On Rationals and Idealists having an evolutionary advantage

[indigoroom]

It is my personal belief that the lower percentages, Rationals and Idealists are on the evolutionary edge. For one thing, it is intuitively obvious (here we go again with the"inf" stuff!) the ability to deal with the world in abstract terms is the wave of the future. We've been moving in that direction since we were cavewomen. The advantage of the technologically gifted Rationals is clear. The advantage of the Idealist is less clear. That's what we're going to look at in this article.

I can make a helpful analogy here with recent findings regarding blood types.40-45% have type O; 35-40% have type A; 4-11% have type B and a very small 0-2% have type AB. [blood types] Under analysis these figures have revealed migration patterns and interactions of ancient hu/man with his/her environment. It is now scientifically clear (as if it weren't always intuitively clear) that O existed first, then A, then B and now AB is emerging, reflecting some kind of physical (blood type) evolution or Darwinism. Temperament theory statistics may reveal a nonphysical Darwinian evolution of the "more fit" in these statistics: Guardians and Artisans make up 38% of the population each while Rationals and Idealists make up 12% each.

We creatures on the Darwinian edge-- Rationals and Idealists -- have both an advantage and a disadvantage. In a certain sense we are adapted to the ways of the future, which is evolving, but on the other hand, the future is not yet here. And therein lies the rub. I have written some articles about this such as Nietzsche: Schizophrenic? Introvert? Or Super Survivor?

( http://www.theintrovertzcoach.com/go..._and_infp.html )

what do you think?

[CuriousSoul]

Thanks for posting , I shall start with criticism.
Intuition does not imply intelligence.
Many people with sensing types are perfectly capable of dealing with the world in abstract terms, and believe me there are plenty of really dull intuitive types. The MBTI and Keirsey tests and statistics though often confuse intuition with intelligence. Partly because the way the whole business is sold as a way to "discover how uniquely gifted and rare your personality type is", and partly because the lack of theoretical structure makes it almost impossible to verify the test results.

Temperament theory statistics may reveal a nonphysical Darwinian evolution of the "more fit" in these statistics: Guardians and Artisans make up 38% of the population each while Rationals and Idealists make up 12% each.

Aushra Augustinavichiute originally postulated that the types would be fairly evenly distributed. This may well be the case. At least when i started typing I seemt to discover plenty of SJ types but as I learnt more about socionics and analysed people more carefully also the type distribution started to change. Here is Sergei Ganin's take on type distribution:

MBTI statistics is a joke. What population? The world? The states? Do they tell you how they calculated this statistics? It is all complete rubbish. I
wouldn't trust a figure in that report. How they can produce statistics if
they cannot even verify the results of MBTI? I can make one up right now,
based on my own experience, and it will probably be closer to the reality
then all that nonsencere. Another thing is that the population changes
every second, new types born, old die...

Anyway, there was a research taken in Lithuania (Baltic states) long time
ago among 100 men and 100 women.

Here the results:

1. ESTj 5m 2w
2. ENTj 4m 2w
3. ISTj 6m 3w
4. INTj 6m 5w
5. ESFj 3m 10w
6. ENFj 5m 9w
7. ISFj 3m 4w
8. INFj 3m 10w
9. ESTp 9m 3w
10. ESFp 4m 9w
11. ISTp 12m 8w
12. ISFp 7m 15w
13. ENTp 11m 4w
14. ENFp 10m 6w
15. INTp 8m 2w
16. INFp 4m 8w

m-men
w-women
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/socionics/message/45


It is also unlikely that the ability to deal with the world in abstract terms conveys any selective advantage in the modern world. On the contrary, intelligence, education or income level and the number of children are negatively correlated in most countries where any statistics are available.
Then about the blood groups still, I do not know much about them but many researchers believe that they may be related to disease resistance, i.e. some blood groups provide more resistance against some diseases.

I think it is best to see the socionics types as Types of Information Metabolism (TIM). Thus the way we process information defines the type, and the interests we have and the abilities we develop are the secondary level manifestations of the type and therefore are only loosely correlated with the basic socionics type. Any other thoughts?

[metaiwan]

I don't know if that's your site or not, but I don't agree with most of the stuff that's on there. It seems awfully 'elitist' to me. I do wonder though where exactly these types came from and what their purpose is. Did evolution have it's hand in the creation and regulation of types? I seriously seriously doubt evolution is pointing 'towards' certain types or anything like that, but I wonder if types wane back in forth in population due to natural selection and the atmosphere of society.

