let me further explain myself- thank you niffy for making this a new thread, i truly appreciate it.
i sometimes wonder how others react to me and my posts if they would react to me the same way if i were not a SEE. not only that, but you can even see this NT intelligence bias in the high number of people claiming to be NT types, or really even N types or T types on this forum. Yes, these people are the ones who would be the most attracted to and interested in socionics, but i find it hard to believe that 100% of these people are accurately typed (especially all the ILIs). Thus showing that some of these people may want to be a certain type or want people here to perceive them as a certain way. Furthermore, I've had SEVERAL experiences on this site (i guess this is to be expected with all the T people around) with T people saying hurtful, disrespectful, unneccessary, and unjustified things towards me and others with a complete disregard for how others may feel. As far as I am concerned, this is ridiculous. IMO, this forum is for people at all stages of understanding socionics to discuss their observations, insights, experiences, whatever. As a feeling type, I can definitely see other feelers not participating as much in the forum because of people's rudeness. IMO, that is a damn shame and the people who participate in such cruelty on this site should be ashamed of themselves. I'm definitely not the only S, F, or SF type to have experienced this bias on this forum and I'm interested to hear what others have to say.
I will continue to fight this injustice against all the S, F, and SF people out there until we have equal rights!
ESFp-Fi sub
6w7 sx/so/sp
You will be treated like an intelligent person when you give others reason to believe that you are one. discojoe, Diana, and bionicgoat are all SF, and all are treated as intelligent people. SlackerMom, Mea, Kristiina, anndelise, Baby....I could go on with the list of NFs who are treated just like the NTs, STs, and SFs.
Snake eyes! Roll again.
i really think it's funny that you keep on responding to things i've written when your ignored. ahhhh ignorance is bliss. but yes, you should be ashamed of yourself for perpetuating some of the things i mentioned above. ah wait, but you won't will you with that whole Fi PoLR thing, right? thanks for proving my point.
ESFp-Fi sub
6w7 sx/so/sp
there isn't a bias towards NT and intelligence; it's a fact that NT's consistently score higher. Just look at all the historical geniuses - 99% of them are NT. That being said, there are many different types of intelligence, and us NT's lack very much in the emotional aspects and interpersonal relations, more so the I's. liveandletlive, you seem to be attached to this subject, as I've noticed it in multiple posts of yours, whether directly or subtlely. On a side note, after reading one of your posts the other day, I thought 'this is the smartest ESFp I've encountered'.
Don't complain about people who perpetuate a conception of superiority; just understand your strengths and weaknesses. changing people is impossible.
I'm an SF and would consider myself Intelligent.
Intelligent when it comes to socionics... No, and I'm ok with that.
Do I really care if anyone here finds me intelligent or not, not really.
I just ate a lunchable.
and they aren't. but not necessarily because they're stupid.not only that, but you can even see this NT intelligence bias in the high number of people claiming to be NT types, or really even N types or T types on this forum. Yes, these people are the ones who would be the most attracted to and interested in socionics, but i find it hard to believe that 100% of these people are accurately typed (especially all the ILIs).
NT=intelligence, but really, some people take that for superiority, just because NT types are supposed to be the smartest temperament.
D-SEI 9w1
This is me and my dual being scientific together
for the first part of my statement, how about you name me 5 historical geniuses who had a preference for sensing.Originally Posted by niffweed17
for the second part, did you read the article hhkkmr posted?
and for the sake of it, name all the "really smart" people you know, then compare that with their type.
I don't give a fuck whether I'm on your ignore list or not, so feel special putting me on...
I can see why there's a perceived bias towards NTs being intelligent, especially given the influence of MBTI and Keirsey implying that intuitives are the intelligent ones, but I think anyone who genuinely is intelligent would be able to use said intelligence to realise that personality type doesn't even come into it. I think one common tendency is for intelligence to be equated, in people's minds, with things like logical and abstract thinking etc., which then makes it seem like those who are naturally pre-disposed to such thinking styles must be intelligent. Which IMO is bullshit. At the end of the day, it's impossible to define exactly what intelligence even is, because there's so many different perspectives that people can put on it. If you're going to consider intelligence to be all about logical thinking and mental capabilities, then an NT will look like an intelligent person. If you consider intelligence to be about being aware of the world around you and being in-tune with reality, then a sensing type would look like an intelligent person. Unfortunately my intelligence (or lack thereof, however you look at it) prevents me from thinking of any more examples, but the point I'm trying to get across here is intelligence is NOT type related and that an intelligent person of any type will be able to put their intelligence to its best use WITH THE SKILLS THEY HAVE.
Bloody hell this was a hard post to write. Hopefully it wasn't in vain.
ILI (Indescribable Lovemaking Inc.)
5w4 so/sx
"IP temperament! Because today's concerns are tomorrow's indifferences!"
Lord Fnorgle's Domain - A slowly growing collection of music, poetry and literature.
Stickam music performances
There are different types of intelligences, I believe...
In some situations I feel like I can more than hold my own in the smarts department, in others I feel like a completely incompetent moron.
EDIT: I think I just pretty much said what BLauritson did.
