themselves that way. Though you must remember these functions are merely preferences and that individuals could tap into their other functions if they so pleased, may not be as natural but combining it with Se provides a different sort of intelligence.






Brian1 said:


> How are you defining intellectual? And how are you defining smart? I have a library at home and no, not of porn, since we're talking about stereotypes here, and dislike, we ESXPs are into sex. My library is filled with American and World History,fiction,ART,biography, and I know a little about scientific figures and how they helped shaped modern science. Did I avoid the S.A.T? Yes I did, I still went to college.I get kidded a lot by my family that I have a brain of useless knowledge unless I were a contestant on Jeopardy. And I think an INTP, The Thinkers, also known as the Intellectuals, would run into a similar conundrum of acquiring all this theoretical knowledge, perhaps some factual,because like us,you are a T,but not being able to use it, except as a contestant on Jeopardy.


^ That is exactly what it is. Having knowledge and finding truth in knowledge. I feel that this approach is much more sensor than intuitive. When I collect information I collect as much as I can (be it true or untrue) and leave it to my intellect/discretion to see if it's true or not. As in if I am presented with new information I will simply follow logic to deem it true or unture, and I do this in a quick intuitive way that involves skimming any information that I have about this topic. So to me books and information is nice to have and to learn from, but I'm not going to hold it as the ultimate truth or refer to just my knowledge of a topic when presented with something new. I feel like sensors have a more practical approach to life and look to the outside world to find truth. 

So really being smart is more practical and finding the truth of a situation.

While intellect is more the perception and understanding of abstract information and warping your mind around an abstract concept or theory.

Really someone with a higher intellect is just looking into things deeper and understanding the world on a deeper level *on there own*.
This is why it's typically more of an N thing because it's abstract understanding, and I'll be honest more than half of the people I meet reach there intellectual limit before mine is met. It's about not taking things at there perceived face value and looking deeper into why it exists and it's point is, and this docent mean rushing to go find more information about a topic (altho that helps) but more about have the natural tools to determine and perceive what it is.

And being smart it more about the best application of the knowledge of that you have.

Really it's more a matter of Subjective (Smart) and Objective (Intellect).



monemi said:


> And you're officially confused. You are automatically concluding that if a person is unintellectual they are ESxP. There is no rule that ESxP's are unintellectual or anti-intellectual. That's just a stereotype. Some ESxP's follow the stereotype. Some other N types can be anti-intellectual. There is no reason to assume that because someone is anti-intellectualism that they are Se-doms.


Well then I guess I just think your types lack intellect, plain and simple. lol Don't tell me I'm confused because I understand what your saying, I just disagree. I know that other types can be unintellectual and I personally know people of other types that lack intellect and I don't type them ESXP, yet the people who I have found to be ESXPs have also generally lacked intellect.

I mean that fact that I have to explain this to you in such a detailed way only proves my point even more.

Your having a hard time warping your mind around the concept that I understand what your saying yet I've noticed a trend in when finding the type of a person and finding similar things about this type in relation with other people of that type. I'm not simply going "they lack an intellect, must be an ESXP" (as you so simply can't wrap your mind around) but looking truthfully at what this persons type is and determining it, and then noticing a following trend.

I mean think for yourself for once?




Kazoo said:


> Because nothing pisses me off more then when I'm trying to enjoy myself and someone has to cry or attempt a feeble attempt to be deep. I'm not against intellect. I'm against the idea of intellectual superiority.


Well sorry dude but thats just what people are like. Some people like to look at things deeply and find enjoyment in it.
So your basically saying that just because you don't like something people shouldn't do it around you? Grow up.

And that fact that you perceive it as them trying to be intellectually superior to you could not be more wrong and really shows a flawed way in your thinking and how large your ego is. 

Not everyone is out to get you, or even gives a shit about you.

Like I said, I simply enjoy looking into things deeply and am not using it to put me higher on the social pedestal, which is usually the thing I give the least shits about.

This is why I have a hard time maintaining friendships with ESXPs because looking at things deeply and theoretically is simply a huge part of who I am and how I naturally think.

And for you to say that I should just not be myself around you because it hurts your feelings is very childish and the reason I dislike and don't get along with ESXPs, ESFPs more specifically.


