I know how to cook Labradors and wash Cupcakes.
I know how to cook Labradors and wash Cupcakes.
Tons of smart enfps explains why the world is so fucked
I don't think there is a link theoretically. It could be possible that a person who is intelligent will likely adopt the traits that would be attributed to ILI and LII.
That is introversion, long periods spent alone studying large amounts of information.
Consider alternative possibilities and explanations to their hypotheses and theories. This may lead them to believe that they are intuitive.
Having the ability to clearly articulate your points in a straightforward and logical manner.
Where I work there are SEIs who have to use Te and they are good at their job despite them having Te Polr.
There are ILI and SLI actors who have Fe polr.
I could go on and on...
Then you have to think about what exactly intelligence is.
ESI-Se tend to have above average IQ, they're probably the smartest ethical type... for some reason, they tend to have above average visuo-spatial and analytical abilities (better than LSI-Ti) and they're usually more open to new opportunities, can find lesser known and beautiful things, think clearly/linearly, and can work with computers well compared to LSI-Ti.
LSI-Ti tend to have average or below average IQ, they tend to do worse with analysis, deductive logic, and visuo-spatial tests than ESI-Se.
ILE-Ti vary quite a bit in how successful they are, but they're all above average intelligence... they all have above average ability on raven's progressive matrices, figure weights deduction block design, definitions, speaking, writing, discernment of visual, auditory, and tactile stimuli, and noticing inconsistencies. I've noticed some have some executive functioning problems, correlated with their C-D cognitive style (particularly the positivist element), which means they test things may not be good for them in attempt to solve problems; they try to confront problems without really thinking about them first. But most have average to good executive functioning.
IEE-Ne are usually verbally quick but not very accurate and usually not good at compartmentalizing and usually have terrible executive functioning (due to being obstinate, result, and having weaker sensing and thinking functions). But they often have talents with ideas and doing things differently from accepted norms, which is good.
IEE-Fi tend to be good with compartmentalizing, and organizing things and working with technical systems compared to the Ne subtype.
EIE-Ni are usually aware of what's been going on. EIE-Fe as well, but they're not as open to possibilities as EIE-Ni.
SLE-Ti are aware AF of what's going on anywhere close to them. They're well-coordinated and usually good with deductive logic (but they don't seem to have as high of an IQ as ESI-Se, as ESI-Se tend to be better with words, but not always). They tend to have above average IQ.
LSI-Se tend to think quite clearly and are among the best at deductive logic.
SEE-Se think quite clearly and are cognitively stable as well and they can compartmentalize and work within context. They're also pretty quick, about as much as IEE-Ne, but SEE-Se are more accurate, have better memory, they think more clearly, and they're more economical with words.
I don't know much about others.
The answer is to the thread title is yes, at least when taking subtypes into account.
I need some good sleep.
Last edited by Disturbed; 12-19-2022 at 06:33 PM.
I'm sorry, but I'm psychologically disturbed.
I'm surprised no one has posted this graph yet.
intelligence.jpg
The full page, along with many other graphs :
http://danidin.ucoz.net/index/profili_svojstv_1/0-37
I don't think intelligence is linked to type, but also what is intelligence, exactly? A lot of those tests are a measure for a specific type of intelligence, usually the test creators'.
All of this candy jar of mind raging algorithms and quantum subsets of the reality chlorophyll deepen the psychic rift of enigmatic Boston tea parties.
ORRE COLOSSEUM JUST GOT STARTED, AND KOBE IS REIGNING AS KING!!
It's Henry vs Zidane, France vs Spain in the 2024 Olympic soccer final, Egypt vs Japan, Yugioh vs Pokemon, Poimandres vs Zarathustra, Giordano Bruno vs Friedrich Nietzsche, haystack picnic robed in silver rods to treasures of lore and sacred spark to unite and forge dancing stars and futures refracting crystal moonlight lures of hanger bay crunching fabrics webbing steel and blizzards juice stringing code red trains of yonder fluid ribbons trophy waterfall cake blueprints frenzy retracting haunted capital terra horns of leading edge canopy blossoms rendezvous shuffling Articuno!!