Oh, to find you in dreams - mixing prior, analog, and never-beens... facts slip and turn and change with little lucidity. except the strong, permeating reality of emotion.
you were right about the different kinds. in a sense, intelligence can be looked at as how 'in tune' with the universe your mind is. The degree of complexity that you can think about the relationships in the universe with, the level of difficulty of information you can understand. Sure, betty-susie may have a real nac for gardening and understanding her physical surroundings, but she may not even be able to understand calculus, which, to me, signifies greater mental ability, because it deals with problem solving.Originally Posted by BLauritson
Intelligence is relative to whatever is being discussed. If you're talking about academic pursuits focused on concepts and patterns, that's one thing. If you're talking about understanding people/learning physical activities/communicating/executing plans/etc, it's another. Another way of putting it might be that we're intelligent to the extent that we're best able to learn, adapt, and apply to practice in some given respect or context. The reason there's all this arguing seems less over issues of facts and more about definitions.
Moonlight will fall
Winter will end
Harvest will come
Your heart will mend
Moonlight will fall
Winter will end
Harvest will come
Your heart will mend
Eek, personally I just wanna say that I think intelligence to me is how much of a capacity you have for understanding/comprehending something, anything.
This is a pretty broad statement, which is good cause it can apply to many different areas of learning, etc ... therefore yeah, there are many different "types" of intelligence ... just that it all boils down to something simple.
bleh
Last edited by Gilly; 12-24-2007 at 09:24 PM.
This is a bit of a silly question, realy. Asking if there "is" a bias is pointless, because obviously SOME people have biases, no matter what we do. There are also plenty of people who don't. It's just not this black and white.
Last edited by Gilly; 12-24-2007 at 09:23 PM.
I agree, that is a good way to look at it.
NTs just appear more intelligent because they focus on things that are typically viewed as the realm of "intelligent" people(abstract + logical ideas, which is why Ns are typically viewed as more intelligent than S types, and ST types as more intelligent than SFs on this forum, because that's what Socionics is mainly concerned with.) This focus causes an illusion that NTs are more intelligent that not only they believe, but others propogate as well. However, focus on an area of thought =/= a necessary superiority in it, and also causes their other intelligences to be diminished. That's the reason's there's types...the intelligences are in different areas in a room and everyone is shining their intellectual flash-light in different places, and this is what causes them to seem "brighter" than others in that area. But you can choose to shine your light in that area of the room...even though it makes you feel uncomfortable or bored or whatever(what you value ie type), and can still be capable of producing the amazing results that other people who are always shining it that area are capable of producing.
"To become is just like falling asleep. You never know exactly when it happens, the transition, the magic, and you think, if you could only recall that exact moment of crossing the line then you would understand everything; you would see it all"
"Angels dancing on the head of a pin dissolve into nothingness at the bedside of a dying child."
I'm sure it's a real mind-bogglerOriginally Posted by Minde
anyway, whoever said that my description was biased...um...not really, because being able to solve real problems through an understanding of complex patterns does signify intelligence. whether it be understanding the physics behind an athlete's tackle or the mathematics involved in calculating the number of moles of an an element in a compound....
what do you do when you think? your mind conceptually travels through the waves of the universe. intuition is correlated with underlying abstract patterns and logic is basically the rational governence of the universe...so, I would naturally expect an NT to be smarter. there was a time when I thought myself ISTx, and I would have said the same thing then.
yeah, salawa, those online ones are mediocre at best....I've never taken a real one, but my old therapist told me what was on it and demonstrated some stuff. there are four categories: verbal, spatial, processing speed and short-term memory. basically, visual is like the blocks and drawing pictures, i.e. attention to detail....processing speed deals with matrices and symbol-coding, short-term memory is where they say #'s, letters or both, in any order and you have to repeat them back....and then verbal is like metaphors and conceptual reasoning and vocab.
I would not be surprised at all if an ESTj scored higher on memory than an INTj....I think the visual fields are where NT's would score best, NF's might score higher on verbal....
In 'Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance', the author, Robert Pirsig, mentioned his IQ of 170 dismissively, saying the test was just analytic manipulation.
I'd say that most people on this forum are open-minded enough to recognise that each type is valuable in their own way. However, I think that in wider society, there is definitely a bias in the clever people being NTs (nerds). NT stands for something else - Nerdic Thinker.
Salawa, just out of interest, which game is your picture from? It looks like C&C or Rise and Fall or something.
ahh, this is what I hoped you would notice. I would conjecture that S's would be better at the visual portion that deals with attention to detail and quick scanning...however, the block are about abstract patterns, seeing the whole....so intuiters would theoretically be better at that (I suck at scanning shit, but can synthesize shapes and stuff like that easily).Originally Posted by Salawa
you took a real test? cool. please share
It's just not true. There are dumb NTs with typical NT interests but that don't understand things particularly well or easily, and the opposite is true for SFs.
Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit
very true, just uncommon.Originally Posted by FDG
dumb NT's are uncommonOriginally Posted by FDG
SAT's!!?? are you kidding me? anyone can score high on the SAT's as long as they have half a brain and have been programmed by the school system to think a certain way. The SAT is not a good indicator of true intelligence.Originally Posted by FDG
Yeah yeah, so it's you the only one able to assess intelligence. Which could be even true, but we need an objective standard in order to be able to speak the same language.
Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit
agreed, but we need to know what we are speaking about when we do. IQ is the closest thing to quantification.Originally Posted by FDG
And SAT scores have a pretty good correlation with IQ scores so I used it as proxy (turns out these 20 people i spoke about all have wide and varied interests bla bla, none of them is your typical guy that has to study 3423545 hours to get an high score. You'll see that this is generally the case for the tail of the distro)
Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit
yeah, I agree. if you take an IQ test, then take an SAT, the results will be similar. but these days, peoples' final scores on their SAT's are higher than their actual abilities, unless they're one of the really smart people who takes it once and does really well.Originally Posted by FDG
Can you give any examples of dumb NT's?
D-SEI 9w1
This is me and my dual being scientific together