----------



## Kazoo The Kid (May 26, 2013)

Bahburah said:


> Well sorry dude but thats just what people are like. Some people like to look at things deeply and find enjoyment in it.
> So your basically saying that just because you don't like something people shouldn't do it around you? Grow up.
> 
> And that fact that you perceive it as them trying to be intellectually superior to you could not be more wrong and really shows a flawed way in your thinking and how large your ego is.
> ...


I would like you to take a moment and reflect on your post. And look at all the assumptions you made from the two sentences I wrote.


----------



## monemi (Jun 24, 2013)

Bahburah said:


> Well then I guess I just think your types lack intellect, plain and simple. lol Don't tell me I'm confused because I understand what your saying, I just disagree. I know that other types can be unintellectual and I personally know people of other types that lack intellect and I don't type them ESXP, yet the people who I have found to be ESXPs have also generally lacked intellect.
> 
> I mean that fact that I have to explain this to you in such a detailed way only proves my point even more.
> 
> ...


Wow! You're arrogant. I am thinking for myself. Just because I've read the stereotype, doesn't mean it's true. I'm not having any difficulty wrapping my mind around your stereotyping. I'm just not going into the box you're trying to shove me into. 

You are typing according bias and aren't drawing on theory. Who's failing to understand theory now?


----------



## monemi (Jun 24, 2013)

ponder said:


> Of course ESxPs can understand abstract concepts, all humans who don't have a sub-par IQ can. It's just a matter of different skillsets. Most NTs will be better at abstract thinking, while most SPs will be better at experiencing.
> 
> I'd agree that it mostly comes down to individual preferences, but it's also a matter of capability, to an extent. It's not just chance that I'm vastly superior to my ESFP friends in math & physics while they're significantly better at connecting with other people and sharing experiences with them.


Experiencing isn't a skill. Essentially you've just said that ESxP's are useless. Well done.


----------



## Kazoo The Kid (May 26, 2013)

This is my main problem with "intellects".

Too many self proclaimed "deep thinkers" just pull a bunch of BS from things. For example. He made about 6000 assumptions about me from a two sentence post. That annoys me. He thinks its being "deep" and looking "closer" when in reality its just a bunch of BS. I notice this too often in people. Mistaking their own fantasies for intellect.


----------



## monemi (Jun 24, 2013)

Zibziby said:


> That kind of describes it really well!


More stereotypes, but nothing relevant to REAL PEOPLE. Stop going off shitty type descriptions and remember we're real people and take many shapes and forms.


----------



## KraChZiMan (Mar 23, 2013)

Bahburah said:


> Well then I guess I just think your types lack intellect, plain and simple. lol Don't tell me I'm confused because I understand what your saying, I just disagree. I know that other types can be unintellectual and I personally know people of other types that lack intellect and I don't type them ESXP, yet the people who I have found to be ESXPs have also generally lacked intellect.
> 
> I mean that fact that I have to explain this to you in such a detailed way only proves my point even more.
> 
> ...












Very trivial view on MBTI. I am disappointed.


----------



## Bahburah (Jul 25, 2013)

monemi said:


> Wow! You're arrogant. I am thinking for myself. Just because I've read the stereotype, doesn't mean it's true. I'm not having any difficulty wrapping my mind around your stereotyping. I'm just not going into the box you're trying to shove me into.
> 
> You are typing according bias and aren't drawing on theory. Who's failing to understand theory now?


I get that, I'm not a fan of stereotyping and typisim especially on the forum and I can relate. 
But there is a reason that stereotypes exist. I'm not trying to put you personally into the box, I'm just saying that I've personally noticed this trend with the ESXPs I've met and theres been a clash of personality.
You could say NT's being arrogant is a stereotype and while it might not be true in certain cases, it generally can be assumed that its a more likely possibility. 

And no I'm typing people based on cognitive functions and noticing a trend. Thats how the stereotypes of your type come to be, and thats the reason those stereotypes exist. Don't you see? Stereotypes or only wrong when you hold it as ultimate truth and don't see past it. And I understand that everyone is different in there own way, yet I see where the stereotype is coming from.




Kazoo said:


> I would like you to take a moment and reflect on your post. And look at all the assumptions you made from the two sentences I wrote.


I don't care dude, I saw the point you where trying to make and shot it down.