[Creepy-Maestro]

There is a definite bias in modern American society toward E,N,T, and P. Extroversion is valued highly because in such a heterogenous society sociatal norms are not aids in coping and thus it becomes more difficult. Intuition is prized because so much in the intellectual world is bullshit, and S's have a harder time bullshitting and being bullshitted (another valuable social adaptation. ppl like you when you buy their crap). Thinking over feeling maps to the male over female dominance. Amazingly feeling is not differentiated from emotion and emotion is considered the root of all stupidity. P is valued over J because perceivers are stalkers and judgers are dreamers. No one dreams anymore, all they do is resent others who impose their values on them. Big advantage P.

[CuriousSoul]

Amazingly feeling is not differentiated from emotion and emotion is considered the root of all stupidity. P is valued over J because perceivers are stalkers and judgers are dreamers. No one dreams anymore, all they do is resent others who impose their values on them. Big advantage P.

Interesting opinions, what caught my attention was your claim that judgers (rational types?) are dreamers. Most people would tend to argue the opposite, at least that is the impression you get when you read type descriptions. So do you have a new theory, or was it just a typo?

Then on the difference between emotions and feelings, I am painfully aware of the need to find better ways of telling the introverted and extroverted functions apart, but cannot find much relevant info in English. In practise the difficulty arises largely because according to theory we all have all the eight functions and the corresponding subconscious contrary functions can be hard to tell apart from the conscious functions, or what did you have on your mind?

[Maestro]

Interesting opinions, what caught my attention was your claim that judgers (rational types?) are dreamers. Most people would tend to argue the opposite, at least that is the impression you get when you read type descriptions. So do you have a new theory, or was it just a typo?

I see judgers as more the dreaming types than perceivers just through observation. But I can easily reason out why this is the case. When you judge you are comparing an existing situation against another ideal or merely better situation. This better situation is determined through ones imaginitive processes. Perceivers dream too of course, and often more creatively, but less centrally to their information metabolism. Think first vs. seconds functions.

Then on the difference between emotions and feelings, I am painfully aware of the need to find better ways of telling the introverted and extroverted functions apart, but cannot find much relevant info in English. In practise the difficulty arises largely because according to theory we all have all the eight functions and the corresponding subconscious contrary functions can be hard to tell apart from the conscious functions, or what did you have on your mind?

The best descriptions still I think between extroverted and introverted functions are still Jung's. If someone knows a better source let us know.

[Waddlesworth]

I would assume this would have alot to do with how you define "dreamer". It isnt exactly a scientific word and it means alot of different things to different people.

[Maestro]

Not the spaced-out dreamer with the heads in the clouds but a person who dreams with their hands and their feet, each and every day letting that special feeling they get when they have a few extra moments after work looking out of their skyscraper window to take over their imaginations, and then the next moment plunge back into their world to, with every thought and action, shape their reality conciously and unconciously to fit this feeling. Or at least we would hope.

The trouble with all ya INTJ's out there is that analyzing disipates a mood. Hard to breathe with air so thin, hard to dream without an atmosphere.

[Waddlesworth]

That's a nice description.
Perhaps i may seem a bit in the clouds when i say this, but it always appeared to me that the INTj way of thinking, metaphorically speaking, is more "dehydrated" than the ENTp way of thinking, which is more "dilluted". Do you see what I mean?

I would assume that perceivers would have a more developed sensoric imagination because they have a clearer relationship with the essence of things, the feelings, the textures. I dated an ESFp for a few months (a disaster), she was a beautiful writer of poetry, you could almost taste or touch her descriptions. As if she actually experienced what was in her mind. When it came to stories, however, She was a terrible. Her plots were superficial and self centered and lacked any technical understanding of the real world.

If one reads Orwell- most likely an ENTp, in my opinion, one can get a very clear idea of his idea of the essence of things. a little more "dehydrated". Things are very grey, based upon technical and geometric patterns. The "sense" is still there, but it is more theoretical and technically oriented.

Being an ENTp myself, I remember in highschool doing alot of doodling on paper, inventing creatures or characters and devise very technical storylines for them. Some other ENTp's I know do this same thing.

I don't know of any professional INTj authors at the top of my head, perhaps it would be interesting food for thought thought. I would assume, from my experiences with INTj's, that they have alot of trouble letting their thoughts flow, but the technical aspects of their writing are to the points so the action might be more tightly knit and intense. Focusing more on the abstract mythical aspects of the world since that might be the best way for them to make sense of it. My first girlfriend back in highschool was an INTj. I remember that she collected alot of little pictures of fairy's and demons, and would often draw demons and monsters in her free time. it seemed peculiar to me, but perhaps, and im not an INTj, so i dont know, but perhaps it was some sort of way to rationalize the outside world. Again, i dont know.

An INFj author, like Dostoevsky, writes as if he is in a perpetual state of emotional terror.

