# It's no wonder 99.9% of people identify as N types. I'm done.



## Oprah (Feb 5, 2014)

Every N description I've read is basically just saying that N types are only slightly short of geniuses. They're so special. They're the most intelligent. They're the most creative. They're the most x, y, z, l, m, n, o, p. 

You read the description and you get a little butterfly in your stomach and you feel a surge of pride: _"omg I always knew I was an undiscovered genius and smarter than everyone else!"_ 

I can say from first-hand experience that reading S descriptions and reading N descriptions... it's *CLEAR* that most people would choose to call themselves N if they had the choice because the descriptions are SO much better. 

N types are described as God's gift to the earth in type descriptions whereas Sensors are _"the rest."_


Then throw in the fact that N types are less common and ~*♥☼UNIQUE☼♥*~ and the rodeo is off. That's it. 


*"Oh so it says I'm an undiscovered genius, AND I'm unique? SIGN ME UP!!! I'M AN INTUITIVE TYPE!"*


People try to justify it whenever this issue is brought up by saying _"oh well in X community N types would be more common"_ well NO. because literally every single internet community I've been on is exactly the same. 99% N types, maybe 2 or 3 people with S types. 

Similar here.
YouTube comments where random vloggers ask their viewers to take the test.
Any social media.
REAL LIFE.
etc. 




So I'm done. 
I'm not going to be defined by a type. I'm going to let my actions and accomplishments define me instead of whatever type I think sounds the most flattering.


----------



## Purrfessor (Jul 30, 2013)

Type descriptions and tests are bullshit.


----------



## Apple Pine (Nov 27, 2014)

I doubt you are done, now you are just trying to show your intelligence. lol.


----------



## Convex (Jan 5, 2015)

You're late.


----------



## Oprah (Feb 5, 2014)

Mantas said:


> I doubt you are done, now you are just trying to show your intelligence. lol.


I am done. I haven't posted here in MONTHS.
If I were trying to "show my intelligence" I would pretend to be an xNTx type (or xNFJ type) and parade around on here calling sensors stupid like so many other people already do.

The reason I'm here is that I just saw someone mention MBTI somewhere else online and remembered that I had a stint on this site about a year ago. 

I had finally figured out how to articulate my distaste for everything, and decided to come back and express it.


----------



## Oprah (Feb 5, 2014)

Convex said:


> You're late.


so this issue has already been solved?
Or is the breakdown still 99.99% N types 0.01% S types?


----------



## Apple Pine (Nov 27, 2014)

Oprah said:


> I am done. I haven't posted here in MONTHS.
> If I were trying to "show my intelligence" I would pretend to be an xNTx type (or xNFJ type) and parade around on here calling sensors stupid like so many other people already do.
> 
> The reason I'm here is that I just saw someone mention MBTI somewhere else online and remembered that I had a stint on this site about a year ago.
> ...


You'll come here again, to express something. lol.


----------



## xraydav (Jan 3, 2013)

I think is because true intuitive types are so underappreciated in society, that these descriptions try and try to "compensate" for that continual SJ psychic oppression against us intuitive types.

Anyway, as was said before, descriptions of MBTI types and MBTI 'tests' are usually innaccurate or highly circumstantial/subjective. Jungian functions are much more interesting and evidence/theory-based.


----------



## charlie.elliot (Jan 22, 2014)

Hahaha so true, this is particularly true if you read Keirsey. Its really bad in the Idealist (NF) section because his wife's an NF and he's like "never had I met such an amazing person" or something and there's a quote about Gandhi that's like "never such a great man had walked the earth" etc. 
Kinda funny when I try to reconcile that with all the dickhead asshole NFs I know...


----------



## xraydav (Jan 3, 2013)

Oprah said:


> so this issue has already been solved?
> Or is the breakdown still 99.99% N types 0.01% S types?


lol well studies of the population of people who type as N types and S types, are definitely not in your favour. SJs tend to be the most common, and there was a tiny proportion of INFPs, like other N types. 

Maybe, it's just on these forums that we don't find as much S types, because S types tend not to 'prefer' talking about ideas and feelings, rather they have an inclination toward physical practices and events and other types of involvement.This would make more sense in theory, but I guess it's a harsh truth as well.


----------



## Oprah (Feb 5, 2014)

AverOblivious said:


> continual SJ psychic oppression against us intuitive types.


----------



## Oprah (Feb 5, 2014)

AverOblivious said:


> S types tend not to 'prefer' talking about ideas and feelings


Whatever helps you feel superior.


----------



## Oprah (Feb 5, 2014)

I can't even tell if you're serious or if you're trolling in order to fit you _"lol I'm an ENTP so I troll all the time!!! I'M SOOO WACKY!!!"_ quota.


----------



## xraydav (Jan 3, 2013)

Oprah said:


> Whatever helps you feel superior.


the funny thing about people who come onto PerC and complain about Jungian-MBTI theory. Like why did you even come onto PerC (which is aimed at MBTI)?? 



Oprah said:


> I can't even tell if you're serious or if you're trolling in order to fit you _"lol I'm an ENTP so I troll all the time!!! I'M SOOO WACKY!!!"_ quota.


No. This is how I talk/appear all the time. I guarantee you that, even before 'MBTI'. Like this, I think i seem to have a similiar effect on some arrogant persons in my life. Anyway, even I know that MBTI is just one interpretation of what's inside me, and that's like any other system of psychological 'types'. 

also, I am skeptical of everything myself. So go figure.


----------



## Oprah (Feb 5, 2014)

AverOblivious said:


> the funny thing about people who come onto PerC and complain about Jungian-MBTI theory. Like why did you even come onto PerC (which is aimed at MBTI)??
> 
> 
> 
> ...


No. I'm critiquing MBTI. I've been a member here almost 2 years so I'm not "randomly coming in"

And like I said. You yourself commented about how _"Sensors don't like to talk about ideas or feelings"_ and in my opinion it demonstrates a need for you to feel superior and "better" than other people.


----------



## 1000BugsNightSky (May 8, 2014)

As an ENFP, do you feel superior?


----------



## Purrfessor (Jul 30, 2013)

Every response from an "N" lol. 

I guess this makes me the elite 0.01%


----------



## Oprah (Feb 5, 2014)

Earthious said:


> As an ENFP, do you feel superior?


thank you for proving my point!
When I was a member here I had limited myself to only considering N types because the descriptions were so much better. 

I know from experience that a ton of people here are doing the same~


----------



## Oprah (Feb 5, 2014)

Stelliferous said:


> Every response from an "N" lol.
> 
> I guess this makes me the elite 0.01%


seems like they're trying to justify themselves after getting caught.


----------



## xraydav (Jan 3, 2013)

Oprah said:


> And like I said. You yourself commented about how _"Sensors don't like to talk about ideas or feelings"_ and in my opinion it demonstrates a need for you to feel superior and "better" than other people.


According to MBTI, they have an inclination against pursuits about ideas and other more contemplative ideas, we intuitives talk about on PerC. If you want to test the theory, you can stay on these forums for 2 more years, and find out yourself, because clearly you haven't been on here long enough to know how disproportionate the number of Sensors are to iNtuitives, especially in iNtuitive forums, where mostly reflective ideas/feelings are talked about.

Good luck driving more potential friends and connections and other people away though.


----------



## Korvyna (Dec 4, 2009)

Fairly positive that I'm an N, but certainly no genius, definitely gravitate more towards a creative brain than a genius one. :laughing: Someone else said they wished they were an ESTP, and I'd have to agree with that, too. 

As others have said, I've always used MBTI more as a guide to understand people and why I get along so well with some, and struggle with others. For instance, my husband is your stereotypical INTJ. I've learned not to engage in debates with him, when he is adamant that he is right and there is no other options that could be right as well... If I don't let it go and keep trying to present him new findings, he will dig for days just to disprove what I've shown him. So there are times where I have just learned to let it go with him.