I can't stand that sort of behaviour.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

ponder said:


> Of course ESxPs can understand abstract concepts, all humans who don't have a sub-par IQ can. It's just a matter of different skillsets. Most NTs will be better at abstract thinking, while most SPs will be better at experiencing.


No, then you don't understand how Se works. Don't you see yourself how you are phrasing things? "Abstract thinking". Please tell how abstract thinking does not in some way now relate to intelligence or IQ and by that I of course mean conceptually, intuitively, abstractly. So much for your supposed INxx typing. Intuition does not mean you are more capable of thinking abstractly. 



> I'd agree that it mostly comes down to individual preferences, but it's also a matter of capability, to an extent. It's not just chance that I'm vastly superior to my ESFP friends in math & physics while they're significantly better at connecting with other people and sharing experiences with them.


lol, I doubt they are ESFPs. They just seem like dumb people honestly, which doesn't mean that they are Se doms by default. My girlfriend is majoring in physics, maths and chemistry. She's much better at understanding these things than I am despite the fact that I'm a supposed NT. Inability to understand stuff like physics or maths has nothing to do with S vs N cognition. She just understands the theory in a way that makes sense to her which is through the lens of Se whereas I do it through the lens of Ni. That's the only true and sole difference between the two of us. She sees the details of a molecule structure; I see what the molecule is made up of more conceptually. I will however tell you about a person who did what you attribute ESFPs - my INFP friend. Ironic, huh? My ESFP girlfriend while thinking partying could be fun isn't engaging in that kind of lifestyle at all but my INFP friend wasted away a lot of her high school time partying instead of studying so she later got problems getting into higher education because her grades got so fucked due to all the partying. Stereotype behavior says nothing about someone's type. 

@Bahburah Your typism is disgusting. I know several very high IQ sensors (think 130+). You on the other hand? Again the quote I provided by Bertrand Russell comes to mind because it's so fucking apt in this context:


> A stupid man's report of what a clever man says can never be accurate, because he unconsciously translates what he hears into something he can understand.


Now try to figure out how this pertains to yourself though of course you likely don't understand simply because you don't see it. Too fucking stupid.


----------



## Van Meter (Sep 28, 2012)

My theory is that a lot of intuitives come here to get away and discuss things that, frankly, a majority of people don't seem to give a shit about, because it doesn't necessarily put food on the table. So if you are a strong intuitive who has his/her smaller functions in a less than sufficient state, you are going to get sick of a society that is largely driven by a mentality that, to you, seems to be headed nowhere. This is their venue, and a football stadium is an Esxp's. jkjk. Everyone has their own interests, and intuitives are fueled by stuff like this. When the stupid poll thread comes up about disliked types, who cares what the results are. Throw in a bunch of Se doms on a forum and they might in turn rag on Inxxs, who knows. I hate myself first, and then everyone else, equally. This is an ethically fair and moral position that won't disappoint.


----------



## Brian1 (May 7, 2011)

I'd respond, but I'm tired from going to a party after work, that is NoVA NORML, legalizing pot. So, I guess I've mentioned drugs-hell every type does drugs,-and party calling Sensor John Belushi, but the kicker, is that it's a party about social justice, very progressive,and libertarian at the same time, I talked with Democratic Candidates and the Director for the Libertarian Party,and isn't that so idealistic? And there is the perfect epitaph for this thread. We Sensors do party, but we also care about social justice,and political movements aimed at changing laws. Everything in the end is nuanced.


----------



## Vermillion (Jan 22, 2012)

ponder said:


> But that's kind of the definition of what Se is.


LOL. No, it's not. I wrote something about how I see Se here, might be worth for you to check it out. 
http://personalitycafe.com/cognitiv...tions-extraverted-sensing-se.html#post5565282



> ESxPs might occasionally engage inferior Ni to deal with abstract concepts, but it's sure as hell not something they're going to be great at. Just like how I'm not great with Fe.
> 
> The stereotypical definition of intelligence is more or less defined by Intuitive preferences. 'Intelligence' is a pointless word though, there are merely different strengths in different areas.
> 
> ...


No. Stop correlating intuition to abstract intelligence, seriously. Did you even read what I wrote to you about Ni earlier? Probably not. And if you don't believe that, then go read Jung or something. He was the father of this entire theory, I'm sure he's not going to be wrong about it. 



