Brain Types

[Raver]

There was an interesting diagram I remember that was on the brain types website until they took it down, but it basically it showed body figures explaining this:

NT:

Excellent mental ability
Good verbal ability
Okay fine motor skills
Poor gross motor skills

NF:

Excellent verbal ability
Good mental ability
Good fine motor skills
Okay gross motor skills

ST:

Excellent fine motor skills
Good gross motor skills
Good verbal ability
Okay mental ability

SF:

Excellent gross motor skills
Good fine motor skills
Okay verbal ability
Poor mental ability

Does this sound accurate to you? Also, this is not my idea, I found this on the brain types website years ago so don't shoot the messenger.

[MisterNi]

I like it. It puts me squarely as an NT and also explains why STs always beat me at video games.

[EyeSeeCold]

STs always beat me at video games.

No kidding.

[Raver]

If this is true, I think it'd only be good for comparing different abilities within a person, rather than for comparing, say, the mental abilities of an NT with an ST. I'm sure everyone knows an NT who is kind of dumb, and is also not very good at talking, or sports, or resheathing needles...

Well, I think general intelligence comes into play. So, the fact that NTs have the greatest mental abilities and SFs have the greatest gross motor skills only means that they're mind is designed to order their abilities in that specific way, not that they'll necessarily be strong or weak in something. So if you look at an intelligent NT or an intelligent SF, all of their abilities will move up a notch in strength, however the order of the strengths will remain the same.

I'm curious - does anyone know why NFs get off so lightly in this description with no "poor" abilities? And why does no type have "poor" fine motor skills? If NFs have poor fine motor skills it all become symmetrical, and SF/NT and NF/ST have complementary skill sets... though I doubt it reflects reality, with the NF musician/artist stereotype.

Maybe because NFs are just that awesome? Perhaps there is no poor fine motor skills as that is a natural human strength? It would make things symmetrical, but I guess personalities' strengths and weaknesses don't work out that way.

[silke]

Does this sound accurate to you? Also, this is not my idea, I found this on the brain types website years ago so don't shoot the messenger.

I don't like this idea because it implies that people can be typed by their skills, talents, intelligence quotient, physical abilities, occupation, etc. rather than by how they process information. It leads to simplistic stereotypical typings a la "she's good at sports (excellent motor skills) so must be a Se-ego" or "he is a scientist (excellent mental ability) so must be NT". This is really one of the main pitfalls in typing and this diagram just serves to reinforce such biases. Wrt to accuracy I can recall several examples of people I have known irl who would contradict each category.

[Raver]

Maybe because NFs are just that awesome?

I'm going to go with that... or that the author was an NF

Haha, I'm just relaying the diagrams on the site into words.

I guess it very vaguely lines up with my experience, although in general the STs I've met have very good mental abilities. The gap between their "excellent fine motor skills" and their "okay mental abilities" is much smaller than, say, the gap between NFs' "excellent verbal ability" and "okay gross motor skills"

I agree with this.

[Creepy-male]

I think NT and ST would have a better mind-body connection, good hand eye coordination and ability to willfully produce action.

NT's would probably be more slanted towards fine motor abilities and tasks that require thought and precision.

ST's would probably be more slanted towards gross motor abilities and tasks that require pragmatic observation and manipulation of objects over thought and precision.

NT's would be more surgical, where as ST's would be more tactile and direct in their manipulation of matter and mechanical movements.

I think NFs and SFs have a better body-spirit connection, spiritualistic foo-fluff aside, what I mean is a better sense of how their body "feels" naturally, and stunted abilities with willfully producing action from the mind in comparison to ST's and NT's.

[FDG]

I have shitty fine motor abilities but great gross motor abilities. Very little precision.

[silke]

I agree, but the problem's kind of solved if you look at it as within each individual rather than being comparable across types. Kind of like how a smart IEI can be better than a dumb LII at Ti, as well as better at Ni and Fe.

Excellent/good/okay/poor doesn't really encourage this interpretation though.

I'd love to know if this holds on average and if there are any studies that support this.

My conception of IEs is that they are something separate from people's abilities, motor, inter-personal, verbal, mathematical, artistic/aesthetic, or otherwise, so from this pov this diagram does not make any sense and actually just serves to obfuscate things.