RaptorWizard Sci-Fi Empire Lugia Bunny ~ Ultimate Aeon Willpower: Wes Net (the16types.info)
The IQ tests like Raven's are biased toward intuitives. I'm not sure whether it's more Ni or Ne, perhaps both.
You need a judgmental function. But the test has time limits so solely relying on Ti analysis might not be enough.
It's probably biased toward N. When I take a test I find that there aren't enough time for my Ti. Although I got good score.
I think it would be better if there's tests to exam how well each element develops. I am good at Ti, Ne and Ni, but I'm not good at other functions.
Finally, data. Not surprising at all, though it is kinda funny that in the alpha and gamma the intelligence gap is massive between NT's and SF's while beta and delta ST's and NF's are relatively equal. Anyone who said any SF type is the smartest please reconsider your life choices and definition of intelligence.
"Hello, my name is cognitive bias. I spend a lot of time pondering about abstract patterns that only i can see. When I'm right, it's because of them! When I'm 'wrong', it's because other people just don't understand!
When others fail to validate my autistic self-aggrandizing preconceived ideas, I call them the 'no-smarts'. I even created a test, called IQ, so that I don't have to deal with people face to face. It only measures what I can see, so differences are framed as a 'lack of intelligence'. BOOOOOH you should serve the bodily needs of your intellectual superior, no-smarts! If you don't agree you're dumb! I knew it all along, I predicted it, and so shall it be!"
Correct me if I'm wrong, but it does seem like they didn't even do a QI test. They seem to extrapolate two sets of information(type and what's called "weak correlated" behaviour) from the same questionnaire.
"Do you think a lot? "Yes" -> you're a thinker & you're probably intelligent" <- conclusion is in the assumtion
So they rely on self-typing to make their correlations more accurate ? That doesn't seem scientific. And what's the point of having an expert questionnaire if they adjust to what people with little expertise in socionics think their type is?Some of the conclusions contained in the work may be partly outdated - due to the fact that the interconnection of socionic features is influenced, among other things, by the internal structure of the questionnaire. This structure is set by the compiler of the questionnaire, that is, it is largely subjective. Thus, a relatively small change in the set of questions can strongly change the secondary correlations of a number of features, and especially the "weakest" among them - that is, those whose study is of the greatest interest. This subjectivity is limited only by the need to maximize the percentage of convergence of the diagnoses of the questionnaire with self-typing of respondents.
Honestly when you look at the graph and see that they correlate type to physical attractiveness, you should start to doubt the validity of this research imo. Like did the dude just watch the pictures and say 'nah this one's a 4 at best'?!
Last edited by lkdhf qkb; 09-18-2021 at 11:17 AM.
>intellegence
IQ is just an attempt at intellectual dick measuring.
The Barnum or Forer effect is the tendency for people to judge that general, universally valid statements about personality are actually specific descriptions of their own personalities. A "universally valid" statement is one that is true of everyone—or, more likely, nearly everyone. It is not known why people tend to make such misjudgments, but the effect has been experimentally reproduced.
The psychologist Paul Meehl named this fallacy "the P.T. Barnum effect" because Barnum built his circus and dime museum on the principle of having something for everyone. It is also called "the Forer effect" after its discoverer, the psychologist Bertram R. Forer, who modestly dubbed it "the fallacy of personal validation".
@roger557I don't think their IQ is quite as high as ESI-Se, but if Richard Nixon is the ethical subtype then maybe they are as smart.
I'm sorry, but I'm psychologically disturbed.
Most of us live in a culture that accepts on some level that some “deserve” success and others don’t, largely on the basis of intelligence. It’s probably difficult for most people to answer this without some moral judgement creeping in. Someone who says “yes, T types are more intelligent” automatically recognizes what he’s saying in his cultural context really means something like “T types are born to a higher calling, and F types are barely worth consideration —“ because this is already how we justify the most extreme inequalities. And this seems to be why so many people are uncomfortable saying what ought to be obvious.