I might be a bit vague, but i really think that we are all dreamers, its just that our dreams are based on how we see the world. Perhaps Judging types are more out of touch with their surroundings, sort of like a perpetual out of body experience which can explain why the world can be frightening to some of them (especially the INFj and INTj types). Perceiving types tend to get more down to the essence, or "feel" of things. Imagine the word "Quanta" at one end of the spectrum, and "Qualia" at the other. Each type fits somewhere in between these two "modes of thought".

To cut this short, since im babbling, im going to say this- of all the types i have known the INFp has had the most vivid and developed "on the spot" imagination. I could never see one develop a sophistocated storyline(leave that to NT's and NF's), but they know how to tell a good joke because their descriptions are always smooth, original and amiable. They know how to make people laugh.

so, all in all, there are different types of dreaming.

sorry I was vague, but I suppose it's a vague topic- which is cool to me.

[Creepy-EvolutionaryEdgeLMAO]

Thats pretty arrogant. Each type has their gifts. Im an ISTP and I wonder why some people are so clumsy with their movements at times, but I dont go thinking I am the future of the genetic strain of humanity. What the hell lol.

Yea I like to drink... I have a lot of respect for rationalists, especially INTPs. Just because I love stimulation and to indulge doesnt mean I am lower on the genetic food chain...

This is a poor method of thinking. Each type (even idealists I think) have gifts to offer the socion. I hate ENTPs though, lying bastards .

[Creepy-]

I'm in disagreement with those results as regards the Lithuanian study. Having been in an environment where I know a number of people of every personality type, and then observing a random population, I've noted the introverts seem rare, and I only know a couple INFp out of a fairly large group. It would be interesting though, if I could convince some teachers to sample across the board through a student body (maybe get all the sophomore english teachers to do it or something), and to see how the results are. Because, my observations and the results I've seen are much more in league with Keirsey, and not the Lithuanian study. Nor would I place much validity in a survey of 200 people. That's a fairly low number.

[stefana]

//

[indigoroom]

See? Even ENTp's have stuff to offer.

Socionics for example

[Typeless Wonder]

So which of the supposedly inferior types will evolution kill off first, the SPs or the SJs? One of the reasons I like this board as opposed to all of the other boards related to type is that this board seems more immune to typism. I think one of the ISXXs here should write an essay about life as a sensing introvert and submit it to that site.

[Rocky]

I think one of the ISXXs here should write an essay about life as a sensing introvert and submit it to that site.

I'll certainly consider this. I'm a guy who apears very ENTP and I actually though I was an ENTP for a long time. After some contemplation about my type it was more obvious that my dominant function is actually Si. I then took McNew's test and it agreed that my strong functions are Si and Te, with a hidden agenda of Fi. I think I can do a good job showing that ISTPs aren't all thick headed grease-monkies.

[Cone]

I'll certainly consider this. I'm a guy who apears very ENTP and I actually though I was an ENTP for a long time.

I read somewhere that people tend to resemble their Semi-Dual later in life. I was stuck between INFp and ESFp for my mother for a long time. Plus, the ESTp description is very accurate for me, if I do alot of wishful thinking.

[Rocky]

^^ Yes but I'm not even 17 yet. If you take half of the ENTP description and half the ISTP description and put them together it sounds like me. I'm sure there are somethings that can affect you like how you were brought up, your genes, ect. For one thing, my Dad is an INTP and he is not shy either. Like you said, during social occassions he can seem almost ESTP. And why would you say "wishful thinking" for an ESTP? Do you think they are any better than INTPs? Of course not. Both of you are annoying .

And Herzblut said that her Mom originally test as an ESTJ, but later found out she was ISFJ. I guess these things can happen.

[Cone]

And why would you say "wishful thinking" for an ESTP?

"Persistence" is a trait I only wish I was good at.

[Rocky]

... and if you're an ESTP foresight is a trait you only wish you were good at.

[MysticSonic]

"And Herzblut said that her Mom originally test as an ESTJ, but later found out she was ISFJ. I guess these things can happen."

She assumed her mom was an ESTj, but she ended up testing as an ISFj.

[MysticSonic]

Oh.

[stefana]

//

[Rocky]

Does he sound ISTp to you?

Rocky, what about VI and playing sports? Is it possible to identify your type with this method?

I do like to type other people that way, but I don't know how I would be able to type myself by the way I play sports. I can't be able to actually see myself play. And maybe the fact that I like to watch people and type them like that is just more evidence that I am a sensor? Intuitives probably wouldn't watch out for facial expressions, body movements, voice tone, etc. I could be wrong, but that seems like something a sensor would do.

As for the VI, I might post pictures of myself if I knew how. Can anyone explain how to post a photo from a digital camera?