[Computer Loser]

[Raver]

Guy123 posted the diagrams I saw years ago from that site. It looks like I pretty much remembered them spot on except that STs have good verbal ability instead of poor verbal ability. Also, listening and neck movement are their own categories apparently. If you look at it closely, NTs and SFs do complement each other well like octopuslove mentioned. It's less obvious with NFs and STs, but they complement each other well too. I get the impression that NTs and SFs are extreme and NFs and STs are more balanced.

[woofwoofl]

Does this sound accurate to you? Also, this is not my idea, I found this on the brain types website years ago so don't shoot the messenger.

I don't like this idea because it implies that people can be typed by their skills, talents, intelligence quotient, physical abilities, occupation, etc. rather than by how they process information. It leads to simplistic stereotypical typings a la "she's good at sports (excellent motor skills) so must be a Se-ego" or "he is a scientist (excellent mental ability) so must be NT". This is really one of the main pitfalls in typing and this diagram just serves to reinforce such biases. Wrt to accuracy I can recall several examples of people I have known irl who would contradict each category.

It's wrong, in many senses of the term "wrong", to throw SFs in the "dumb jock" category; I know a Fe-SEI who's great at writing/poetry and is going to a really fancy college and stuff, and shit, I'm too tired to think right now due to bike riding and walking all over the place (fuck yeah for wrecking the rationale behind my own post)

I remember the LIE FDG talking about climbing massive ass hills on his bike, ones where the SEE me would have to probably hop off the bike and push to make it past...

[Cat King Cole]

I don't like this. It insults my mental abilities (which are good but not great). It borders on Keirsey levels of innate superiority. NFs are the designed supermen, followed by their ST bros. NTs are nerd stereotypes that don't really exist in the world anymore and SFs are just terrible human beings.

I'd imagine it's based on a gross misunderstanding (or disingenuous misrepresentation) of the way the brain works. I'd be interested to hear their rationale for this little system.

I suppose it works for "how things measure up inside", but I'd say my gross motor and verbal skills are equal; if you don't acknowledge that that seems like an apples and oranges comparison.

Reasoning, planning, mathematics, etc, all things I struggle with (possibly difficult to believe). Understanding arguments, engaging in wordplay, vocabulary, accuracy in describing and understanding the world, associating concepts, etc, etc, I'm all very good at.

Gross motor skills like articulating and maneuvering my body I'm also good at. I'm one of those people who steps onto a bus and treats it like a jungle gym, or one of those douches who stays standing on a moving train without leaning on anything, just to dare it to get me off balance. I can also be catlike when I'm making a point to be relaxed.

Meanwhile my fine motor skills are atrocious. My hands quiver and I have a hard enough time writing without wibbling and wobbling everywhere

[Raver]

I don't like this idea because it implies that people can be typed by their skills, talents, intelligence quotient, physical abilities, occupation, etc. rather than by how they process information. It leads to simplistic stereotypical typings a la "she's good at sports (excellent motor skills) so must be a Se-ego" or "he is a scientist (excellent mental ability) so must be NT". This is really one of the main pitfalls in typing and this diagram just serves to reinforce such biases. Wrt to accuracy I can recall several examples of people I have known irl who would contradict each category.

It's wrong, in many senses of the term "wrong", to throw SFs in the "dumb jock" category; I know a Fe-SEI who's great at writing/poetry and is going to a really fancy college and stuff, and shit, I'm too tired to think right now due to bike riding and walking all over the place (fuck yeah for wrecking the rationale behind my own post)

I remember the LIE FDG talking about climbing massive ass hills on his bike, ones where the SEE me would have to probably hop off the bike and push to make it past...

Well, like I discussed with octopuslove, we think that they got the order of the abilities generally correct, however it is misleading because you have to take general intelligence into play, which has nothing to do with Socionics. For example if you take a dumb ILE, he may have decent mental ability with weak verbal, fine motor and gross motor skills, but compared to a smart SEI, they might end up having the same mental ability except the SEI would be vastly superior to him in verbal ability, fine motor skills and gross motor skills as a result of greater general intelligence.

I think FDG being able to climb massive hills might have more to do with having stronger leg muscles, which has nothing to do with gross motor skills.

[plotter]

Well, like I discussed with octopuslove, we think that they got the order of the abilities generally correct, however it is misleading because you have to take general intelligence into play, which has nothing to do with Socionics. For example if you take a dumb ILE, he may have decent mental ability with weak verbal, fine motor and gross motor skills, but compared to a smart SEI, they might end up having the same mental ability except the SEI would be vastly superior to him in verbal ability, fine motor skills and gross motor skills as a result of greater general intelligence.

