# Will Sensing Types Have Just As Strong An Interest In Type As Intuiting Types?



## BerkshireHunt (Mar 26, 2010)

Functianalyst said:


> First as SP or SJ type, do you consider your interest as equal to someone preferring intuiting?


traffic on this board is always highest in the NF forums, than NTs, SPs than SJs

plenty of sensors are interested in type, but IRL many sensors I know think its BS


----------



## firedell (Aug 5, 2009)

Headcase said:


> Indeed.
> 
> I can relate to being sure of N and then starting to realize that it has been that way because of general bias on the MBTI forums. And at the same time it feels like I am using N to much to not be an _intuitive type_.
> 
> ...


Yes. I'm an ISFP that can act like an ENFP. :mellow:


----------



## PhotoGeek (Apr 2, 2010)

Just wanted to pop in here to say: the more I read about ISTP (and the more I read actual posts from other ISTPs) the more I feel at home. I think they key for me is _thoroughness_. Incredibly important for me. I have always thought I was an N type. Always, every time I took the tests I thought I was N. NJ or NP, it varied. But there was always something missing... something not quite right about it.

Here's the thing for me with personality type. I go through phases where I am extremely interested in it (usually a couple months or so) until I realize it just doesn't really fit me, or I don't see the practical application of it any more, and get bored with it. Are there a lot of STPs that do this? It seems more the NT rationale to be more interested in a theory, and less interested in how it fits people in real life. To me, that is the difference between the way an S and an N might approach the subject... it might be just as interesting initially, but I have a feeling that once the novelty wears off, and once the practical application wanes, that an SP might get bored. Just a thought.

One more thought: how many of you try to type your coworkers/friends/loved ones? When I am in an MBTI mode, I try to type everyone.


----------



## Functianalyst (Jul 23, 2009)

PhotoGeek said:


> Just wanted to pop in here to say: the more I read about ISTP (and the more I read actual posts from other ISTPs) the more I feel at home. I think they key for me is _thoroughness_. Incredibly important for me. I have always thought I was an N type. Always, every time I took the tests I thought I was N. NJ or NP, it varied. But there was always something missing... something not quite right about it.


I don't think that most ISTPs would consider themselves thorough, in particularly in comparison to an ISJ type. In fact I think ISTPs are some of the most efficient types and may dismiss taking in information if they believe it will not conclude a different determinaiton. 

***Edit*** I think that I may have taken your inquiry out of context Photo. Yes we are very thorough in researching and writing. However my initial response was based on how we are when we have accumulated experience in a matter and know the principles of how something works. Then we do not find the need for being completely thorough. We also may be quick to jump into something without reading the instructions thoroughly and only will refer to the particular section when we hit a road block. But to answer your general question, yes we are very thorough. One just needs to look at my writing style on this forum.


PhotoGeek said:


> Here's the thing for me with personality type. I go through phases where I am extremely interested in it (usually a couple months or so) until I realize it just doesn't really fit me, or I don't see the practical application of it any more, and get bored with it. Are there a lot of STPs that do this? It seems more the NT rationale to be more interested in a theory, and less interested in how it fits people in real life. To me, that is the difference between the way an S and an N might approach the subject... it might be just as interesting initially, but I have a feeling that once the novelty wears off, and once the practical application wanes, that an SP might get bored. Just a thought.


Actually NTJs can be just as interested in the practical application of something. The difference in the NTJ and the STP is the former will not take action until they have a complete understanding of something and the latter will take action and learn as they go. On the other hand NTPs do like theory for it's own sake.


PhotoGeek said:


> One more thought: how many of you try to type your coworkers/friends/loved ones? When I am in an MBTI mode, I try to type everyone.


Always one more thing with you Missy :laughing:. I personally don't believe in typing others, even when I know them on an intimate level. I think we are forced to play roles and you never truly know whether you are seeing the real person or a role to adapt to the presented circumstances. I am not sure that I referred you to this site yesterday, but this article gives some reasons for the *ISTP confusing themselves as INT* types.


----------



## PhotoGeek (Apr 2, 2010)

I catch what you're saying, Funct. Yeah, with typing people, trying to do it doesn't mean I succeed...  I usually end up with "Eh, I don't really know... Oh well." But the thought crosses my mind a lot (if I'm in that mode). I guess I just really wonder what makes people tick. I am always curious about why they say/do what they say/do.

And yes... I hardly ever read the instructions first.  And always looking for efficiency. Gah, this is seriously like a lightbulb went off for me. I'm still undecided on my type for now, because I think it is important to be unbiased in my judgment.

No, you did not link that article, but one like it. Will read it now!

Sorry to hijack this thread with more of my ramblings! Just trying to figure things out, you know? Discussion is a good thing.


----------



## Functianalyst (Jul 23, 2009)

PhotoGeek said:


> I guess I just really wonder what makes people tick. I am always curious about why they say/do what they say/do.


NFs and SPs both focus on peoples motives, SJs and NTs focus on systems. Maybe you're curious as to their motives when they say something?


----------



## The Great One (Apr 19, 2010)

In my response, the sensing types won't give a damn about mbti. There are exceptions to the rule, but this is what I've found. I think the proof is in the fact that about 90% of the people on this forum that I see are intuitive.


----------



## MilkyWay132 (Jul 15, 2010)

I think it depends on the Sensor.


----------



## OrangeAppled (Jun 26, 2009)

Of the sensors, I notice that the Ji doms tend to be the most interested in personality theory. I think it's the conceptual nature of Ti & Fi that may draw them to it. Jung speaks of Ti & Fi doms as both being easily misunderstood types, and I think for ISTPs who fall outside of the extreme sports dude stereotype, this may very much hold true. No doubt that many ISFPs are seen as weirdos :tongue:


----------



## The Great One (Apr 19, 2010)

I've already made a thread like this. No most sensors could give less of a shit about it. Some with Fi may take interest in it though, especially the ISFP. Oh, and most SJ's will say that the system is bullshit. Here's the general rule:

SP: Won't deny it's existence, but won't care.

SJ: Will say that it's bullshit.

NF: Will become obsessed with it.

NT: Most will be skeptical at first, then will become obsessed with it. Oh, but I've noticed a lot of ENTJ's don't believe in it, which is odd.


----------