----------



## Caraxor (Apr 21, 2015)

(There's a lot of people reading this)
First off, I think you are justified in hating the descriptions of S types. It does make sense for people to feel more special when they are part of the "Idealists" and "Rationalists" rather than the "Guardians" and "Artisans". It doesn't help that Si types are seen to only be good at enforcing rules and is always afraid of the future, nor is it good that Se types are seen to only be able to think in the moment and somehow have their five senses enhanced (as if to compensate for their intelligence). 

When I did the test for the first time, I had no previous experience with the MBTI. I just wondered if science had managed to classify the complex personalities of human beings. But in my first few weeks with MBTI there is a clear bias favoring N types, with IN being the most "intelligent" and "rare" types while still being able to dominate sites like these. (Slayerment's bias to N types definitely didn't help)

But in time when you get more interested in the subject and want to delve into its contents more you start to dispel the stereotypes and illusions and find information is more reliable. Michael Pierce's videos helped me in appreciating the S types. His description of ISTPs made them look like bad asses, he made ESFPs more deep and complex than just crazy dumb people who party all the time and ISFJs as people I'd rather be with than INFJs. The celebritytypes.com also showed variety, where not all scientists are INTPs, not all generals are INTJs, not all writers and musicians are INFPs and not all social activists are INFJs.

Like charlie elliot said, every type has good and bad points to it. In the same way where you can't say all Americans are fat and stupid when you only see one acting like so, it's not fair to criticize MBTI based on a few descriptions


----------



## Angina Jolie (Feb 13, 2014)

Stelliferous said:


> No N types are not more interested in the system, though I could agree there are more N types on the internet. Or rather, living on the internet with a social identity... Because everybody uses the internet.
> 
> The system is abstract yes, but N does not equal interest on the abstract, it equals interest in unknown possibilities, which of course a system like this brings. S types are interested in usefulness of information, abstract or not. The system is obviously useful as it allows the growth of communication between different people. There's no reason S types would stray from learning about the system. They would however stray from being a part of an online community because it's filled with ego-stroking instead of learning/sharing, which is useless in itself except for those who experience depression or loneliness or really any sort of feeling they want to escape from. That was after all why I joined in the first place. And when the social status isn't needed any longer, this place feels useless.
> 
> Just remember though that online community does not equal MBTI community, and lots and lots of sensors are interested in the system.


Ehh, I'm sorry but I don't see any reasoning for this. N types flock to such forums cuz it sattisfies their for ego stroking? I could understand Fi needing that but how does preference for taking in certain information equal ego stroking, whichh is usually related to validation - judgement?

Everything also seems simply thrown upside-down too. I mean, if there's reasoning - sure.


----------



## Purrfessor (Jul 30, 2013)

Shameless Nation said:


> Ehh, I'm sorry but I don't see any reasoning for this. N equals need for ego stroking? I could understand Fi needing that but how does preference for taking in certain information equal ego stroking, whichh is usually related to validation - judgement?
> 
> Everything also seems simply thrown upside-down too. I mean, if there's reasoning - sure.


No I didn't say N is ego-stroking. I said the ego stroking is why I came here (and I'm an S so not sure where you got that from). And the not needing it any longer is a reason to disappear because to an S if there is no use for being here then being here feels wrong.


----------



## Angina Jolie (Feb 13, 2014)

Stelliferous said:


> No I didn't say N is ego-stroking. I said the ego stroking is why I came here (and I'm an S so not sure where you got that from). And the not needing it any longer is a reason to disappear because to an S if there is no use for being here then being here feels wrong.


Uhh, ok. Yeah, I misunderstood that. Then I understand.


----------



## The_Wanderer (Jun 13, 2013)

Type descriptions are stupid and so are people who think Intuition is a byword for intelligence.


----------



## Grandmaster Yoda (Jan 18, 2014)

Welcome back, this is gonna energize the community. It's like having a long dead feminist come back to life and start talking about feminism again.


----------



## UnicornRainbowLove (May 8, 2014)

Stelliferous said:


> No N types are not more interested in the system, though I could agree there are more N types on the internet. Or rather, living on the internet with a social identity... Because everybody uses the internet.
> 
> The system is abstract yes, but N does not equal interest on the abstract, it equals interest in unknown possibilities, which of course a system like this brings. S types are interested in usefulness of information, abstract or not. The system is obviously useful as it allows the growth of communication between different people. There's no reason S types would stray from learning about the system. They would however stray from being a part of an online community because it's filled with ego-stroking instead of learning/sharing, which is useless in itself except for those who experience depression or loneliness or really any sort of feeling they want to escape from. That was after all why I joined in the first place. And when the social status isn't needed any longer, this place feels useless.
> 
> Just remember though that online community does not equal MBTI community, and lots and lots of sensors are interested in the system.


There is some ego-stroking appearing on the forum, particularly as some take pride in the general description of their type, of how cool or unique one of their functions is, or the level of intelligence or creativity which their type entitles them to be - not to mention how others are put down for not possessing the same qualities. 
However, while a lot of typology talk is curled up into a broken yet nostalgic Narcissus mirror, there are also some truths (or rather average truths) out there. I am most certainly not denying that many if not most N types pride themselves outwardly or inwardly about their intuition, but it shouldn't overshadow the fact that N types are grossly over-represented in communities like this one. I doubt that any data pool will say otherwise - particularly when accounting for population frequency. There are S types who like typology, but they're heavily outnumbered.


----------



## Purrfessor (Jul 30, 2013)

UnicornRainbowLove said:


> There is some ego-stroking appearing on the forum, particularly as some take pride in the general description of their type, of how cool or unique one of their functions is, or the level of intelligence or creativity which their type entitles them to be - not to mention how others are put down for not possessing the same qualities.
> However, while a lot of typology talk is curled up into a broken yet nostalgic Narcissus mirror, there are also some truths (or rather average truths) out there. I am most certainly not denying that many if not most N types pride themselves outwardly or inwardly about their intuition, but it shouldn't overshadow the fact that N types are grossly over-represented in communities like this one. I doubt that any data pool will say otherwise - particularly when accounting for population frequency. There are S types who like typology, but they're heavily outnumbered.


Data pool based on what? Self typing? When the tests show bias for N? Unreliable data if you ask me.


----------



## Vermillion (Jan 22, 2012)

Some silly self-identified intuitives here being like "lol harsh truth accept your weaknesses lol ~~theory~~"

Stereotypes, statistics, tests -- all bullshit. Sadly MBTI is full of them. That's why I don't look at this subforum much any more.

Socionics is WAY better. Mostly every type is equally glorified there. I'm an ESFp and the descriptions talk about me like I'm some kind of queen. It's hilarious.


----------



## charlie.elliot (Jan 22, 2014)

ScientiaOmnisEst said:


> Also, reposting this: The Intuitive Bias - What's my MBTI?


That article is so perfect I'm just going to post it all like this in case people are too lazy to click--



> If you are…
> 
> ENTJ: You are an amazing lightning-calculator of optimal allocations of capital and labor resources in grand global corporate or military undertakings. Your only weakness is that you are just so amazing and competent at everything that you often lose track of your ~feelings~
> 
> ...


----------



## UnicornRainbowLove (May 8, 2014)

Stelliferous said:


> Data pool based on what? Self typing? When the tests show bias for N? Unreliable data if you ask me.


Why shouldn't it simply be the case that the data is correctly representing which types that are more likely to seek out typology forums? Shouldn't it make sense that since there are different types that they also have different interests? 

Even if the data is unreliable, it's still 90% or so N types, so you'll need extraordinarily good arguments to brush it aside. Do you even feel that there are many S people in here?



Night Huntress said:


> Some silly self-identified intuitives here being like "lol harsh truth accept your weaknesses lol ~~theory~~"


Funny thing is that S types are described as not as trusting of theory as intuitors. Your whole position is very S like. I can't really argue against it on your terms as I have no idea how to... anecdotally?