If you’re looking at it honestly, it’s fundamental to Socionics/Jungian typology that T types are generally better at thinking. T types’ thinking can obviously be misguided, but they’re at least predisposed to make attempts on problems F types are generally reluctant to begin. And a weak thinking function can be made up for or imitated, for instance by memorization or by practicing replicating a T type’s natural thought process. But posts in this thread about F types doing well in sciences or some T types being stupid seem to be evading the obvious point.
Last edited by FreelancePoliceman; 11-16-2021 at 07:06 PM.
While I don't have source for his claim, I actually have a source for something contrary.
There are two neurotransmitters mostly involved in ADHD, dopamine and norepinephrine, low levels or reduced sensitivity to them result in ADHD or similar conditions. These two neurotransmitters work synergistically, this is why ADHD is usually medicated with stimulants that rise both dopamine and norepinephrine levels in the brain and not with NRIs alone. Having low dopamine and high norepinephrine is very unusual. According to Talanov, Ne types may have reduced dopamine sensitivity, he concluded it from his research about sexuality in socionic types.
Translated from Russian, should be clear enough:
"Black sensorics and, to a lesser extent, black ethics are thus responsible for libido (in contrast, BI and BL reduce libido). Orgasmic strength has roughly the same profile as libido strength, but the main negative influence goes from white logic to black intuition - this can be explained by a deficit of dopaminergic sensitivity in black intuitives. Firstly, there is a lot of known evidence pointing to a direct connection between individual expression of BI and a decrease in the sensitivity of type 2 dopamine receptors in relay thalamic neurons (which leads in black intuitives to a decrease in the quality of sensory filters and, accordingly, to an expansion of the associative field), and at the same time, it is known that before orgasm an additional release of dopamine into the CNS occurs, that is, dopaminergic transmission is necessary for testing a full orgasm (dopamine is called a pleasure mediator for good reason)."
Source: http://sociotoday.narod.ru/sex.html
To answer the question, for people who took the WAIS-III:
Statics (and Fe-base Fe-subtypes) and types with good sensing (mentioned below) and who were good with logic and cause and effect would do better on I.Q. tests (or at least the WAIS-III).
So:
ILE-Ti, LSI-Se, EIE-Fe, SLE-Ti, IEI-Ni, and ESI-Se and maybe IEE-Fi and maybe ILI... those types (except I don't know whether ILI do or not, I'd guess the ILI-Ni does) tend to have great memories, the most ability to focus, the most field independent, able to sequence and quickly narrow it down to the option that works best for them, good coordination (low rates of dyspraxia), and are the most successful in life, have the best visual recognition, most successful in getting what they want, most able to persuade, they're generally self-controlled when it's to their advantage to do so, the least internally emotional (or at least the least aware of their emotions, except maybe the ESI-Se), and they have the biggest achievements which is correlated with I.Q.
I really think good black Sensing (and people who are able to use it non-impulsively/dose it well/use it in wise proportions in any situation, who are successful at getting what they want out of using it, like the types mentioned above can, but the opposite subtypes can't) correlated with I.Q. test scores more than all the other information elements. Ne isn't really important for I.Q. testing, and LII would be slow on the performance parts of I.Q. tests which are timed and LII are also somewhat cut off from reality and not always able to work well in the physical world and they have some misogyny, prefer traditional gender norms, and have some health problems they can't take care of on their own which are correlated with not very high I.Q.
Any reason ILE-Ti would do best on I.Q. tests (especially the performance sub-scale of the WAIS-III which has the picture arrangement subtest), is because they notice details heavily what the external is (they tend to have good usage of black sensing noticing appearance, desire to do well what on anything that matters to them, and good white sensing which notices the space), they tend to perceive information as it was laid out and can arrange it will.. that correlates with I.Q. I disagree with the post I liked earlier in this thread which said you can't easily tell how smart a woman, how high her IQ is by looking at her. Maybe not the face, but there are certain bodily characteristics, such as tibia length and how much drive she has and how able to she is to be aggressive without getting consequences too much in proportion to her aggressiveness. or if she's not aggressive, then how well she's able to work with the systems that are already there.
