1) I haven't thought too much about it but, in my opinion, IQ tests measureand
, so high IQ literally means "strong
and
"
2) Asperger syndrome looks like an ENTp profile: high, intense focus on certain fields, low social abilities, etc
Feedback?
1) I haven't thought too much about it but, in my opinion, IQ tests measureand
, so high IQ literally means "strong
and
"
2) Asperger syndrome looks like an ENTp profile: high, intense focus on certain fields, low social abilities, etc
Feedback?
ILE "Searcher"
Socionics: ENTp![]()
DCNH: Dominant![]()
--> perhaps Normalizing
![]()
Enneagram: 7w6 "Enthusiast"
MBTI: ENTJ "Field Marshall" or ENTP "Inventor"
Astrological sign: Aquarius
To learn, read. To know, write. To master, teach.
i've always thought aspergers is more LII or ILI, stereotypically at least. aspergers is probably independent of type though.
ILE
those who are easily shocked.....should be shocked more often
How does an SEI get 147 then? o_O
I think that there are certain dangers involved with attributing intelligence - even intelligence tests which do indeed focus on some specific areas of intelligence - with certain types and functions. You tend to run the risk of suggesting that certain types are less intelligent than others by doing this, rather than making the realisation that not only will certain types value and therefore perhaps studty out of interest different things than others (I know that this point may also be an argument FOR achievements based on type in IQ tests, but moving on), but that attributing intelligence to certain types may indeed just be an unintentional display to others of 'you' making a judgment on others' intelligence based on what you personally value as intelligent (function values) rather than actual intelligence. What I'm essentially saying here is that attirubting any idea of intelligence to a specific type/types runs the risk of making you look.......stupid.
Hello, my name is Bee. Pleased to meet you .
Furthermore - I think that suggesting that Aspergers people are either more or less intelligent than anyone else probably runs the risk of separating them from a feeling of belonging in society even more than they may already feel/others may feel. It seems like it is the sort of thing that builds more of a stigma around such people.
I'm not saying that it isn't interesting or true/false, but I don't really like the idea of people feeling disconnected from others. People are people and I guess the best any one person can do is be accepting and try to help and understand when something in their world goes wrong concerning external influences such as other people.
Hello, my name is Bee. Pleased to meet you .
IQ tests ime are based on identifying patterns of geometric forms or wavy lines or dots or w/e.
I tentatively state that there may be type bias in IQ tests.
This does not mean intelligence is correlated to type and is more a possible issue with IQ tests.
The end is nigh
You beat my argument. You win 1.
Hello, my name is Bee. Pleased to meet you .
Just my two cents on this thread: I think the issue is more that the way Ne and Ti are described by Socionists makes them sound like IQ, rather than that IQ tests measure these things. Yes, to an extent, certain IQ tests questions may appear similar to Ti and Ne, but actually Te may also be involved in solving them because one has to have some sort of strategy or approach to attack the various problems; similarly, Ni may also give a certain insight regarding the direction for some problems, although I would agree that typically for test kinds of questions it feels more like one is using Ne because you have to think of lots of possible approaches fast and can't get deep into any one, otherwise you'll run out of time. (Of course, the use of mental abilities is a bit different from personality, so someone may in fact use a lot of "Ti" and "Ne" in daily life and not come off as Alpha at all. I think this is also one of the "trouble" spots in Socionics because the IM elements exist at many different levels, and one may be different at all these levels.) In any case, different people will probably use different functions to solve the same problem and still come up with the right answer.
As to ILE being about intense focus and low social abilities, that just doesn't sound like a good description of ILE at all, at least as it's normally described (I guess this comes back to some earlier discussions on who actually is ILEs and what ILEs are really like, and I guess that's an open question with a lot of different opinions). In any case, coming from the point of view of what I would consider most the "norm" in Socionics, it may be true of certain ILEs, but if you described someone that way, it would not make me think of ILE. It sounds more LII. In fact the most noticeable differences between ILEs and LIIs are that LIIs usually seem more focused, and with lower social abilities. ILEs usually come off as being less focused and tending to jump around more, and they're usually more aware of more different stuff around them which usually gives them higher social abilities compared to LII.