----------



## Caneaster (Jan 18, 2015)

Oprah said:


> Every N description I've read is basically just saying that N types are only slightly short of geniuses. They're so special. They're the most intelligent. They're the most creative. They're the most x, y, z, l, m, n, o, p.
> 
> You read the description and you get a little butterfly in your stomach and you feel a surge of pride: _"omg I always knew I was an undiscovered genius and smarter than everyone else!"_
> 
> ...


So you (rightfully) don't like it and therefore your answer is to run away from it rather than to try reform it or at least contribute against those silly descriptions and stereotypes? I mean, I get where you're coming from as a lot of worthless people do try to find superiority in their type rather than understanding but I disagree with your response as running away will change absolutely nothing.

Also, there is a difference between categorizing someone by type and defining that person by that type. A file that begins with the letter X will be sorted into the "X" section but that sortation does not define the file itself. I think anyone using a personality type to define themselves really hasn't got a clue to begin with.


----------



## Purrfessor (Jul 30, 2013)

UnicornRainbowLove said:


> Why shouldn't it simply be the case that the data is correctly representing which types that are more likely to seek out typology forums? Shouldn't it make sense that since there are different types that they also have different interests?
> 
> Even if the data is unreliable, it's still 90% or so N types, so you'll need extraordinarily good arguments to brush it aside. Do you even feel that there are many S people in here?
> 
> ...


Yes I do feel there are many S types on this forum wearing N as their label for multiple reasons involving mistyping, lack of credible unbiased typing resources, and herd mentality that is a phenomenon among social circles. I won't name any names as to who exactly I believe is mislabeled, but there are a considerable amount of suspects. I don't think it's 90% N at all around here. Probably more like 65-70 - and it's closer to 50 when dealing with communities that aren't based online. 

The data says one thing, but it disregards a LOT of variables and it's not as simple as explaining the discrepancy as a mere preference of interest among a specific type, because S types DO have interest in this sort of thing (yes I do agree there is a difference in interest however the difference of interest is not a factor due to the appealing nature of typology to both S and N types).


----------



## Vermillion (Jan 22, 2012)

UnicornRainbowLove said:


> Funny thing is that S types are described as not as trusting of theory as intuitors. Your whole position is very S like. I can't really argue against it on your terms as I have no idea how to... anecdotally?


I trust theory which is intelligently put together, as I hope anyone would, if they had their wits together. Hence I find it silly that some self-typed intuitives here are defending badly-defined concepts and stereotypes because it benefits them.


----------



## shameless (Apr 21, 2014)

Oprah said:


> Every N description I've read is basically just saying that N types are only slightly short of geniuses. They're so special. They're the most intelligent. They're the most creative. They're the most x, y, z, l, m, n, o, p.
> 
> You read the description and you get a little butterfly in your stomach and you feel a surge of pride: _"omg I always knew I was an undiscovered genius and smarter than everyone else!"_
> 
> ...


Thank you! An intuitive that is not in denial of this epidemic. I appreciate it. Please carry on & continue pointing the elephant in the room out to all the unicorns in denial.

Don't mind me anyone I am just your average dumb ordinary everyday sensor.


----------



## Choice (May 19, 2012)

Amaranthine said:


> Tbh I'd rather be an ESTP


Ooh, and why might that be?


----------



## shameless (Apr 21, 2014)

A song appropriate for the thread.


----------



## Apple Pine (Nov 27, 2014)




----------



## Vermillion (Jan 22, 2012)

Tbh I don't know what possessed me to post here, what a bad decision. The dark days of my past resurface. Ew.


----------



## stargazing grasshopper (Oct 25, 2013)

Cinnamon83 said:


> :blushed: See I cant understand online tone half the time.


 Maybe it's not actually you.

No worries though, merely cracking a joke. 
Not that you need cheering up or anything, I just wanted to cause you happy smiles.



I see you've settled on an extroverted type, what do you think of this sensor type video?


----------



## valkyrie0o (Jul 19, 2013)

by now I think everyone knows that half the internet descriptions out there are bullshit, the best i have come across so far was the stellar maze, read it and check how he just butcher every type around lol
Every type has their up and down, but i honestly think S are more equipped to deal with life, so testifies my inferior Se


----------



## PrinceAngel (Jan 3, 2014)

i mean, i think she does have a point tbh. i always say that tests AND MBTI descriptions are written BY intuitive people, which causes a big problem; mostly any person who does them (or read about them) would come off as intuitive.

this is why i really like EJ (why does his full name get automatically censored? ) and michael pierce (both on youtube) cause they give each type a full unique description. (and notice how they go to precise details in types without vague generalizations.)

its really a shame that people stereotype what N and S is, considering we have two types of N and S in the first place; in other words, if you really want to figure your type, you HAVE to read about the cognitive functions. unevitable.


----------



## Khiro (Nov 28, 2012)

Stop whining, you ass.


----------



## great_pudgy_owl (Apr 20, 2015)

Oprah said:


> Every N description I've read is basically just saying that N types are only slightly short of geniuses. They're so special. They're the most intelligent. They're the most creative. They're the most x, y, z, l, m, n, o, p.
> 
> You read the description and you get a little butterfly in your stomach and you feel a surge of pride: _"omg I always knew I was an undiscovered genius and smarter than everyone else!"_
> 
> ...


I think it would be so cool to be an istp, estj, isfj, they get terrible raps. Sherlock's superpower to remember and spit back facts and things he notices have always seemed much more S to me and it's magical (I'm aware the ability to appreciate the concrete vs. abstract is stereotypical of course). Type descriptions are crap, and I completely agree the N descriptions in particular seem to paint anyone who uses Ni or Ne as almost a special separate caste in themselves. 

In case I sound hypocritical, it took me forever to decide if I use the functions in the order of an infp's because of it, largely because the descriptions make it sound a bit gross and very DELUSIONAL. I also possess a very average intelligence, imagine that. I wish I was Sherlock


----------



## Parrot (Feb 22, 2015)

@Oprah I'm a little late to the party, so if you're still around, I'll say I agree with you. I used to think being an iNtuitive was so much better but there are so many things that I do terribly with. Society wise, it's probably a 3-1 split of S-N. Simply put, the world needs more sensors than intuitive types. While it might seem boring, on the surface, sensors are much more practical in what they perceive. As an ENTP, I would not want to flip my function stack and become an ISFJ, but neither would I expect them to do the same. Every type, when mature, has a unique cognitive skill set that is useful to the world. 

Some traits I admire of Si:
1. I can remember some details, well, but only because I'm slightly autistic. I remember concepts though, rather than actual sensory data. I wish I can remember what something specifically looks like. I always hated the "ISpy" books.
2. My Ti likes to notice inconsistencies, but I can be completely oblivious to the specific details.
3. I can do a piss poor job of following directions.

Some traits I admire of Se:
1. Living in the moment - I wish I could turn off my brain and enjoy the moment. I might be raging hard at a party, but still thinking of philosophical concepts. Sometimes I'd rather just enjoy the girl's ass I'm looking at rather than breaking down the variables of how she crafted it.
2. Noticing actual differences. SPs can quickly tell my brother and I are related by noticing the similarity of our facial features. SJs can do it decently, but I notice N types do things the hard way by considering behavior, for example. Dammit, we have the exact same nose, it's not that complex.
3. Opportunistic. Se can seize the day like no other. I analyze too much, which is why I was never as successful in sales.
4. Comfort in the environment. I walk into a new place and have to analyze all the aspects of who the people are and why things are that way. An SP just walks into that place and thinks "Oh, this is a barbershop, time to get my hair done".

The criticism of S types is they need more prodding to consider deep hypothetical matters. Although N types are quick to discuss such topics, there is something rewarding about getting my SP friends to discuss deep topics. The reward is due to how rare it is, which makes the discussion's timeframe more valuable.