I'm sorry, but I'm psychologically disturbed.
I’d agree, I have high functioning adhd n my environment also makes a big impact on whether I can focus. I’d imagine tho alpha nts scorer higher on iq test than me because I struggle with those sort of questions, as they seem kinda complex where it would be easier for a ti user to connect. I see IEIs being able to have more focus and score better too, and more likely to pursue like a certain topic and be able to understand in depth. That’s something I struggle with from my adhd (like I have been able to pursue topics when I had better focus since I had a healthier environment and routine helps me a lot)
Last edited by youfloweryourfeast; 02-19-2024 at 09:55 PM.
My psychiatrist confirmed that I am a genius so I guess even dum dum ESFPs... ups, I meant IEIs can be smartypants.
Ethical types are adapted to dealing with people, better at emotional manipulation, mostly are better at emotional intelligence, etc. (Ex: Adolf ****** being good with indoctrinating people, EIE).
To expand on that idea of an ethical type having a higher IQ than a logical type for the sake of making any counter argument, I would guess that an ethical type with great logic and a high IQ would have an astonishingly high EQ, while a logical type with an astonishing EQ would still have to have a IQ that is much higher. What mostly defines an Ethical type is that their logical functions < ethical functions in terms of strength, vice versa for logical types. So any type can have a high IQ, just if it's an ethical type, its EQ would be maybe far higher.
Basically sequenced strength?
But also types can-socionics is not just defined by behavior, but also philosophy, political beliefs, etc; which are all factors that can change over time. It just makes zero sense that a type is fixed when it is defined by factors that gradually change, but the likelihood of types changing would be low usually. Just behavior is more likely to change over years of work rewiring your own brain and breaking old patterns of thinking. But political and philosophical beliefs can change suddenly, but often take time to change.
Simply an "ethical" type with an extremely low EQ and IQ wouldn't be possible, or vice versa for logical types, it simply completely contradicts the whole purpose of dimensions of the functions and undermines the strengths of each type.
Also, taken into consideration that intuitive types are better at intuition, better knowledge on how things would play out in terms of patterns, better with ambiguity, so that could maybe impact IQ?
For a genius EIE with the same strengths in Ti as an LSI would have Fe that is 8x better than that LSI's Fe, so on with intuition, etc.
Also, I find that Logical types can be moral, just they find different ways to justify their own moral compass.
Ti(Tx): "We only justify killing for the sake of preserving our safety, to protect, and for food, thus it would be wrong to go out ruthlessly killing animals if they aren't a threat, and you have plenty of food. Also, meaninglessly killing these animals would ruin the environment, thus negatively affecting us, and these animals may even stay far away from us from now on, making it harder to hunt."
Fi(Fx): "It's wrong to kill animals because they have feelings as well, they have families, I wouldn't want to eat a wild animal that was cruelly killed.”
My own view on Fi usage is kind of shallow, so please give some better suggestions
What if your dad asked him/her to say it? Also, I think way back in the day you said your family pushing you to be thinking out of the box and be extraordinary led to your breakdown. I wonder whether your shrink knows this and still thought it would be a good idea to gas you up.
Well, I'd expect someone with a 100 IQ to be an ESFJ, 140-150 to be an ENFJ, 170+ to be a INxP and 190+ to be an ENxP. Don't forget the ESxP who have IQs a little over 80.
Sometimes you don't have motivation because you lack purpose.
Sometimes you don't have purpose, because you lack self-knowledge
Sometimes you don't have self-knowledge because you lack love
Sometimes you don't have love because you lack self-love
Sometimes you don't have self-love because you lack guess what? Ask Gulenko!!
IQ tests heavily favor INxx types as they literally test an aspect of Ni which is cause and effect perception (which picture follows logically?). I think it measures a specific aspect of intelligence and probably has some merit but I doubt types like SEE or ESE would even give a shit about these tests.