# What�s the most NAIVE of all types? and the WISEST? Easiest types to manipulate?



## curiousel

*What´s the most NAIVE of all types? and the WISEST? Easiest types to manipulate?*

is the ISFP in general quite naive, perhaps the most naive of all types? 
are INTJ the opposite? the best prepared to neutralize an attempt of being manipulated, tricked?
Which type are the easiest to manipulate, to trick?


----------



## εmptε

*INFJ for wisest type. They're the only type that I've seen who remained wise no matter how many I've met. I've met some really naive INTJs. If it were an NT for wisdom it would probably be the INTP.

Naive? Any type can be Naive but I say the most Naive is probably the ESFP.
*


----------



## zynthaxx

I don't think it has to do much with type, but with balance and maturity. Imho, being wise is the result of having gathered a lot of reference material from the world around oneself, and having learned how to apply it to real life, or perhaps having seen how real life fits together around this reference material.
Naivity, on the other hand, is simply the result of a lack of reference material, cluelessness when it comes to how it applies to the world, or both. 
The same goes for people who are easy or hard to manipulate. If you are conciously aware of the fact that some people will try to manipulate you, you can avoid these situations and still be a trusting person.


----------



## roxtehproxy

Cheshire Wolf said:


> *INFJ for wisest type. They're the only type that I've seen who remain wise no matter how many I've met. I've met some really naive INTJs. If it were an NT for wisdom it would probably be the INTP.
> 
> Naive? Any type can be Naive but I say the most Naive is probably the ESFP.
> *


You've read my mind. :shocked:


----------



## firedell

Well as Sensors are meant to be in tune with what is around them, I don't see them as naive. Or I could be wrong. *shrugs*


----------



## Korvyna

Actually, all the SPs I know are far from naive. The NF I know is incredibly naive though. And as far as being manipulated... I think a lot of it would depend on the manipulator. I'm pretty hard to manipulate, but there is a couple of people out there that have done it, and I won't even catch it until after it's happened....


----------



## ArianBelle

IMO, any T and N type are wiser. Wise men aren't emotional wrecks that judge people, they think. simply said~


----------



## Hocking

I've seen "naive" and words like "childlike enthusiasm" in a lot of INTP descriptions (especially when it comes to affection).


----------



## Stephalump

Naïve? I would say SPs first, and SJs second. Being naïve is basically not being able to see through the obvious to underlying motives and/or properly considering all possible outcomes, right? So, definitely Ss. As far as the hardest to manipulate, I'll go with NTs. Wisest? NFs.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## 0 1 1 2 3 5 8 13 21 34

The Naive T expects everyone to be honest, expects people to say what they mean.

The Naive F expects people to be nice or good, expects everyone to respect everyone's feelings and try to get along.

(Maybe the above is only for Intuitives. I'm not sure)

People are Naive in different ways, but wisdom is, as already stated, not merely the accumulation of information, but of relevant information and more importantly knowing what situation to apply which information in.


----------



## Kathryne

IMO, any type with a dominant Fe would be easier to manipulate. So, xxFJs.
As far as naivete goes, I am perfectly willing to admit I can be very naive at times. I'm getting better, but still. I would not put INTJs as least naive (especially socially!)

I would not place naive as the opposite of wise. I've been called wise before, and also naive. By the same person. Maybe "perceptive" would be a better contrast to naive.

In that case, I would say an NT or an NFJ would fall into the "perceptive" category.
Uninfluenced/hard to manipulate? xxTJ. probably an xNTJ, in my opinion. I may be naive at times, but I am much more the manipulator (when I want) than manipulate-ee. ENTJs are by no question very hard to manipulate :crazy:

(good luck interpreting all that; my brain is quite muddled at the moment.)


----------



## HeartlySerious

Wisdom comes with knowledge and/or age. Any type is capable of wisdom.

INFJ i have met could become wise but at this time he is not. 

Naive tendencies...i would say are most likely found in the idealist temperament. But then again, personally as an idealist, i choose to see the rose-color world even if i have already uncover the "reality" of this world. Being manipulated...not sure if the manipulation can escape the NF. Perhaps some choose to be manipulated.


----------



## OrangeAppled

A lot of the SFPs I know are not inclined to analyzing, and this can make them "naive". Sometimes getting so caught up in the moment seems to make them forget to stop and question other people's motives & to see how things could go very bad in the long run. I've seen many ESFPs get hurt by people and make bad decisions because of this. I know ISFPs who are overly trusting of friends and it leaves them susceptible to bad advice. They don't seem to analyze the advice.