I think FDG being able to climb massive hills might have more to do with having stronger leg muscles, which has nothing to do with gross motor skills.

What you're saying is retarded in so many ways that no amount of superior verbal skill can make up for it. Being an NT with IQ 140+, I must be correct

[Pa3s]

This is pretty interesting.

I'm curious - does anyone know why NFs get off so lightly in this description with no "poor" abilities?

I thought exactly the same. Like NFs, STs also have two "good" and no "poor" abilities. That might look like one "club" is more capable than an other. I guess it would have been better if those strengths were shown in a pie chart, this could also show that NTs and SFs are more "specialised" (more extreme scores among the fields) according to these diagrams.

For me personally, I'd either put "mental ability" or maybe "fine motor skills" first and "gross motor skills" on the last place.

[yellow82]

I may be stupid, but at least I'm a harder worker and better liked then most people I know. I'm also going through Medical School. . . so I can't be terribly dumb.

[Raver]

Well, like I discussed with octopuslove, we think that they got the order of the abilities generally correct, however it is misleading because you have to take general intelligence into play, which has nothing to do with Socionics. For example if you take a dumb ILE, he may have decent mental ability with weak verbal, fine motor and gross motor skills, but compared to a smart SEI, they might end up having the same mental ability except the SEI would be vastly superior to him in verbal ability, fine motor skills and gross motor skills as a result of greater general intelligence.

I think FDG being able to climb massive hills might have more to do with having stronger leg muscles, which has nothing to do with gross motor skills.

What you're saying is retarded in so many ways that no amount of superior verbal skill can make up for it. Being an NT with IQ 140+, I must be correct

Why not dispute my argument point by point instead of just saying I'm wrong with no evidence. Clearly, the IQ test is wrong, you are probably a stupid NT with no verbal ability to prove your point.

[Raver]

I may be stupid, but at least I'm a harder worker and better liked then most people I know. I'm also going through Medical School. . . so I can't be terribly dumb.

Yellow, general intelligence is not Socionics related. Being an SF doesn't make you dumb, and being an NT doesn't make you smart. All it does is affect how your intelligence is distributed.

[FDG]

I may be stupid, but at least I'm a harder worker and better liked then most people I know. I'm also going through Medical School. . . so I can't be terribly dumb.

Nah, you can be terribly dumb and still go through a full university cycle, up to PhD.

[yellow82]

Nah, you can be terribly dumb and still go through a full university cycle, up to PhD.

Depends on your definition of dumb, what University you're going to and what major you are trying to obtain.

[Pa3s]

I may be stupid, but at least I'm a harder worker and better liked then most people I know. I'm also going through Medical School. . . so I can't be terribly dumb.

Don't worry. There are enough retarded NTs out there as well. People can be both intelligent and stupid since these terms can be defined differently each time. Also, wisdom is more important imho, and this can be aquired by everyone to some extent.

[Galen]

I like how we have NTs and SFs as having "poor" qualities while the NFs and STs are more well-rounded.

[FDG]

Nah, you can be terribly dumb and still go through a full university cycle, up to PhD.

Depends on your definition of dumb, what University you're going to and what major you are trying to obtain.

Yes it depends on your definition of dumb but no, you can pretty much go through any university or major.

[woofwoofl]

I like how we have NTs and SFs as having "poor" qualities while the NFs and STs are more well-rounded.

I wasn't able to read it, being an SF and all

[Galen]

Speaking for myself here

Verbal ability: Apparently I'm a good writer, but I tend to get tongue-tied while speaking.
Mental ability: Pretty damn good if you ask me.
Fine motor skills: Also pretty good, given I have lots of practice with that sort of thing.
Gross motor skills: lol

I like how we have NTs and SFs as having "poor" qualities while the NFs and STs are more well-rounded.

I wasn't able to read it, being an SF and all

Your poor dear

[Raver]

Speaking for myself here

Verbal ability: Apparently I'm a good writer, but I tend to get tongue-tied while speaking.
Mental ability: Pretty damn good if you ask me.
Fine motor skills: Also pretty good, given I have lots of practice with that sort of thing.
Gross motor skills: lol

Good idea Galen to post your own abilities/skills. Everyone should post how their abilities and skills pan out in real life and compare them to the brain types theory. My abilities are probably more similar to an NT then an NF.