----------



## overlordlegacy (Aug 22, 2012)

Oprah said:


> So I'm done.
> I'm not going to be defined by a type. I'm going to let my actions and accomplishments define me instead of whatever type I think sounds the most flattering.


I'd like to start out by pointing out that your quote is almost word for word what many of my S friends say about the Myers-Briggs.

Secondly, I've studied the MBTI on my own for quite some time and I have to say that the Myers Briggs test is terrible and the letter's don't really explain different personalities. For example... my result was ENTP which stands for the functions Ne-Ti-Fe-Si. Those functions are the 'true' Myers Briggs in my experience and notice how I have both (N)e and (S)i in my personality. In fact we all have both N and S to varying degrees. By assigning you an N or S, it looks like the MBTI is saying you are only one or the other when it actually means which one is more dominant in you.

Going further all the possible N and S functions consist of Si, Se, Ne, and Ni (Introverted and Extraverted Sensing or Intuition).
And I have found it easiest to identify whether someone is N or S based on functions which represent a tendency to live in a certain frame of time.

Si - They live in the past. As such, their memories of past events shared with friends are extraordinary. They love pictures and to keepsakes that facilitate this. They also tend to keep traditions such as family and holiday traditions therefore reliving past memories. If this is like you chances are you are an S or more particularly an SJ.

Se - They live in the present. As such, they tend to be the party animals, performers, and sports players. They enjoy activities that require them to be fully present in-the-moment like these. If this is like you then chances are you are also an S or more particularly an SP.

Ne - They live in the future. As such they tend to look situations in life saying 'how can this be better tomorrow', 'what will I be doing in 10 years', 'where is the world headed etc'. As such these types enjoy things like Sci-Fi which generally depict the space age of tomorrow. If this is like you chances are you are an N or more specifically an NP

Ni - They are the rarest type and kind of step back and look at life as a whole. Therefore they look at past present and live toward the future. It's pretty difficult to put their behavior in a box in just a few words so I won't try here. But if you aren't like one of the above them maybe this could be you.

And in my observation of many other N's... unless you have either felt like a complete misfit, constantly questioned the way things were done and what adults taught you, or thought a lot about where the world is headed, chances are you are not an N.


----------



## likeSEEPINGwater (Feb 22, 2009)

Lord Fudgingsley said:


> There are aspects of iNtuitives that Sensors will never, or at least struggle to comprehend. I cannot fathom the way Sensors (particularly Se) see things; as interesting as it is. I think there will always be a barrier, though typism should never be encouraged. We've somehow gone from iNtuitives being primarily focused on things that could be present (rather than what is present) to iNtuitives being able to sense perfectly and to think abstractly; the latter being much unlike Sensors, who sort of... wander blindly.
> 
> I have no idea how any of this unfathomable happened. It's like having a philosophical debate with a drunkard, who got so drunk that his brain turned to piss.


This discussion could actually be continued within the Socionic Quadra framework.
...Lets say that outwardly media visible and party culture bias are dominated by Sensors and that culture-molding bias presents as Sensors toward and against the Intuitive.

In academic subculture (and it would seem as the OP has said in 'forums too') the Intuitive versus the lesser sensor designated characteristics prevail.

Though lets however admit some may be (in both arena's above mentioned) vain glorifying and airing of tensions built up. i.e. the sensor as a type of female really wants to be lavished by Ntive dick rather than climbing a false hierarchy ladder in social standing and still be used-&-"lonelified" by other sensors who really fit into another of the eight crags of intve--nani.

....lol, perhaps a bit too far. Let me not find the highest tree from which to fling--it in the prior view.(Rick's socionics.us is really a good intro{and has original Gulenko material translated on quadra}). Let's briefly look at the 4 quadrants.(taken from wiki)


1Alpha2Beta3Gamma4DeltaILE (ENTP)SEI (ISFP)
ESE (ESFJ)
LII (INTJ)EIE (ENFJ)LSI (ISTJ)
SLE (ESTP)
IEI (INFP)SEE (ESFP)ILI (INTP)
LIE (ENTJ)
ESI (ISFJ)LSE (ESTJ)EII (INFJ)
IEE (ENFP)
SLI (ISTP)

Alpha's - 'firstlings', self [developing] directed, ..true of ENTP's I know, and that other introvert intuitive class who really like to leave other intro-tuitives in the dust [cause it can be done, most just don't know how or that it really is just about mastery of the world belt].
Beta's - This is actually the group I hate, and responsible for most popular out culture bias against Intuitives. What would one say of ENFJ's, are they oblivious to themselves, do they falsely foster or are they the centre's of out culture groups, balancing group sense[beyond mtbi/scncs dichotomy, merely as an organismal necessity], yet doing nothing to foster tolerance and acceptance of intuitives? you tell me. Of the INFP, these introverted feelers seem to chase around in the half shadows, and natural 'first psychologists, little of the "adjusting to social-hood crisis of other intuitives"'
Gamma's - the break-down, catabolizing so as to generate group. I'm yes, critic. The ENTJ notes order and makes it more efficient [so as popularily said, to generate molla therefrom], and in the gamma's sensors are ambivalence as from territoriality to their own--at a stage, though they can become lost if their NT duals don't step upto the plate.
Delta's - consolidators. Well they'd consolidate feed Alpha trend, but really they just side with whoever wins the Gamma and Beta or Intuitive Sensor superiority fight................well a short analytic
perhaps some tolerance for migration and pollination (as it doesn't have to be won within social dynamics, but the world does have to be mastered, and perspectives and group contribution make for such)


----------



## sleepingdragon83 (Mar 1, 2011)

I was thinking the same thing actually. Almost everyone I know who takes the test online test as "N" simply because of how some of the questions are worded. Then they feel all proud of themselves for not scoring as "S" because of all the reasons that have already been posted above. This has made me question (not for the first time) my type as well. I always considered myself with high "Ne" but seriously, what do I know? I could very well be a mistyped ISFP or ISFJ for all I know.

It annoys me that so many people favor N. I admit I fell for that when I first started studying Myers Briggs, but the more I learned and observed how S works the more I respect it and understand how a lot of people are mistyped "S" types.


----------



## yentipeee (Jun 19, 2013)

stargazing grasshopper said:


> Maybe it's not actually you.
> 
> No worries though, merely cracking a joke.
> Not that you need cheering up or anything, I just wanted to cause you happy smiles.
> ...


You don't have to believe everything you see on youtube, Amazon CEO jeff bezos is a classic ENTP


----------



## shameless (Apr 21, 2014)

stargazing grasshopper said:


> Maybe it's not actually you.
> 
> No worries though, merely cracking a joke.
> Not that you need cheering up or anything, I just wanted to cause you happy smiles.
> ...


I believe I like ISTJs I think they are those kind of people I can probably distinguish in my life as more memorable based on the the level of integrity and how solid they seem. I guess I see my subconscious or alter ego as relating to this personality type much like IxFJs. I think most of the people who have struck a chord with me were STJs & IxFJs in regards to integrity. I think alot of it resonates with me internally (obviously I am more like a chaotic or evil good while they are stable good lol) But just mean in a shadowy way. 

I am not sure tho that I think I have had much of an issue with ISTJs myself like how he discusses at the end, as that they have been rubbed wrong by me. Thinking like highschool and work settings I think my level of obnoxiousness can irritate the same sex (not the opposite sex as much). Its interesting he said they are most likely to not get along its often listed many places that the two polar opposites are compatible and complimentary matches. I have nothing to compare to with that myself tho never been that close to one. But as I said I actually have alot of respect for ISTJs that stick out to me and usually think highly of them (lol I think they just usually get annoyed with me or think little of my life approach oddly even tho I would come off very hedonistic to some ISTJs I think somewhere in how an ESTPs generalized hedonistic attitude how they arrive there I think an ISTJ could actually maybe see, if they cared to look, and I guess thats why I personally can say I like ISTJs from my experience is because its not so much I agree with their delivery or approach or process-but rather that I can see a baseline and can relate despite being opposite if that made any sense-I think ESTPs for example can really be misunderstood for example because of how they come off, but ESTPs do process principles its just usually deduced to another approach-if that made any sense.