> You're also making a fatal flaw in assuming that everyone can use their senses optimally...I'm usually unaware of what's going on inside and outside myself.


If you're oblivious to basic sensory input that's really your problem and no one else's; essentially not type related. I know an INTJ who can play six sports and also used to dance, despite being an intuitive with terrible Se. Pretty sure being involved in that much physical activity requires good usage of the senses and good awareness of physical information.



> Se doms are amazing at being ebullient and engaging though, so why not be proud of those things? Why not be proud of the ability to just go out and DO shit? It's a trait I sure wish I had.


If you'd read what I said a little more carefully you'd have noticed I implied being "ebullient and engaging" is more a behavioral aspect that a Se dom (or any type) may or may not possess. That's actually behavior which would fit better with the stereotype Fe dominant because of their need to regulate emotional atmospheres.

Also, we _are _proud of our ability to go out and do shit. Never denied it.



> I guess my main question is; why do ESxPs feel so compelled to try to prove their supposedly deep and innovative personalities? Is it a defense mechanism to avoid accepting certain flaws and deficiencies?


Why the fuck are you assuming being an ESxP and having a deep and innovative personality are mutually exclusive concepts? That's my main question to you. Literally anybody of any type can be wise, quick to understand things, and creative and inventive, if they have good, keen mental faculty. And I really hope you are not implying we're automatically lacking in this area. 

The Se doms here could equally engage in reverse typism and declare that apart from being good at getting things done and maneuvering through the world, they also happen to be fast thinkers and since they're here on a forum discussing theory, intelligent and able to successfully abstract concepts and ideas and express them coherently. How does it feel if some other type declares its overarching superiority, especially when it's the ESxP? Not very good, right? Exactly. We don't like or agree with the sort of sweeping statements you make about our capabilities either. Stop.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Bahburah said:


> Hmmm this brings a quote to mind by Bertrand Russell. It goes something like,
> 
> _"A stupid man's report of what a clever man says can never be accurate, because he unconsciously translates what he hears into something he can understand."_
> 
> Something to think about.


Good to know that you are reacting exactly the way I expected you to and that you aren't capable of processing what the quote entails in relation to this thread's content and specifically yours


----------



## Lucky Luciano (Nov 28, 2013)

Being Se dom don´t make you stupid. Ok, I never cared about school, I was put in "special kids class", I was in tests and I scored well above average in each of them, my IQ is 131, I just didn´t bother to do my homework but so what? At the age of 17 I have my own business, I have attracted some investors, I am on my way to financial independence. If I care about something, if there is practical application for that subject I´ll learn every detail and abstract concepts about it.


----------



## sceptical mystic (Mar 6, 2014)

Kazoo said:


> You know what I think is even better then being intelligent and deep? Being a good person. Being kind. Being tolerant.


I'm with you - except I've realised in the real world it's difficult to find a genuinely good, kind or tolerant person who isn't also intelligent or deep. 

Stupid/simple-minded doesn't equal good - it takes intelligence and insight to be genuinely kind, empathetic and tolerant. 

Interpersonal intelligence is, indeed, a type of intelligence. So the assumption that stupid equals good and innocent is just a myth. 

Personally, I've noticed the least intelligent a person is, the least aware (s)he is of others' feelings or needs (especially when they are different from theirs), or of basic things such as cause and effect (if I do this, that will happen). In my experience, "stupid" people usually come across as unreliable, selfish and immature. 

Of course, there are also people who appear highly intelligent in other selected areas (e.g. logical/mathematical or musical intelligence) but pretty stupid in interpersonal or intrapersonal intelligence. As you pointed out:



Kazoo said:


> I've met plenty of really intelligent people who are just cynical assholes who sit around all day in criticize. I've met plenty of really deep people who minimize everyone around them into being mindless idiots.


To me such people aren't "intelligent but assholes", they are "intelligent in a limited field and stupid in the others", and after prolonged interaction I tend to lose respect for them. I prefer well-rounded intelligent types - that's what the world really needs.


----------



## SHININGKNIGHT87 (Apr 15, 2014)

*Esxp*

Personally I've always thought most ESXP's were pretty cool, but to each his own I suppose.