I can be naive in that I am so idealistic that I will block out the bad possibilities if I like the idea of something. I only want to consider what could be good, because I have romanticized it and want it to work out. I can also give people the benefit of the doubt to a fault, and I will make excuses for bad behavior due to "over-empathizing". I can be a bleeding heart and find it hard to say no when I should (this is mostly in romantic situations - pity dating & not trusting my gut instinct about a guy. I steer clear of sales people :laughing. It makes me feel like a dumb-ass to admit that mushy-gushy side, but it's there, and it's a vulnerable spot.

However, I also have a pretty good BS detector, and when I listen to it, it proves to be a protection. I also find it easy to say no if something violates a value, and that makes me far from a pushover. I only tend to go along with something if someone manages to appeal to my idealistic side and empathy and bypassed my sense of what is right and authentic. That's harder to do than my previous paragraph makes it sound.


----------



## εmptε

*ESTJs are the easiest type to manipulate. I'm not joking.*


----------



## In a Quandary

I would say that the INFJs are amongst the most difficult people to manipulate, as they tend to be naturally predisposed towards paranoia/suspicion/skepticism and belief in the ill-intentions of others. Speaking from experience, it takes either a very long time or an outstanding display of one's good character to earn their trust, and even so, it is impossible to persuade them to do something against their wishes.

Undeveloped NFs can be naive in the sense that they desire strongly in their hearts for everyone to be good, and inadvertently impose their mental ideal upon others in the belief that said others would achieve their expectations. When that inevitably fails to happen, the NF gains his/her acclaimed perceptiveness.

But yes, I agree that those with a dominant/auxiliary (with the singular exception of the INFJ, of course) Fe function are more susceptible to manipulation, and using manipulation themselves.


----------



## Who

ArianBelle said:


> IMO, any T and N type are wiser. Wise men aren't emotional wrecks that judge people, they think. simply said~


So you're implying that sensors and feelers are "emotional wrecks that judge people" and don't think? For one thing, you seem to be getting wisdom confused with intelligence. Intelligence is associated with thought and learned from school/books/Internet sites/other educational resources, whereas wisdom is associated with insight and is learned from experience. Feelers are also capable of thinking without judging people.

Thinkers and intuitive types aren't necessarily wiser, they just have a different style of thinking. For example, sensors can still be wise. Sure, while they are often concerned with the "here and now," that style of thinking also allows them to learn by doing things. That said, they can notice patterns in the way people, places, things, ideas, and so on work and become able to predict things by comparing them to past results. This means that, with the right experiences, sensors can become quite wise.

As far as feeling versus thinking goes, you seem to have some misconceptions there as well. When someone is a feeler, it doesn't necessarily mean they don't think or they judge people. After all, I prefer to think of actual "thinking" as an N vs S thing more than anything else, as intuitiveness implies focusing on the future and abstract ideas, which involves the thinking process (though sensors can think and be intelligent too). Instead T vs F involves the _type_ of thinking that is done. Thinkers are more concerned with logic and reason, whereas Feelers are concerned with emotions and the like. Feelers can still think, they just think with their heart instead of their head, pardon the cliché, but it's the only way I can think of wording it. Besides, feelers don't necessarily judge people, as many feelers (especially NFs) are good at trying to see things from others' viewpoints and will often be able to see why people are motivated for their actions.

Think of it this way: you're an ENTJ. As an extrovert, you don't _always_ want to be surrounded by people every minute of your life, just like introverts will still seek their friends' company. Just because you're not a sensor, it doesn't mean you're completely oblivious to your surroundings. I know you're a thinker, but you obviously have emotions as well. Even though you're a J, I'm sure you improvise things every now and then and you don't have your _entire life_ scheduled right down to the second. That's the thing about MBTI types; you don't always conform to it all the time and there are moments where you can relate to one or more of your so-called "shadow functions."

Sorry for the off-topic spiel there. Back to the whole wise/unwise discussion, I have to agree with those that said it's not so much a type thing as it is an individual thing. After all, there are naive and wise people of every type.


----------



## INFpharmacist

In a Quandary said:


> I would say that the INFJs are amongst the most difficult people to manipulate, as they tend to be naturally predisposed towards paranoia/suspicion/skepticism and belief in the ill-intentions of others. Speaking from experience, it takes either a very long time or an outstanding display of one's good character to earn their trust, and even so, it is impossible to persuade them to do something against their wishes.


I agree with you.


----------



## perennialurker

I agree with a lot of the other sentiments expressed earlier about how any type can be naive or wise. I do believe there are also different types of wise and naive. I think xNTJs are perhaps among the most on their guard for being manipulated and therefore least susceptible to it, however we can be tricked at times. This is especially true when we let our guard down to those we are/become close to. This is also why we are hard to get close to. I am also inclined to believe NFs are probably easier to manipulate because of their idealism, but they are also clearly more wise about matters of the heart than almost any T.