Verbal ability: Excellent - Writing comes naturally to me, but speaking tends to vary on my state of mind at the time as I can speak fluently at one moment and then be choppy at another moment.
Mental ability: Good - It varies, when my mental health is at my best, my mind works very well and I can analyze things very easily, when I'm not mentally healthy, my thinking can be sluggish and choppy.
Fine motor skills: Okay - I have no problem playing musical instruments and I can type very fast with my fingers. However I can be clumsy with my hands at times.
Gross motor skills: Poor - I'm a dreadful dancer as I move awkwardly, however I'm a decent athlete.

[plotter]

What you're saying is retarded in so many ways that no amount of superior verbal skill can make up for it. Being an NT with IQ 140+, I must be correct

Why not dispute my argument point by point instead of just saying I'm wrong with no evidence. Clearly, the IQ test is wrong, you are probably a stupid NT with no verbal ability to prove your point.

I really don't know my IQ, but used that statement because it was not in line with the previous part of my post.

Anyhow, the "findings" that you're discussing is most likely based on stereotypical typings of people based on stuff like: This person is an excellent athlete - he's probably a SF/ST, or based on statistics showing that some types are overrepresented where certain kinds of skills are needed.
This might be true and to the untrained eye indicate stuff like what you presented, but it is in no way a correct conclusion to be drawn.

Another, not as interesting but much more likely explanation is that different types have different pesonalities which makes it more likely for their type to come in contact or be interested in certain fields, like someone that have a very competitive personality might be drawn to sports where the individuals achievement is more recognized than the team effort.
This leads to a greater training of the body functions that are used when the individual is doing what he or she finds interesting.
Of course people are born with different potential for things, but it is the active use of those functions that determines how good the individual will become in them,

and some fixed order would be ridiculous... if we rigidly apply this that would mean that if someone train their least favoured function, the individual would become better at all other functions to compensate, alternatively the person would change type...

my list
1 mental abilities - excellent, easy learner, good memory,
2 gross motor skills - very good, athlete, above average in all major sports
3 verbal skills - okay - average, would'nt make a good speaker
4 fine motor - okay-poor, I can play instruments and stuff, but my hands shake constantly so I would never make a surgeon.

[Raver]

Why not dispute my argument point by point instead of just saying I'm wrong with no evidence. Clearly, the IQ test is wrong, you are probably a stupid NT with no verbal ability to prove your point.

I really don't know my IQ, but used that statement because it was not in line with the previous part of my post.

Anyhow, the "findings" that you're discussing is most likely based on stereotypical typings of people based on stuff like: This person is an excellent athlete - he's probably a SF/ST, or based on statistics showing that some types are overrepresented where certain kinds of skills are needed.
This might be true and to the untrained eye indicate stuff like what you presented, but it is in no way a correct conclusion to be drawn.

Another, not as interesting but much more likely explanation is that different types have different pesonalities which makes it more likely for their type to come in contact or be interested in certain fields, like someone that have a very competitive personality might be drawn to sports where the individuals achievement is more recognized than the team effort.
This leads to a greater training of the body functions that are used when the individual is doing what he or she finds interesting.
Of course people are born with different potential for things, but it is the active use of those functions that determines how good the individual will become in them,

and some fixed order would be ridiculous... if we rigidly apply this that would mean that if someone train their least favoured function, the individual would become better at all other functions to compensate, alternatively the person would change type...

my list
1 mental abilities - excellent, easy learner, good memory,
2 gross motor skills - very good, athlete, above average in all major sports
3 verbal skills - okay - average, would'nt make a good speaker
4 fine motor - okay-poor, I can play instruments and stuff, but my hands shake constantly so I would never make a surgeon.

Fair enough, you make some good points. What bothers me most about brain types is how they came to those conclusions about types. Like if they made a large inventory of people abilities and compared them to their type or if they just made assumptions on biased evidence. To me that would make all the difference in the world whether to take the theory seriously or not.

[munenori2]

What are you if you're awesome at all this shit?

[munenori2]

H...high fffive, derp. *goes for high five but misses and falls down several flights of stairs, flounders for his cell phone to call for help but the buttons are too small for his fumbling fingers, exits the gene pool*

[Jarno]

I have shitty fine motor abilities but great gross motor abilities. Very little precision.

Two ESI's that I know have really weak motorskills.

What's you experience with them?

The OP sais they should have great skills.

[Igxfl]

Fair enough, you make some good points. What bothers me most about brain types is how they came to those conclusions about types. Like if they made a large inventory of people abilities and compared them to their type or if they just made assumptions on biased evidence. To me that would make all the difference in the world whether to take the theory seriously or not.