----------



## aloneinmusic (Mar 1, 2014)

I actually really like ESXPs. You guys are always so fun to be around, and you don't get annoyingly over the top either. People like you bring me out of my introverted shell. :3


----------



## monemi (Jun 24, 2013)

Bahburah said:


> I get that, I'm not a fan of stereotyping and typisim especially on the forum and I can relate.
> But there is a reason that stereotypes exist. I'm not trying to put you personally into the box, I'm just saying that I've personally noticed this trend with the ESXPs I've met and theres been a clash of personality.
> You could say NT's being arrogant is a stereotype and while it might not be true in certain cases, it generally can be assumed that its a more likely possibility.




Stereotypes aren't helpful. Stereotypes have lead to prejudism, racism, sexism and pretty much every -ism you can shake a stick at. Even "positive" stereotypes aren't good. Ask Asian people how they feel about the "positive" stereotypes about them. ESxP stereotypes don't exist for a good reason. The stereotypes relate to how people read the shitty type descriptions and not to how we live. Some of us are loud, many are not. Some of us are good at sports, many are not. And you can say you 'get it' all you want but as long as you see the entire group as less capable intellectually you_ don't _get it. 



> And no I'm typing people based on cognitive functions and noticing a trend. Thats how the stereotypes of your type come to be, and thats the reason those stereotypes exist. Don't you see? Stereotypes or only wrong when you hold it as ultimate truth and don't see past it. And I understand that everyone is different in there own way, yet I see where the stereotype is coming from.


You think you've noticed a pattern of ESxP's. You _don't actually know_ their cognitive functions. You've noticed a pattern of behaviour and decided they were ESxP's. That's what is bullshit. People can be in the same field and have completely different cognitive functions. When seeking truth, we all approach from different perspectives but meet up at the same destination. You are being entirely xenophobic to a different perspective. You see the different perspective as intellectually inferior. When the truth is, it is only a different way of processing information. MBTI is only how you think. Which way you prefer to process the information. It doesn't tell you what we think about or what we're interested in. I've seen enough discussions on the ESTP subforum to realize that many of us aren't interested in watching sports. We actually have very few interests in common. Some of us are more interested in science. Some of us are more interested in politics. Some of us are more interested in activism. Some of us are more interested in health and fitness. Who we are, our intellectual capacities and interests are extremely varied. These are not people you typed within your bias. These are ESTP's who have actually typed themselves. More than half of us don't even fit the stereotypes beyond our communication style. And that seems to be the only calling card I've seen to date from ESTP's.


----------



## the_resistance (Aug 27, 2013)

Ermenegildo said:


> I summarize …
> 
> 1. If someone looks foolish in front of strangers that person could be
> 
> ...



Actually, we all frequent violence. You just don't know it. That is what separates prey from predator.


----------



## aendern (Dec 28, 2013)

monemi said:


> Another thread brought up something I've noticed. Many posters tend to think very little of ESXP. I think I know why. *We aren't as worried about looking foolish in front of strangers as many other types are.* ESFP will perform and *willingly look like idiots* to make people happy. For comic relief to bring harmony to a situation or what have you. ESTP aren't as willing to make fools of ourselves as ESFP's, but if it's to meet an objective, we'll do it.
> 
> This means the odds are good people have seen ESXP's fail or look foolishly very publicly. *People mistake willingness to look less than stellar in public for being unintelligent.* But people rarely know WHY we did what we did.
> . . .
> This also means, our failures and foolishness is out there where everyone saw it. That's what people remember.* They conclude we're always loud, always high energy and always 'on'. They don't see ESXP's on their down time.* I can understand that those with a high cringe factor and care too much what other people think, wouldn't want to hang out with ESXP's. When improvising no one is more surprised what comes out of our mouths than we are. But really, I think the people that dislike us the most, care too much what strangers think of them and take themselves too seriously. They need more of us.


I think you hit the nail on the head.

To contrast, I am one who is "overly"-cautious and doesn't do something unless I know it's the correct move to make. I take my mistakes very seriously. And I try to minimize them at all costs.

I think, also, that this is an Fi mentality. ^ to not want to misrepresent oneself UNLESS it's common knowledge that we're playing a character or acting.

When Se comes before Fi, it may be more common to be silly without first thinking, "Hmm.. would doing that really represent who I am as a person? Do I really want people to view me that way?" Instead they just do it and have fun, no?