At the risk of hijacking the thread:
I wouldn't describe the INTj mindset as particularly "focussed" myself. It's more like a state of diffuse, idle readiness. An INTj typically has an uninvested attitude toward the surroundings he is in. Typically, s/he will notice everything that is going on around him/her in a shallow way, but investigate very few of the things deeply. From this attitude it is very easy to begin focussing, but to do so would still be a divergence from the attitude itself. Also once the INTj begins focussing, he enters a state that is more physically focussed than mentally so. So in their physically focussed state they are most likely to seek direct contact with the issues concerned. There isn't really a middle ground between the two states for an INTj.In fact the most noticeable differences between ILEs and LIIs are that LIIs usually seem more focused, and with lower social abilities.
The ENTp attitude is typically invested in a personal urge or idea. The environment is closed off and the person begins to draw attention and energy from the surroundings to the personal obsession. In a sense this is also a focussed state, because the obsession is made the focal point of everything the person controls.
There's no such thing as Asperger aka Ass Burgers. Learn how to think for yourself.
Society just can't accept that everybody is different. That some people , who prefer not to be outwardly social, stay mute, and might express themselves better through writing or online. However, objectively this behavior will seem 'weird' to others so it's going to be labelled as a disorder by mainstream society (because it doesn't functionally produce monetary value and turn human beings into slaves), but it's not. People need to get a grip and learn how other people think instead of saying they are disordered when they are not. But it goes both ways. People with "Ass Burgers" (as if such a thing exists) needs to learn how other people think too.
"Autism", "Ass Burger's", they don't exist.
However, I do take an ethical stance against people who ACTUALLY, with OBJECTIVE EVIDENCE harm others (Not just "socially" or "Hurt somebody's feelings") -- "ass burgers" or not. We need to stop guilt tripping everybody just because their internal worlds are different than our own. People need to feel guilty for what they do, not who they are.
CAN I GET AN A-MEN!
2) Asperger syndrome looks like an ENTp profile: high, intense focus on certain fields, low social abilities, etc
LMAO . there is NO way to define what exactly is 'low social abilities' and what is not. It is human discrimination and biases. If I can pwn somebody in writing, and create a very good document for human beings to follow, but I'm shy in the 'real world' it doesn't make my insights or work any less. Intense focus on certain fields? You need that to succeed in any occupation! By that definition, doctors have Ass Burgers because to become a doctor requires intense focus on certain fields. If you have enough money, nobody would ever say that you had 'Ass Burgers.'
The whole thing is a lie. Wake up!
"Jonny is weird. Instead of trying to understand him and talk to him and empathize with him and really relate to his level, I'm going to label with him something, be an asshole and ostracize him and be condescending and patronizing to jonny."
Now I could just *personally* find him an asshole, and ignore him. That would be okay, really. But instead of doing that and taking ANY personal responsibility for myself, I'm going to label with him disorders, and basically make his life a living hell because I'm afraid of him and I can't tolerate differences or ambiguity. And I'm going to do it all while thinking that I'm the good guy.
THAT'S HOW WE HAD EONS OF HATRED AGAINST GAYS AND WOMEN AND ******S, YOU RETARDS! *blows people up with Piper's Hands of Discontent*
lol, assburger.
depends on the IQ test, really. I can show you one which favors Si / Se
How about this one? Blogthings - How Observant Are You?
Not an IQ test per se, but I think it definitely favors S types.
By the way, I got a D+ on this test. I never bothered to pay attention things like which numbers correspond to which letters on the telephone dial or which card in a deck has the cardmaker's trademark. I just don't care.
LII-Ne with strong EII tendencies, 6w7-9w1-3w4 so/sp/sx, INxP
ass-bugger. LOL could be a sexual variation.
oh wait this isn't the blow job thread what am i thinking.
ILE
those who are easily shocked.....should be shocked more often