----------



## OrangeAppled

Am I the only person who does not see naiveté and wisdom being mutually exclusive? They seem contradictory, but I very much think they can exist in the same person, maybe in different areas of their life/thinking. I don't think that naiveté equals gullible either....to me it's a childlike innocence, which a person may have in some form, but still have much discernment and insight in other ways. My fellow INFPs always strike me as bearing this dichotomy.


----------



## Korvyna

In a Quandary said:


> I would say that the INFJs are amongst the most difficult people to manipulate, as they tend to be naturally predisposed towards paranoia/suspicion/skepticism and belief in the ill-intentions of others. Speaking from experience, it takes either a very long time or an outstanding display of one's good character to earn their trust, and even so, it is impossible to persuade them to do something against their wishes.


Hell, I'm this way. I'm very distrusting of everyone. Even people I have known for years, I still have my doubts about their intentions. If someone doesn't have some kind of proof I refuse to believe it.


----------



## Mr.Xl Vii

Lav said:


> Are wise and naive opposites?


yes, they always have been. Not direct opposites "foolish" is the correct antonym according to the internet. But ignorance/naivety would be the opposite of a learned/wise person


----------



## Lav

So there cannot be a person that is wise and naive at the same time?


----------



## B-Con

Lav said:


> So there cannot be a person that is wise and naive at the same time?





Mr.Xl Vii said:


> yes, they always have been. Not direct opposites "foolish" is the correct antonym according to the internet. But ignorance/naivety would be the opposite of a learned/wise person


That's already been asserted. Are you not reading the responses or are you challenging that assumption?


----------



## SyndiCat

It depends on what is being manipulated, and how.


----------



## Lav

B-Con said:


> That's already been asserted. Are you not reading the responses or are you challenging that assumption?


No, I agree that taking into account those dichotomal definitions in particular the conclusion seems logical. But I challenge it as it was described in the title. IMO wise is not the opposite of naive in the broadest sense. You can be inexperienced in worldly matters and have great wisdom, or you can be savvy and cunning about the ways of life and have no idea about anything worthwhile (no wisdom). Someone could be innocent and wise, or clever and a fool (I've known a few in my time). Cleverness doesn't necessitate wisdom. Of course, the best option would be having both cleverness and wisdom.


----------



## AussieChick

dizzygirl said:


> I'm a F and i expect people to be honest before nice.
> And i would say INFPs seem naive. They seem to be too engaged in their imaginative world to be aware of the harsher reality.





MilkyWay132 said:


> I don't think naivity and wisdom is determined by type. I just think that certain types display different kinds of naivity, and that any of them can acheive wisdom if they put their minds to it.





vellocent said:


> Easy to manipulate & naive? That phrase concerns me, why are you asking? Anyway, it has more to do with trust than anything. A stubborn skeptic is rarely easy to manipulate. Any type can become skeptical or stubborn if they have had bad luck with a situation before. It doesn't mean they had to fail to get there, because if someone is just informed and trusts the informer they will also be hard to manipulate.


I agree with all of the above,i'm an ISFJ and have been prone to naievety on occasion.I have also had flashes of wisdom when required too.I don't believe that any particular type is prone to being either naive or wise.It depends on whether that person is a healthy individual or not.I get manipulated alot so i'd class myself as naive,at the present time.I'm also unhealthy in that i'm constantly questioning my motives and beliefs,and have a very low opinion of myself.I get depressed and discouraged easily.I've been given excellent advice by my friends,but either choose to ignore it or think i can muddle along on my own.It's not till my world comes crashing down that i suddenly come to realise 'Oh i should have listened to my wise friends'.These wise friends who also happen to come from a number of personality types.We are all open to manipulation,and flashes of wisdom in certain situations.


----------



## IonOfAeons

We are always biased in what we believe as being signs of wisdom. I personally believe it's impossible to say type-wise because you can't be sure that certain characteristics you saw in the person you're typing, that you may well correlate with naivety, haven't influenced your pronunciation of type. For example, you may muddle believing other's intentions as something to do with feeling which you then proclaim on the person, but in actual fact they do it because they don't see the emotional implications as being important, they would think 'whether they are lying or not to me is irrelevant because it is an emotional matter that I don't think concerns me'. This could easily be a thinker's response, and they may not even realise that it actually _does_ concern them.

Speaking personally, I can't be manipulated on my core values, usually including feelings because I just don't care what your opinion is. However if you start talking about something that I am not sure of, ideas wise, then I am easier to manipulate, because I can't always trust my own mind to come to the right conclusions. I try not to say too much in these situations because I refuse to let others have power over me.