I have no idea how this manifests in Se > Ti people.


----------



## FearAndTrembling (Jun 5, 2013)

I like ESTP. I honestly get annoyed with ESFP, even though a few are my friends. It gets old. People who always want to be the center of attention, and talk about themselves.


----------



## MNiS (Jan 30, 2010)

emberfly said:


> When Se comes before Fi, it may be more common to be silly without first thinking, "Hmm.. would doing that really represent who I am as a person? Do I really want people to view me that way?" Instead they just do it and have fun, no?
> 
> I have no idea how this manifests in Se > Ti people.


It's pretty simple, ESFPs act based on Fi while ESTPs act based on Ti.

I think the best distinction is that ESFPs make fun of themselves to make people laugh while ESTPs make fun others for laughs. That's probably why the ESTP is kind of considered the a-hole archetype to people who don't like being made fun of while ESFPs are kind of universally loved.

Barring comical activities another major difference is that ESFPs like to promote others they deem worthy while ESTPs are very much into self-promotion. That's another key difference involving Fi and Ti.


----------



## monemi (Jun 24, 2013)

MNiS said:


> It's pretty simple, ESFPs act based on Fi while ESTPs act based on Ti.
> 
> I think the best distinction is that ESFPs make fun of themselves to make people laugh while ESTPs make fun others for laughs. That's probably why the ESTP is kind of considered the a-hole archetype to people who don't like being made fun of while ESFPs are kind of universally loved.
> 
> Barring comical activities another major difference is that ESFPs like to promote others they deem worthy while ESTPs are very much into self-promotion. That's another key difference involving Fi and Ti.


I would say you're promoting yourself just fine here.


----------



## MNiS (Jan 30, 2010)

monemi said:


> I would say you're promoting yourself just fine here.


Don't like the truth except when it serves your purposes?

Well, to be fair, those are extreme examples. Clear-cut distinctions. Personally, I don't make fun of myself because that would hurt my reputation as a reasonable person and I know many ESTPs who learned the virtues of modesty.

Still though, the Court Jester and ringmaster (ex: P.T. Barnum) would be archetypes for ESFPs and ESTPs respectively, IMO.


----------



## Grandmaster Yoda (Jan 18, 2014)

I never hated an ESTP. Matter of fact my only friends are likely to be ESTPs, I have an ISTP friend as well. ESFP to me is still the unknown type, I never really looked much into the type and I don't seem them often on PerC at all.


----------



## Catallena (Oct 19, 2014)

This thread is amazing.



Grandmaster Yoda said:


> ESFP to me is still the unknown type, I never really looked much into the type and I don't seem them often on PerC at all.


----------



## monemi (Jun 24, 2013)

MNiS said:


> Don't like the truth except when it serves your purposes?
> 
> Well, to be fair, those are extreme examples. Clear-cut distinctions. Personally, I don't make fun of myself because that would hurt my reputation as a reasonable person and I know many ESTPs who learned the virtues of modesty.
> 
> Still though, the Court Jester and ringmaster (ex: P.T. Barnum) would be archetypes for ESFPs and ESTPs respectively, IMO.


I think my joke just went over your head. 


(Psst... you said ESTP's take the piss out of people. I took the piss out of your biased type promotion. God it ruins the joke when you have to explain it.)


----------



## MNiS (Jan 30, 2010)

monemi said:


> I think my joke just went over your head.
> 
> 
> (Psst... you said ESTP's take the piss out of people. I took the piss out of your biased type promotion. God it ruins the joke when you have to explain it.)


Well if you can think of a way to explain what I was saying without it sounding like self-promotion then I'm all ears.  Calling it taking the piss out of people is a pretty good way to describe what ESTPs do though, hahah.

Okay, how about this:

ESTP comedy involves poking fun at others and really roasting a person as a means to show off the full spectrum of their wit.

The self-promotion part is very true though. That's hallmark ESTP. If they're good at something, _everyone_ will know about it. ESTPs know how the get the word out about themselves. I don't mean in a bragging manner either, somehow everyone will just know whatever it is the ESTP wants everyone to know. I guess maybe a 6w5 ESTP and few other types might not be so willing, but otherwise I think that's pretty damn true.


----------



## Grandmaster Yoda (Jan 18, 2014)

Siouxsie said:


> This thread is amazing.