----------



## stargazing grasshopper (Oct 25, 2013)

yentipeee said:


> You don't have to believe everything you see on youtube, Amazon CEO jeff bezos is a classic ENTP


Is that an example of ENTP wishful thinking, discounting reality & believing too much at online personality sites? Why are ENTPs so willingly to ignore facts & distort inconvenient reality?
Have you read Jeff Bezos biography, there's very little doubt that his personality type is STJ.
In the world of reality aka IRL, Jeff Bezos is extremely likely an example of XSTJ 5w6. He's quite intelligent, but his trust issues caused his secretiveness, overly controlling micro managing & pissed reaction towards insubordinates incompetence.

STJs horse around but rarely passive aggressive & they're the definition of existing within reality.
Famous ISTJs - CelebrityTypes.com


----------



## yentipeee (Jun 19, 2013)

stargazing grasshopper said:


> Is that an example of ENTP wishful thinking, discounting reality & believing too much at online personality sites? Why are ENTPs so willingly to ignore facts & distort inconvenient reality?
> Have you read Jeff Bezos biography, there's very little doubt that his personality type is STJ.
> In the world of reality aka IRL, Jeff Bezos is extremely likely an example of XSTJ 5w6. He's quite intelligent, but his trust issues caused his secretiveness, overly controlling micro managing & pissed reaction towards insubordinates incompetence.
> 
> ...


That's a dumb website, Steve Jobs is ENTP, the inventor, but they list him as ISTP.


----------



## stargazing grasshopper (Oct 25, 2013)

Cinnamon83 said:


> I believe I like ISTJs I think they are those kind of people I can probably distinguish in my life as more memorable based on the the level of integrity and how solid they seem. I guess I see my subconscious or alter ego as relating to this personality type much like IxFJs. I think most of the people who have struck a chord with me were STJs & IxFJs in regards to integrity. I think a lot of it resonates with me internally (obviously I am more like a chaotic or evil good while they are stable good lol) But just mean in a shadowy way.
> 
> I am not sure tho that I think I have had much of an issue with ISTJs myself like how he discusses at the end, as that they have been rubbed wrong by me. Thinking like high school and work settings I think my level of obnoxiousness can irritate the same sex (not the opposite sex as much). Its interesting he said they are most likely to not get along its often listed many places that the two polar opposites are compatible and complimentary matches. I have nothing to compare to with that myself tho never been that close to one. But as I said I actually have a lot of respect for ISTJs that stick out to me and usually think highly of them (lol I think they just usually get annoyed with me or think little of my life approach oddly even tho I would come off very hedonistic to some ISTJs I think somewhere in how an ESTPs generalized hedonistic attitude how they arrive there I think an ISTJ could actually maybe see, if they cared to look, and I guess that's why I personally can say I like ISTJs from my experience is because its not so much I agree with their delivery or approach or process-but rather that I can see a baseline and can relate despite being opposite if that made any sense-I think ESTPs for example can really be misunderstood for example because of how they come off, but ESTPs do process principles it's just usually deduced to another approach-if that made any sense.



Yeah I didn't agree with the compatibility section of that video.


----------



## stargazing grasshopper (Oct 25, 2013)

yentipeee said:


> That's a dumb website, Steve Jobs is ENTP, the inventor, but they list him as ISTP.


Yeah I'm not into celebrity websites but doesn't that article include the link to Jeff Bezos biography? 

It's one thing to be envious of billionaires & want to have things in common with them, but it's too much to refuse accepting the reality that they're not the same personality type as yourself.
I've no want or need to change your mind, carry on believing your own version of reality. adios


----------



## shameless (Apr 21, 2014)

stargazing grasshopper said:


> Yeah I'm not into celebrity websites but doesn't that article include the link to Jeff Bezos biography?
> 
> It's one thing to be envious of billionaires & want to have things in common with them, but it's too much to refuse accepting the reality that they're not the same personality type as yourself.
> I've no want or need to change your mind, carry on believing your own version of reality. adios


Many often think every awesome quirky successful person is an ENTP


----------



## stargazing grasshopper (Oct 25, 2013)

Cinnamon83 said:


> Many often think every awesome quirky successful person is an ENTP


Maybe so, it's every individual's choice to believe in whatever reality gets em through life. Each to their own, it's all good with me.

Hey I like all types, this thread is more of a joke but I'd give zero fxxks were it for real.


----------



## Ron Swansons Mustache (Feb 20, 2015)

Oprah said:


> N types are described as God's gift to the earth in type descriptions whereas Sensors are _"the rest."_


And??? Lol...

Seriously, I know a ton of Sensing types who are quite proud of what they are and the unique strengths they possess. 



Oprah said:


> I'm not going to be defined by a type. I'm going to let my actions and accomplishments define me instead of whatever type I think sounds the most flattering.


I think this is good advice. Type shouldn't be defining. Type can be enlightening, helpful, etc., but we are not defined nor limited by our type. When we define ourselves or others by MBTI or any other tool we have done a huge disservice.


----------



## counterintuitive (Apr 8, 2011)

PrinceAngel said:


> i mean, i think she does have a point tbh. i always say that tests AND MBTI descriptions are written BY intuitive people, which causes a big problem; mostly any person who does them (or read about them) would come off as intuitive.


Yes and I think there is a component of inferior and maybe tertiary projection here. For instance ENPs project their inferior Si onto ISJ/ESJ, so if they're writing SJ descriptions, of course it's going to be unflattering. Same for INJs and SPs with Se. Same reason F descriptions written by T types make F types sound like hysterical crybabies, when in reality, they're usually able to manage their emotions better than T types (especially inferior F types - ETJ/ITP - which are prone to emotional eruptions).

The obvious solution is to get more sensor theorists in the mix, feelers too, especially ESP/ISJ who are S-dominant types.




Ron Swansons Mustache said:


> I think this is good advice. Type shouldn't be defining. Type can be enlightening, helpful, etc., but we are not defined nor limited by our type. When we define ourselves or others by MBTI or any other tool we have done a huge disservice.


Biggest thing I've learned here is how to understand and control the dominant-tertiary loop. Would never have learned that if not for type.


----------



## RubiksCubix (Oct 29, 2014)

Cinnamon83 said:


> I am so tired of this argument being used as a defense for pretentious circle jerking that goes on around here.
> 
> For one its way too generalized to assume that all SJs are all your problems. Further more I would like to say that considering school is made and set up by SJs & NTs, that its not N vs S but rather NF & SPs that likely struggle most among society, and NT & SJ thrive quite well often.





I have to say, I deeply admire ISTJ's and ESTP's. Some individuals include Winston Churchill and various conservative radio show hosts. I never saw the merits in traditionalism before I started reading Russell Kirk (ISFJ). Traditions and societal institutions based on practicality and reality are extremely important, and exist mainly due to the "guardians". In fact, Mark Levin (ISTJ) has wholly convinced me that "abstractions" which are not grounded in reality naturally lead to society destruction and/or tyranny:

“In utopia, rule by masterminds is both necessary and necessarily primitive, for it excludes so much that is known to man and about man. The mastermind is driven by his own boundless conceit and delusional aspirations, which he self-identifies as a noble calling. He alone is uniquely qualified to carry out this mission. He is, in his own mind, a savior of mankind, if only man will bend to his own will. Such can be the addiction of power. It can be an irrationally egoistic and absurdly frivolous passion that engulfs even sensible people. In this, mastermind suffers from a psychosis of sorts and endeavors to substitute his own ambitions for the individual ambitions of millions of people.” - Mark Levin (ISTJ) 

Note the other quotes in my signature. All sensors except for Immanuel Kant, the INTP.


