What's the personality profile of someone who loves understanding and truth?

[Carl-Richard]

58 minutes ago, integral said:

@Carl-Richard Becareful this is a standard MBTI mistake pegging sensors are dumb, praising intuitives. Intuitive have major blind spots that sensors dominate at.  Its all strengths and weaknesses. 

Laying out statistics is a mistake? I never made any absolute statements like that. Intuitives are generally more academically gifted.

[integral]

@Carl-Richard Everyone including leo made the same general assumption when reading the post, its the implicit statement. 

6 minutes ago, Carl-Richard said:

Intuitives are generally more academically gifted

No there not, there just statistically more likely to be involved in does fields. The data is not saying anything, its interpretation. 

Its like saying men are better engineers then women, because the statistics say so. in truth its just culture skewing men into does fields. Like its culture skewing intuitives into academia. Sensors can do anything an intuitive can do, they just dont receive the same opportunities for growth. The intuitive mind is adapted to this culture in a way that clusters in a certain pattern. 

We can make the point that there are differences in there abilities, some will perform better in certain branch's in academia. Saying this there are ESFJ mathematicians, breaking these silly stereotypes. There are INFP chess grand masters (this one surprised me) What does Fi dominants have to do with chess? Nothing. The cognitive stack does not map directly to real world application in a superficial way. Statistically the top 10 chess players are all male INTJs... because INTJs are more likely to devote that much time into the game, its not the cognitive stack. Got to be autisticly focused on chess to reach the top in this culture. The INTJ is most likely to match the requirements. 

MBTI intuition is not the same as intuition. Its used in a way for its framework. Everyone has intuition... but not everyone is a MBTI intuitive. 

 

45 minutes ago, SamC said:

Yeah, and what is that reward system linked to?  What more effects does this thing create if the whole system is trying to get to truth. If that's the evolutionary strategy, what does the body do to get to a place where this is the body seeks?

What are some of the intuitive blindspots in regards to finding truth? Of course there must be some, but what are those?

Also, where do you pegg yourself on the Mbti scale?

From a the scientific materialist point of view, A genetic component has been found mapping personality types to genetics, its a born structuring of the brain, the operating system. We can say there are 16-32 core operating systems a human can be born with. Where the neuro path ways of least resistance are set in a specific way for each type. 

Thought the evolutionary strategy was survival not truth? Truth will get ya killed real quick. lmao

The human perspective is a nested web of blind spots. We are imaging a brain story built for survival not truth, why believe anything presented to us? Nearly impossible to navigate. Its not specific to Intuitives. The problem of self-deception, if there's self there's deception lol. 

But ok more specifically every Type has its own weaknesses that will warp the method they use to make sense of things. There all unconsciously using the same tool for every job. To learn of all the specific pitfalls of each type got to dive in more and absorb it, 

This units operating system is the INTJ (Ni-Fi dom), whats yours? 

[SamC]

52 minutes ago, integral said:

@Carl-Richard Everyone including leo made the same general assumption when reading the post, its the implicit statement. 

No there not, there just statistically more likely to be involved in does fields. The data is not saying anything, its interpretation. 

Its like saying men are better engineers then women, because the statistics say so. in truth its just culture skewing men into does fields. Like its culture skewing intuitives into academia. Sensors can do anything an intuitive can do, they just dont receive the same opportunities for growth. The intuitive mind is adapted to this culture in a way that clusters in a certain pattern. 

What about natural hierarchys regarding men and woman. I mean.. woman are more intuitive than men on average and have a biological drive to take care of kids.

Maybe, that's why they also dominate in childcare for example, because they like it more because of how they are biologically Wired.

Quote

From a the scientific materialist point of view, A genetic component has been found mapping personality types to genetics, its a born structuring of the brain, the operating system. We can say there are 16-32 core operating systems a human can be born with. Where the neuro path ways of least resistance are set in a specific way for each type. 

Do you study/ research/ work with this stuff personally? You seem to know a lot of stuff.

Quote

Thought the evolutionary strategy was survival not truth? Truth will get ya killed real quick. lmao

Lol yeah of course in that way, but in another way the wiring of " truth" has to be linked to some sort of benefit in order for it to exist and survive the natural selection.