Shhh....
*reading*
Se Fi Te Ni
This is an ESFP. Primarily focused on their experience and seek new ones as they navigate through life....


----------



## JackSparroww (Dec 10, 2010)

MNiS said:


> I think the only thing you've proven is that you aren't all too bright.


You need to stop judging otherwise the eyes will stay that way


----------



## MNiS (Jan 30, 2010)

JackSparroww said:


> You need to stop judging otherwise the eyes will stay that way


Anyone with half a brain wouldn't accept that guy's argument as anything remotely intelligent or even a cogent argument. So yeah, I was judging the argument to be stupid.

Unless you think the guy was making a sound argument in which case, I'd worry for you.


----------



## JackSparroww (Dec 10, 2010)

MNiS said:


> Anyone with half a brain wouldn't accept that guy's argument as anything remotely intelligent or even a cogent argument. So yeah, I was judging the argument to be stupid.


And anyone with balls would just not care


----------



## MNiS (Jan 30, 2010)

JackSparroww said:


> And anyone with balls would just not care


You mean someone with no balls or brain just wouldn't care.

It's easier to not care than to not accept bullshit.


----------



## JackSparroww (Dec 10, 2010)

MNiS said:


> You mean someone with no balls or brain just wouldn't care.
> 
> It's easier to not care than to not accept bullshit.


Spoken like a true politician


----------



## MNiS (Jan 30, 2010)

JackSparroww said:


> Spoken like a true politician


Thanks. 

Although I'm not a political person.


----------



## Schweeeeks (Feb 12, 2013)

Actually...Sherlock Holmes is a great example of a genius Sensor. Arthur Conan Doyle's books were so revolutionary that shows/movies still explain mysteries in a similar way. Uneducated people probably type him as INTJ, but he is clear xSTJ (and LSE in Socionics DA thinking - Find the truth by eliminating inaccuracies).
Putting down quotes that show Sensor over Intuition in spoilers. I wish I could find an actual example of him solving a crime to post here.


* *





"It is a capital mistake to theorize before you have all the evidence. It biases the judgment."
"Let me run over the principal steps. We approached the case, you remember, with an absolutely blank mind, which is always an advantage. We had formed no theories. We were simply there to observe and to draw inferences from our observations."
"There is nothing like first-hand evidence."
"You know my method. It is founded upon the observation of trifles." (Also "Little things are the most important")
"The world is full of obvious things which nobody by any chance ever observes."
"I have already explained to you that what is out of the common is usually a guide rather than a hindrance."
Sherlock Holmes Quotes - Sherlock Holmes on Deduction and Deductive Reasoning

"Eliminate all other factors, and the one which remains must be the truth." (however improbable) - DA Thinking 



So much Si/Ne. Anyway sorry for derailing OP! I can't find a quotable example of Se brilliance off the bat, but I have seen it first hand. Maybe MacGyver would work? He's good at grabbing what's in front of him to invent exactly what the situation calls for. Then again I haven't watched any of it, so grain of salt.


----------



## XZ9 (Nov 16, 2013)

Oh you guys failed to see the bigger picture in my argument ironically for the posters who are S. The bigger picture is that even when SP's are at the _top of their game_ in education and learning by the time they're done graduating, they still fall short in verbal test scores. Even the best of the best SP's, the smartest of the smart, they fall short. Bahhaha, how stupid is it for posters to call spite the me. It's just makes you look extra stupid.


----------



## MNiS (Jan 30, 2010)

@_Schweeeeks_ 

Those are both fictional characters.

Bill Clinton and Mitt Romney would both be examples of intelligent sensors. Se and Si respectively to give you an idea of the contrast between the two functions.


----------



## XZ9 (Nov 16, 2013)

[No message]


----------



## JackSparroww (Dec 10, 2010)

Great_Thinker said:


> Oh you guys failed to see the bigger picture in my argument ironically for the posters who are S. The bigger picture is that even when SP's are at the _top of their game_ in education and learning by the time they're done graduating, they still fall short in verbal test scores. Even the best of the best SP's, the smartest of the smart, they fall short. Bahhaha, how stupid is it for posters to spite the me. It's just makes you look extra stupid.


