Quote:
Originally Posted by AMDG
My best friend is a very extreme case of ISTJ, but because he's intelligent and enjoys advanced math and computing, he doesn't like to think of himself as a Sensor and feels insulted by the description. (...) when he reads the descriptions of the NT types, it's how he prefers to see himself.
|
This has been my experience also. Almost every S I know has tested and self-identified as an iNtuitive and only after reflecting on the Ns in their life have they changed their mind. Through trial and error, I've found a good self-identification question: Try asking them whether they, in a group work setting, are most often irritated by others being flighty and impractical or by others being unwilling to entertain a novel (if potentially useless) way of thinking with them. (This question will backfire, though, if they've never worked closely with a strong N.)
Quote:
They feel perhaps that the Sensing descriptions and profiles are basically trying to say 'stupid' and 'pedestrian' in as polite a way as possible, and because they don't like to think of themselves that way, they just dismiss the whole theory, because Sensors can be just as intelligent.
I dunno, maybe it's just a flaw in the way the profiles are written or the functions are described, that makes them appeal more to INtuitives than Sensors.
|
It seems like the N profiles are written as best cases, whereas the S profiles are written as averages. Sure, there may be a lot of ISTP
mechanics out there, but what are my colleagues in business going to find aspirational in that description? If the INTP description was rewritten as an average, it would probably be "The Unemployed Geek" instead of the philosopher-sounding "The Thinker". Similarly, what INTJ doesn't prefer the sound of "The Scientist" to the probably more universal "The Know-It-All"?