----------



## Themis

I wouldn't want to speculate on a quality that could be perceived as a shortcoming of another personality type without some kind of study, but I can speak for myself as an ESTJ - I am not easily manipulated or at all naive. If anything, I am quite the oppposite. Jaded? Skeptical? Cynical? 
But I face off with criminals everyday, so I just naturally question anything that does not present with immediate evidence. 

The question of being wise is pretty subjective. How would you measure or even categorize wisdom? Education, behavior, common sense or philosophy? I know some over-educated fools and I know some very under-educated, brilliant people...


----------



## Jeyssika

ENTPreneur said:


> Interesting. Ive only met a handful of INFJs and they all have had problems running deep; low self esteem, neurotics, fear of closeness etc. But they CAN be very emapthic...
> 
> I wonder where to find these balanced INFJs....hmmm....


To be fair INFJs are a bundle of opposites - one of the most paradoxical types I think; besides I think if you're going to be that complex & see people and the world for the awfulness it really whilst almost hopelessly trying to wish and make it a better place you're going to have issues too


----------



## Silent Chameleon

Interesting question. 

Wisest: INTP (of course!). If I have to choose another type I'd say the INFPs.

Naive: ESFJ.


----------



## Lav

ESTJ and ISFJ are the most naive. And I happen to know some girl that's both those types...


----------



## Protagoras

*this post is full of bias, generalizations and stereotyping comments, do not take it too seriously... it is based on my personal perception of the INTP type and is not really empirically testable* xD

I think the INTPs are wise in a Taoist manner: we spend a lot of our time being passive and pensive and we only act when necessary. We analyse our world and try to find truths without being too subjective and personal. We think that it is important to know one's place in a social order, but we are also the most principled non-conformists there are. We act out of curiosity and necessity and don't think we should act just because we _can_ act. We seem to respect and understand the natural order of things, but we don't always accept the natural order as the best possible situation. If that's not a good-working homoeostatic process of the mind, then I don't know what is.


----------



## counterintuitive

(Haven't read the whole thread, but) IME young SFJs are the most prone to manipulation. This makes sense. Firstly, the xxFJ thing someone mentioned before, due to Fe. NFJs may be able to see through what is happening, but an SFJ's Si has to build up experiences. The SFJ has to be manipulated enough times to be able to see manipulation happening again, and the new manipulation has to be similar enough to their past experience, for them to see what is happening. In a young SFJ, Si doesn't have as much of these experiences, so they can be more easily manipulated. At least, I think this is why.


----------



## goodgracesbadinfluence

Elwood92 said:


> *this post is full of bias, generalizations and stereotyping comments, do not take it too seriously... it is based on my personal perception of the INTP type and is not really empirically testable* xD
> 
> I think the INTPs are wise in a Taoist manner: we spend a lot of our time being passive and pensive and we only act when necessary. We analyse our world and try to find truths without being too subjective and personal. We think that it is important to know one's place in a social order, but we are also the most principled non-conformists there are. We act out of curiosity and necessity and don't think we should act just because we _can_ act. We seem to respect and understand the natural order of things, but we don't always accept the natural order as the best possible situation. If that's not a good-working homoeostatic process of the mind, then I don't know what is.


I also think some INTPs aren't so much passive but just indifferent. I do not let anyone walk all over me or tell me what to do, but if it's on a smaller scale I'm likely to keep my mouth shut and deal with it, like if someone keeps making rude/obnoxious comments. I'll leave the room before I tell them to stop. 

As for the original question.... I think INTJs/INTPs are the wisest, but I am biased in that respect. Perhaps ISTJ/ISTPs too. 

Most naive... the only ESFP I know is extremely naive, so I'm inclined to think that but that's just one person.


----------



## lman161

ENFPs are by far the easiest to manipulate. They crave acceptance and wear their insecurities on their sleeves. Sorry ENFPs


----------



## myexplodingcat

Since "naive" and "wise" have different and vague definitions, this question is virtually impossible to answer.

Easy to manipulate? That I can handle.

Emotional manipulation: The INFP. If your own psyche can handle the guilt of even attempting to manipulate someone like an INFP, they're quite easy. Which is sad, because they're so often wonderful people and take it the hardest.

Manipulation in order to get someone to do something: ESFP. Just... ESFP. Convince them it's fun and... ESFP.


----------



## kelar

The people who give somebody something to manipulate them with, are the most easily manipulated...so, I'd say it's about a lifestyle. The people that keep their feelings to themselves and also think things through rationally (even if that isn't their strongest function) should be harder to manipulate. As for specific types...I really can't say...


----------



## The Great One

ESFP types are the easiest to manipulate and ISFP's as well. Manipulating an NT is damn near impossible.


----------



## Spades

Oh hello there typism and overgeneralized stereotypes.


----------



## Stephen

What a dreadful concept for a thread.


----------