Even if they made an inventory of types, the inventory was probably created by typing people based at least in part on said biased assumptions.

[Raver]

Fair enough, you make some good points. What bothers me most about brain types is how they came to those conclusions about types. Like if they made a large inventory of people abilities and compared them to their type or if they just made assumptions on biased evidence. To me that would make all the difference in the world whether to take the theory seriously or not.

Even if they made an inventory of types, the inventory was probably created by typing people based at least in part on said biased assumptions.

Yes, but that's just being presumptuous. We don't really know how they came to those conclusions, so it's best just to compare it to real life and see if it fits. It seems like most people think it doesn't fit or don't want to admit it fits because it's politically incorrect. Even though it's politically incorrect to say this, I've noticed that it fits in with most people. However, I've also noticed that there are some people that don't fit in with it at all.

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

Umm. I've always been shitty at sports, but good in art. I'm a great writer of course, and I most likely have a natural potency in music.

(For typical gay man ness)

lol it was embarrassing how bad I was at sports, like 5-year-old girls are better than me. Oh well though. I kick people's ass with writing.

I probably wouldn't be that bad at archery for some reason, either.... Probably cause the competition is more self-focused/inward and archery requires a lot of focus/concentration which I can be really good in! But throwing the football around with the buddies is like not really my element you know, for many reasons...

((I kinda wanna be a hunter/ranger and not a mage. Or maybe a magical ranger... like suddenly you're doing something straight man ish and then you look down and u see a pink arrow in your heart. It hurts just as much as if the arrow wasn't pink, but its pink anyway. <3))

[mimisor]

There was an interesting diagram I remember that was on the brain types website until they took it down, but it basically it showed body figures explaining this:

NT:

Excellent mental ability
Good verbal ability
Okay fine motor skills
Poor gross motor skills

NF:

Excellent verbal ability
Good mental ability
Good fine motor skills
Okay gross motor skills

ST:

Excellent fine motor skills
Good gross motor skills
Good verbal ability
Okay mental ability

SF:

Excellent gross motor skills
Good fine motor skills
Okay verbal ability
Poor mental ability

Does this sound accurate to you? Also, this is not my idea, I found this on the brain types website years ago so don't shoot the messenger.

Yes, i remember the diagram too, but i can't find it anywhere now.

I recommend for further reading

http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...ead.php?t=1444
http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...ead.php?t=1444

This is what Rocky explained long ago:

THE TOP OF THE MOTOR CORTEX: This controls everything starting from the toes and feet, legs, hips and up through the shoulders.

The types that are dominant in this region of the cortex are the Empirical Animates (or the Sensory Ethics in socionics). -- SF

THE MIDDLE OF THE MOTOR CORTEX: This area controls the lower arms, hands, fingers, and eyes.

The types that are dominant here are the Empirical Inanimates (or the Sensory Logics in socionics). --ST

THE BOTTOM OF THE MOTOR CORTEX: This is where you control the tongue, lips, jaw and throat areas.

The types that are dominant in this area are the Conceptual Animates (or Intuitive Ethics in socioniocs). --NF

NTs are pretty much off the chart.

[FDG]

As far as I know, NTs can't really autonomously move their limbs. Stephen Hawking is a good representation of your average (even above average) NT - there's a reason why SF types are their duals, they can control everything, even other people's movements.

[Sumer1an]

For me its more along the lines of:


Mental capabilities>Verbal capabilities>gross motor skills>Fine motor skills.

My verbal skills are somewhat of a close second. My motor skills are pretty poor though my gross motor skills is miles ahead of my fine motor skills. I have the worst handwriting of anyone I've ever met.

[Jarno]

These correlations are fucking retarded.

For myself, I'd estimate: Mental > Gross Motor > Verbal > Fine Motor

Does verbal includes how large your vocabulary or how well your writing style is. Cause in that case I think second place is correct and correlation is less 'retarded'.

[FDG]

These correlations are fucking retarded.

For myself, I'd estimate: Mental > Gross Motor > Verbal > Fine Motor

Does verbal includes how large your vocabulary or how well your writing style is. Cause in that case I think second place is correct and correlation is less 'retarded'.

Well, you mean that the ranking shouldn't be considered as absolute but just relative i.e. I might have better gross motor skills than a SF, yet my mental skills will still be higher. In that case it might make more sense, however the brain types guy had an absolute ranking system in mind IMHO - many people here use "good", "medium", "poor" instead of simply suggesting a ranking.