If it weren't for sensors and a few high Si INTP's, I would still be a radical mindless emotionalistic Utopian anarchist. I love sensors, and have them to thank for my intellectual sanity.


----------



## leftover crack (May 12, 2013)

Lucyyy said:


> Also, it's not the N that makes you a genius. It's the T. When you make decisions based on your feelings, 97% of the time your decisions are bad. The reasons why those decisions are bad are:
> 1- Not thinking about the consequences of the decisions
> 2- Being impulsive
> 3- Not considering all the possibilities and not planning what must be done in case you face one of those possibilities
> ...


Nowhere reputable did I find that ones function stack made them a genius. You also clearly misunderstood thinking and feeling. But that's alright, every newbie makes that mistake. Goes to show how biased MBTI is. 

Now, to fill my INFJ quota, I think that you are insecure about your true INFP self so you chose to _become_ an INTJ to gain popularity amongst your peers. 

But joking aside, neither T nor F makes you a genius and T types are suspectible to making bad decisons just as F types are. It's a blessing really. We are all subjective. 

Also please don't go around with your thinker cap on asking people why they are so "emotional" about a given subject when the reason is right there in the first post: It's a response to the extremely typist MBTI community.


----------



## Oprah (Feb 5, 2014)

reckful said:


> In my three years at PerC, not only have I seen more posts complaining about anti-sensor bias than posts displaying serious anti-sensor bias, but I've seen more posts _by Oprah_ complaining about anti-sensor bias than posts displaying serious anti-sensor bias. :tongue:


you know what they say - you can never smell your own stink.


----------



## Kakorrhaphiophobia (Jun 6, 2015)

Can you please try to construct your arguments without trying to boost them with pathos and hyperbole? Why most people object to your Sensor-defending threads is not the content of the ideas you defend, but rather how you *present* them. I do have emotional outbursts frequently in real life, but you have unlimited time to monitor the content you'll post. Try it before opening a 100th thread on this topic.
So much exaggeration and propoganda. Your posts honestly look like Scientology ads.


----------



## Wild (Jul 14, 2014)

Voxi said:


> You've only seen 2 or 3 S types here? Maybe they're out sensoring all over the place, annoying the piss out of other humans in the real world for attention? You've summed up in one enormous, tantrumy wall of text why I stay far away from S's. How utterly exhausting that 3rd grade meltdown was to process.


You do realize you just overreacted to the OP's attitude by making a massive, disgusting, sweeping generalization of what is supposedly 75% of the world's population, right? Oh, and to boot, that generalization was based upon a psychological theory that may or may not _actually _hold weight in the real world.

Nice job sinking down to (and possibly below) his level.


----------



## JacksonHeights (Nov 6, 2015)

Lucyyy said:


> When I took the MBTI test, I had no idea what the 16 personalities were nor what cognitive functions were involved in the test. I simply answered the questions objectively and honestly.
> 
> Besides, being an N doesn't necessarily make you a genius. However, improving your lacking cognitive functions does improve your intelligence.
> 
> ...


I agreed with you until you mentioned the "T", T does not make someone a genius; Donald Trump is a T and he's a racist misogynistic macho pig. Actually I find that most T's are extremely insensitive and selfish


----------



## Kerik_S (Aug 26, 2015)

Oprah said:


> Every N description I've read is basically just saying that N types are only slightly short of geniuses. They're so special. They're the most intelligent. They're the most creative.


That's why actual N types are also pissed. Because the descriptions people are going off of are incredibly biased. If these tests weren't so horrible, you wouldn't also have N types who _didn't go by those descriptions_ (and willing to admit that Ni and Ne have nothing to do with intelligence or creativity) and still agreed that people are definitely mistyping because of all the hype.

But many of us do think they're terrible tests simply because they're so flawed and skew the scores so horribly when given to the general public.

I loathed the idea of testing as INFJ specifically because of all the things you pointed out.

I even went as far as abandoning MBTI for awhile and sticking with socionics and Enneagram. I'm with on this one: The bias is palpable and the stupidity is great.

All of the irrational functions, in a sense, C-c-c-c-cOMBO-BREAK rationality and lead to great insights: Si, Se, Ni, Ne! All of them.

Who cares if xNTx's display "classical logic" more clearly? It's one type of thinking, and to some people it's great and to others it's dry and nebulous.

Yay! I can win a cookie for every time I use "social construction" in a sentence? So can every F type or anyone who reads SJW shit.

It's all bollocks!

One type's relative worth is just that: Relative-- it would mean nothing if everyone acted that way. It would just be lame.


----------



## Kerik_S (Aug 26, 2015)

AverOblivious said:


> I think is because true intuitive types are so underappreciated in society, that these descriptions try and try to "compensate" for that continual SJ psychic oppression against us intuitive types.
> 
> Anyway, as was said before, descriptions of MBTI types and MBTI 'tests' are usually innaccurate or highly circumstantial/subjective. Jungian functions are much more interesting and evidence/theory-based.


Agreed. This is likely what led to tests being worded this way.

However, once into the hands of the public, it's taken on a life of its own to where the "N" isn't looked at as rare or terrible anymore. Now it's just like a trope, and people love mistyping themselves to play to the trope, especially when it's easy as heck to figure out what to answer to subconsciously feed your desire to hit "Submit" and see a self-fulfilling false-type prophecy pop up.


----------



## Kerik_S (Aug 26, 2015)

Wild said:


> You do realize you just overreacted to the OP's attitude by making a massive, disgusting, sweeping generalization of what is supposedly 75% of the world's population, right? Oh, and to boot, that generalization was based upon a psychological theory that may or may not _actually _hold weight in the real world.
> 
> Nice job sinking down to (and possibly below) his level.


I concur. I join you, in N-to-S solidarity, in the public shaming of this tantrum.


----------



## Kerik_S (Aug 26, 2015)

Typeless said:


> Nowhere reputable did I find that ones function stack made them a genius. You also clearly misunderstood thinking and feeling. But that's alright, every newbie makes that mistake. Goes to show how biased MBTI is.
> 
> Now, to fill my INFJ quota, I think that you are insecure about your true INFP self so you chose to _become_ an INTJ to gain popularity amongst your peers.
> 
> ...


I only read your response and then skimmed the quote you pulled, and I was like... You were talking to someone who seriously has themself listed as INTJ? That's supposed to be an INTJ? "T is smart because feelings are st00pid. Accept your F-type means you have stuff to work on and my T-type means I'm not st00pid! Yay!"


----------



## Kerik_S (Aug 26, 2015)

_*This INFJ stands with Oprah/Rosie!*_


----------



## leftover crack (May 12, 2013)

Kerik_S said:


> I only read your response and then skimmed the quote you pulled, and I was like... You were talking to someone who seriously has themself listed as INTJ? That's supposed to be an INTJ? "T is smart because feelings are st00pid. Accept your F-type means you have stuff to work on and my T-type means I'm not st00pid! Yay!"


It gave me the opportunity to release some pent-up anger.


----------



## Purple Skies (Aug 31, 2015)

You should be mad at those who identify themselves as N's based on the descriptions rather than the descriptions themselves. You'd have to be pretty arrogant to claim to be an intuitive knowing you don't have the real traits of an intuitive, but rather take a liking to the idea of being super creative, looking beyond the facts, and having other ''great'' characteristics. There are negatives to being an N. Especially when you're outnumbered. And of course, I'm going to get some sensors rolling their eyes to what they think is a sob story, but the truth of the matter is, N is only really praised in communities such as this one. An N in the real world isn't so praised for their ''N'' qualities. In fact they're seen as slow, having bad concentration, weird etc. So really, I don't know what the big fuss is, you're blowing shit out of proportion. It's not even that serious. How many ordinary people irl know about MBTI anyway? 