I'll pm you something big


----------



## MNiS (Jan 30, 2010)

Great_Thinker said:


> Oh you guys failed to see the bigger picture in my argument ironically for the posters who are S. The bigger picture is that even when SP's are at the _top of their game_ in education and learning by the time they're done graduating, they still fall short in verbal test scores. Even the best of the best SP's, the smartest of the smart, they fall short. Bahhaha, how stupid is it for posters to call spite the me. It's just makes you look extra stupid.


I think you're just unintelligent with your stereotypes and trolling and no one particularly cares about your views which is why no one responds to you. 

Of course you won't actually respond to any of what I wrote because you're a troll and can't back any of your idiotic statements with anything factual, reasonable or rational.


----------



## Flaming Bassoon (Feb 15, 2013)

Great_Thinker said:


> Oh you guys failed to see the bigger picture in my argument ironically for the posters who are S.


Isn't seeing the big picture an N thing, not S? S's see details.


----------



## beth x (Mar 4, 2010)

Thread warning:

Please refrain from calling each other stupid whether implied or not. There are nicer ways to disagree and this is a good opportunity for people to understand typism and stereotyping. Try to keep an open mind and amiability towards each other.


----------



## B00Bz (Jul 11, 2013)

Great_Thinker said:


> How about let me set the conditions of what counts as "smart."


How about not.


----------



## TurtleQueen (Nov 8, 2014)

I'm not sure if I would feel all that great about being friends with someone who decided to do something potentially risky (you gave an example of "starting a fight") all the time. I'm pretty conflict averse, so I don't like the idea of someone starting a fight with some random stranger. Sure, you might feel okay about it. But what if the person you fight turns out to be a psycho and stabs you or something? You wouldn't know that would happen. What if I get dragged into some weird, potentially risky shit? I wouldn't feel cool about that possibility.

I don't know that much about your type, but I wouldn't feel that cool with someone doing physically risky things a lot of the time. Not because I think you're dumb intellectually, but it doesn't make much sense for me (as risk-averse as I am) to do potentially risky stuff on purpose. When I care about someone, I dislike it when they involve themselves in risky situations that don't make sense to me. Sometimes my mom and sister can get involved in an argument with some random jerk who decides to say something rude to them for whatever reason at a public place like an amusement park. And I just feel weird about it because I don't know if that random dumbass is going to end up acting like a psycho. As long as you didn't do this kind of thing all the time and were able to handle the consequences of your choices, I would feel perfectly fine with you as a person. I would dislike it if your potentially risky decisions actually ever made me unsafe. But in general, I don't like it when people I care about make decisions that seem risky to me.


----------



## B00Bz (Jul 11, 2013)

Great_Thinker said:


> Oh you guys failed to see the bigger picture in my argument ironically for the posters who are S. The bigger picture is that even when SP's are at the _top of their game in education and learning by the time they're done graduating, they still fall short in verbal test scores. *Even the best of the best SP's, the smartest of the smart, they fall short.* Bahhaha, how stupid is it for posters to spite the me. It's just makes you look extra stupid._


Do you have proof for this, and by what criteria do you consider them the best of the best? A house built on bologna will be easily knocked down.


----------



## B00Bz (Jul 11, 2013)

JackSparroww said:


> I'll pm you something big


Hahaha I <3 you


----------



## JoelleESFP (Nov 13, 2014)

I really like this thread and in reply to the original post, 
I would one hundred percent agree. I am constantly written off as simple and naive but my closest friends know I usually have a purpose. Now my brother and best friend is an ESTP and he always has a purpose in his actions though they are sometimes extreme and crazy. However, my only explanation is sometimes that I just wanted to have fun and bring others along for the fun. This in itself is also a purpose and it matches my values yet it is not nearly as credible as it could be. 

But it is very true that public embarrassment is merely a stage for me and risk taking is my second nature. I thrive in environments where friends respect me through the fun and crazy. Yet I do just fine with people who look down on me for acting out of the norm because I'm usually enjoying myself in the moment much more than they are and I never really did care about their opinions anyways.


----------



## JoelleESFP (Nov 13, 2014)

TurtleQueen said:


> I don't like it when people I care about make decisions that seem risky to me.


To me risk taking is part of my love for life. When I am around people who do not feel comfortable with this I do try to respect it yet I can't help but feel stifled and held back.


----------