Plus, I think it's up to people themselves to find out what their real type is by looking at the cognitive functions because after all, they make up the 4 MBTI letters. People tend to mistype themselves more when they rely solely on MBTI descriptions. Had I went on the descriptions alone, I'd be claiming to be an INFJ since I relate more to their profile than my real type. In that case, I'd be the one at fault.


----------



## Baphomet (Apr 20, 2015)

AverOblivious said:


> According to MBTI, they have an inclination against pursuits about ideas and other more contemplative ideas, we intuitives talk about on PerC. If you want to test the theory, you can stay on these forums for 2 more years, and find out yourself, because clearly you haven't been on here long enough to know how disproportionate the number of Sensors are to iNtuitives, especially in iNtuitive forums, where mostly reflective ideas/feelings are talked about.
> 
> Good luck driving more potential friends and connections and other people away though.


:laughing: wow


----------



## paperlily (Dec 1, 2015)

People need to learn about functions before they parade around with a label over their head. The type descriptions aren't great, and then there's also the stereotyping that attracts and repels people to/from different types.

Being an 'N' online is very different to being an 'N' in the real world - what I mean by that is that generally, Ns (especially introverted people) are usually seen as weird, awkward...grow up feeling like they don't fit in anywhere etc. It's not some kind of gift or curse, it's just a small part of someones personality. Personally I wish I was a sensor, mainly because my entire family are STPs/STJs. I think N types are misrepresented on the internet though, probably because people mistype themselves and also, INXX types might just feel like they fit in more online than they do irl. 

And I don't necessarily think that being an N makes you more intellectual or creative...I think that's probably got more to do with factors outside of MBTI altogether. My brother is an ESTP and he's very intelligent. Besides, as an INFP, I'm very creative, imaginative, "deep" etc, but I'm also ditsy, unorganized and forgetful, so my positive traits are quite redundant and useless unless I have somebody like an SP or an SJ to talk some sense into me. There is nothing bad about being a sensor.


----------



## Super Luigi (Dec 1, 2015)

@Oprah
Well this is completely off-topic but I have to ask out of genuine curiosity: why is your username Oprah and yet your avatar is a picture of Rosie O'Donnell?


----------



## atarulum (Jun 21, 2015)

Voxi said:


> I've never heard these grandiose descriptions. Maybe during one of my daily self deprecating rants I'll pretend I did read it and maybe feel better about myself, even though it wouldn't be true if I had actually read it.
> 
> You've only seen 2 or 3 S types here? Maybe they're out sensoring all over the place, annoying the piss out of other humans in the real world for attention? You've summed up in one enormous, tantrumy wall of text why I stay far away from S's. How utterly exhausting that 3rd grade meltdown was to process.


A lot of you guys really sounded like a bunch of infp or sjs


----------



## Purple Skies (Aug 31, 2015)

atarulum said:


> A lot of you guys really sounded like a bunch of infp or sjs


If anyone sounds like the stereotypical whiney INFP, it's the creator of this thread.


----------



## INTJake (Oct 1, 2015)

One random day I googled "personality test", and got INTJ without having a clue of what the letters meant.

What i mean is...I didn't choose the N life...the N life chose meh


----------



## atarulum (Jun 21, 2015)

Luna Medlock said:


> If anyone sounds like the stereotypical whiney INFP, it's the creator of this thread.


You could be right


----------



## Endologic (Feb 14, 2015)

The definition of Intuition depends on which preference function you pair it with.
NJ (Ni) = Strategic Mindset
NP (Ne) = Creative Mindset
Same with the S types.
SJ (Si) = Sense of Duty
SP (Se) = Common Sense

Sensing focuses on the outer world.
Intuition focuses on the inner world.

NJ (Ni) = Inside In
They envision and form plans and strategies independently. The Judgement function (Te or Fe) decides what their intention is and how they execute their plan.

NP (Ne) = Inside Out
They are good at analysing details of the world around them and notice many possible ways of connecting the details to form different big pictures. They also notice patterns in the moment but usually don't involve them in their judgement process.

SJ (Si) = Outside In
Their plans and strategies are dependent on the needs of the environment meaning they have a natural sense of obgligation to either organize (Te) or help (Fe) their environment.

SP (Se) = Outside Out
They are likely the most street smart types because they have superior common sense. It's hard in my opinion to describe Se, as they simply "do" things. They live in the moment and love physical experiences.

That's why intuitives are smarter. They learn and think independently.


----------



## Saturnian Devil (Jan 29, 2013)

O_o said:


> Lol, yeah I've had folk do similar thing. I think someone resurrected a thread of mine which I asked a question in, they thought it was a good idea to quote me a year later and answer my question. I guess they assumed that even after a year I was still pondering the same thing. Watcha gonna do, you know?


It always ends up happening somewhere down the line. As long as it helps others figure things out, that's what matters I guess.


----------



## INTJake (Oct 1, 2015)

OP is really butthurt. Being an Intuitive is cool. Being a Sensor is cool.

I think the description itself sucks, i mean, 'Sensor' sounds a little boring. It should be "Intuition vs. Sensation". Those words sound equal.

I took the test just randomly googling 'personality test'. Got INTJ by giving unbiased answers.

Three good friends of mine are: ESTJ, ENFP, and another INTJ.

I equally enjoy being around each of them. What's funny is how stereotypical they are. The INTJ and I are usually theorizing something or discussing a deep topic. The ENFP and I are usually brainstorming or kidding around. While the ESTJ and I work on topping each other's insults and agreeing at how annoying everyone's emotional outbursts are.

Anyway (READ THIS if you're going to read anything of what I'm saying OP):

Both my parents are S's (SJ's) and actually, my dad's entire extended family is Sensing. They all thought the results were accurate and were completely satisfied.

I think the N's look for further affirmation and want to check out everything and see if this MBTI is legit.
A sensor will normally be like 'cool, that looks like me!' and go on with their life, doing something probably more productive.

Additionally, Sensors have their advantages - Better focus, more loyal, and if you're an SJ, they get in much less trouble.
During schoolwork I often wish I were an S myself so I could just memorize all the facts.


----------



## Cbyermen (Nov 28, 2014)

This makes me so mad. Intelligence has nothing to do with what type you are. You could have thick intuitives and genius sensors. MBTI describes the way we think, not our ability to do so. That's always been a problem with type descriptions, and I wish the MBTI community was less biased towards Ns. 

Personally, I'd love to be a sensor. I'm always in my head and I always feel so stupid around my sensor friends who seem to understand and do so many things that I just can't.


----------



## Belzy (Aug 12, 2013)

Stelliferous said:


> creative, does well learning at school, etc


That doesn't sound like me. 



Stelliferous said:


> But those things don't make an N!


Okay.



Stelliferous said:


> concern with information that is potentially irrelevant


That's me!


----------



## Mahkara (Jun 1, 2015)

Vikinq said:


> I think the description itself sucks, i mean, 'Sensor' sounds a little boring. It should be "Intuition vs. Sensation". Those words sound equal.


I second this idea. 



Vikinq said:


> Additionally, Sensors have their advantages - Better focus, more loyal, and if you're an SJ, they get in much less trouble.
> During schoolwork I often wish I were an S myself so I could just memorize all the facts.


I'm not sure that I'd say "more loyal" or even necessarily "better focus". It's just a difference in how you perceive the world.

TBH, I feel like sensors (esp. Ses) tend to enjoy the world a lot more. They live in the moment, which I'm jealous of. (I literally *cannot* live in the moment. Like, even when eating a great meal, I'm barely present.) They master a lot of skills so much faster (esp. tactile/physical - I was discussing athletic attempts with someone I suspect is another Ne and it was...well, neither of us are ever going to be natural athletes. Or even particularly competent ones.) Trying to figure out how to do something without understanding the theory behind it is literally hell. (So I spent hours and hours mastering that vs. cramming for a test like a normal human.)

And yeah, I share OPs dislike of the whole "Ns are special snowflakes thing". Ugh. None of us are that special. Even if you're like 1% of the world, there are still 600,000,000 more of you out there. Get over yourself.


----------



## Kerik_S (Aug 26, 2015)

Vikinq said:


> OP is really butthurt. Being an Intuitive is cool. Being a Sensor is cool.
> 
> I think the description itself sucks, i mean, 'Sensor' sounds a little boring. It should be "Intuition vs. Sensation". Those words sound equal.


That's why I say "Intuitives and Sensorics". [sen-SOAR-icks] sounds so cool!


----------



## kahashi (Dec 26, 2014)

Oprah said:


> I'm not going to be defined by a type. I'm going to let my actions and accomplishments define me instead of whatever type I think sounds the most flattering.


I think it is weird how you said "I'm not going to be defined by a type." but not deleting your type ESFP from your profile. Just saying.



Oprah said:


> N types are described as God's gift to the earth in type descriptions whereas Sensors are "the rest."


Well yeah descriptions are not always trustworthy. It needs to be kept in mind that some descriptions could have been written by people who did not understand the theory behind Myers Briggs.

And about being God's gift. I think every personality type has its own place in society. Kind of like a machine. There is no way you can just label some pieces as irrelevant. If they were irrelevant they would not be there. I also think sensors are the main reason that machine keeps working.

But at the end it is up to person. If the person chooses to be that piece which just exist there for how it looks (without any function) there is nothing society can do about it. Which can more likely to happen to an N then S(too much generalization here...Wow scary).

PS: I think S types are cooler than N types in many ways. Such as their observation abilities. I feel like they have super power.


----------



## jcal (Oct 31, 2013)

How about "Dreamers" and "Been there, done that and got the T-Shirt-ers"? :tongue:


----------



## Kerik_S (Aug 26, 2015)

jcal said:


> How about "Dreamers" and "Been there, done that and got the T-Shirt-ers"? :tongue:


Boo! This implies that N types never do anything and that all S types are decisive. Action is a choice, not a preference.


----------



## charlie.elliot (Jan 22, 2014)

This is thread is no longer spewing hatred and prejudice, its boring


----------



## INTJake (Oct 1, 2015)

charlie.elliot said:


> This is thread is no longer spewing hatred and prejudice, its boring


You only read threads with hatred and prejudice? 

Are you sure you're an INFJ...?


----------



## Lakigigar (Jan 4, 2016)

I'm definitely a N. It is the only thing i'm sure of. All the rest is insecure:

E or I: I'm introvert but would i stay introvert when i have more friends. Sometimes i like to tell experiences, but i never get the chanche. I'm insecure and so on... When i'm more secure, i would maybe be a E. I would never know. Maybe that insecurity is part of the I or maybe it is a block for being E.

T or F: I need a key question to know which i am. I read about the differences, need to read more about it. Think F is stronger at T atm. Also because i strongly ashamed by showing feelings, and maybe inside i'm a feeler, but get to know more about it.

P or J: Need to check. I want to plan but i always fail, but i'm also someone who wants to see what happens, need to know more about this.

The N i'm nearly sure of it.


----------



## Who (Jan 2, 2010)

The only reason I identify as N is because of my weaknesses. I'd much prefer to be an S, but to be honest with myself, N seems more likely.


----------



## Denature (Nov 6, 2015)

We already know everyone wishes they were an INTJ. Nothing new.


----------



## Levitar (Jan 24, 2015)

Poizon said:


> We already know everyone wishes they were an INTJ. Nothing new.


Maybe for the reason in my signature...


----------



## Orelli (Nov 29, 2014)

Apple Pine said:


> I doubt you are done, now you are just trying to show your intelligence. lol.


You are correct; so it continues :laughing:


----------



## Apple Pine (Nov 27, 2014)

Orelli said:


> You are correct; so it continues :laughing:


Yea, it's honestly quite funny to see all this now. xD


----------



## Orelli (Nov 29, 2014)

I found this post to be intriguing until I looked at your profile pic of Rosie O'Donnell and your name as Opera. Now I'm wondering if your serious?


----------



## Apple Pine (Nov 27, 2014)

Vikinq said:


> You only read threads with hatred and prejudice?
> 
> Are you sure you're an INFJ...?


Based on this you question her INFJ? Are you trying to be funny, or you're just fucking stupid?


----------



## cipherpixy (Jul 9, 2015)

Poizon said:


> We already know everyone wishes they were an INTJ. Nothing new.


Is that why you're INTJ?


----------



## Kerik_S (Aug 26, 2015)

charlie.elliot said:


> Very true, and Fe is also very entertained by the righteous anger it feels when it encounters hatred and prejudice


YASSS! 8w9, even moreso. ^_^


----------



## INTJake (Oct 1, 2015)

Schizoid said:


> Some words of wisdom when typing yourself: Always remain open to possibilities. Never rule out any of the 16 types when typing yourself. Sometimes, we have to go through all the 16 types just to find our type.
> 
> I'm currently typing myself as INTP but I remain open to possibilities that I might be other type. I always had this notion that the truth will end up finding me if I remain open to possibilities, but when I start deciding on a type and start closing off possibilities, this is when I end up drifting further and further away from the truth.
> 
> ...


very true


----------



## INTJake (Oct 1, 2015)

charlie.elliot said:


> Are you sure you know what a joke is....? :tongue:


you saw i was joking right hun


----------



## charlie.elliot (Jan 22, 2014)

Vikinq said:


> you saw i was joking right hun


lol ok


----------



## WamphyriThrall (Apr 11, 2011)

The truth is somewhere between the two extremes: not everyone who is an N is a mistyped S, but on a site like this, you're going to get more N than S (just like you're going to get more I than E). 

And that revelation bit? Everyone gets that when they find "their type". Well, scratch that - some simply shrug and go their merry way. It's like horoscope, where the descriptions are so general, they could apply to anyone.

How would you describe the few out and proud sensors, then? Are they simply more mature? I've even seen a few xNFJ type as xSFP and xNFP as xSFJ, among others.


----------



## Kerik_S (Aug 26, 2015)

WamphyriThrall said:


> It's like horoscope, where the descriptions are so general, they could apply to anyone.


Ugh, the descriptions! Abandon descriptions for MBTI. You can't try and use Te to chip away at that nonsense. You have to chop it all up with Ti, and even then you're like "I can't work like this! [damsel in distress]".

The function stack thing sucks, and CFs descriptions are a bit all over the place. But they're still more numerous flawed parts (8 functions, looked at in terms of each of their places in the function stack = 8 x 4 = 32 small flawed parts)-- more numerous than the gaping flaws that is each and every broad description of MBTI types (16 broadly flawed large parts)--....

Ti can try and bring together 32 small-but-imprecise things into a somewhat more coherent whole than Ti would be able to with 16 sweeping generalizations.

While Socionics is a bit more difficult to "historically-source-to-Jung" than MBTI, who the eff cares? It's a better system.

MBTI is good for subscribing to the idea of 16 Tropes, and going to the subforums for each trope and being like "Ok. This other 'INFJ trope' actually does think a bit like me.... Maybe we can have some interesting stuff go on here!"

If you want logical (T) coherence rather than relating to others based on tropes (F), go to Socionics. When I see T-types have their way with MBTI, I'm like "Why are you wasting your logical prowess on this whimsical crap?"

Whimsical. Fun... Yes.

Crap. Yes, also.

　


WamphyriThrall said:


> How would you describe the few out and proud sensors, then? Are they simply more mature?


It probably takes a bit of maturity to sift through all the anti-Sensor vitriol on these forums.

　


WamphyriThrall said:


> I've even seen a few xNFJ type as xSFP


I love ISFPs and they're the type second-most that I relate to in terms of their _expressions and aesthetics, _but as far as their processing: Absolutely not.

　


WamphyriThrall said:


> and xNFP as xSFJ, among others.


That seems like a possibility. It's the J-/P-switched version of NFJ-to-SFP confusion.


----------