There has to be some sort of purpose for it. Also people with enmeshment trauma tends to want to discover the truth and introspect because they are afraid to be wrong ( fail) and to hurt other people by projecting ignorance, which many enmeshed trauma folks have experienced themselves when interacted with narrsists. They understand that no one likes narcissists and they are therefor afraid to be that becuase they are afraid to not belong ( yet still terrified of losing it's sense of identity)

Quote

The human perspective is a nested web of blind spots. We are imaging a brain story built for survival not truth, why believe anything presented to us? Nearly impossible to navigate. Its not specific to Intuitives. The problem of self-deception, if there's self there's deception lol. 

Yes

Quote

But ok more specifically every Type has its own weaknesses that will warp the method they use to make sense of things. There all unconsciously using the same tool for every job. To learn of all the specific pitfalls of each type got to dive in more and absorb it, 

This units operating system is the INTJ (Ni-Fi dom), whats yours? 

 

yeah, there are a lot of fun stuff to learn?

INFP

@integral

 

Edited February 25, 2021 by SamC

[Carl-Richard]

1 hour ago, integral said:

@Carl-Richard Everyone including leo made the same general assumption when reading the post, its the implicit statement. 

No. You're the one making assumptions here. I was deliberately being careful in representing the numbers without making any additional claims. There is nothing implicit about simply laying out statistics. You're not a mind-reader — nobody is that intuitive

 

1 hour ago, integral said:

No there not, there just statistically more likely to be involved in does fields.

Read the study before making assumptions about what the graph really represents. These types of studies compare the academic perfomance of students in a school, and they consistently find that intuition correlates with academic giftedness. That is the only takeaway here, no implicit whatevers.

 

1 hour ago, integral said:

MBTI intuition is not the same as intuition. Its used in a way for its framework. Everyone has intuition... but not everyone is a MBTI intuitive. 

I made this point earlier in the topic.

[integral]

@Carl-Richard I know your careful like that, been reading your posts for a while, but im claiming your not taking responsibility for the implicit but taking care to represent things in a pure unbiased way, like in a vacuum. lmfaaao. 

1 hour ago, Carl-Richard said:

Read the study before making assumptions about what the graph really represents. These types of studies compare the academic perfomance of students in a school, and they consistently find that intuition correlates with academic giftedness. That is the only takeaway here, no implicit whatevers.

The point made was that "academic giftedness" is a low consciousness measurement stick. 

 

1 hour ago, Carl-Richard said:

 There is nothing implicit about simply laying out statistics

Disagree, we are not in a vacuum. Some version of "I never said that" is Carl Richards top repeated comment lol. What causes this? Is there a way to avoid it? 

 

2 hours ago, SamC said:

What about natural hierarchys regarding men and woman. I mean.. woman are more intuitive than men on average and have a biological drive to take care of kids.

Maybe, that's why they also dominate in childcare for example, because they like it more because of how they are biologically Wired.

It probably plays a role and is a mix of many things, the cultural indoctrination is overwhelming. People do and think exactly what they where exposed to. 

 

[Carl-Richard]

28 minutes ago, integral said:

@Carl-Richard I know your careful like that, been reading your posts for a while, but im claiming your not taking responsibility for the implicit but taking care to represent things in a pure unbiased way, like in a vacuum. lmfaaao.

Disagree, we are not in a vacuum. Some version of "I never said that" is Carl Richards top repeated comment lol. What causes this? Is there a way to avoid it? 

I think it's unreasonable having to spend your time adding endless caveats to what you're saying in order to warn about any potential misinterpretations, because that potential is limitless. I will rather wait until the misunderstanding actually arises and deal with it there like we just did.

 

28 minutes ago, integral said:

The point made was that "academic giftedness" is a low consciousness measurement stick.

...sure. By the way, if you're all about that implicit stuff, I did infact vaguely express my concerns about the representability of academic giftedness as a measurement for "the need for understanding and truth" earlier in the topic, but maybe you missed that (I'm not being hyperbolic btw).

Anyways, what do you consider to be a high consciousness measurement stick? Just curious.

Edited February 25, 2021 by Carl-Richard

[Carl-Richard]

On 23.2.2021 at 7:17 PM, Carl-Richard said:

I ran into this graph again and found a great way to generalize the results in terms of cognitive functions:

"intuitive aux>dom, introverted dom>aux and thinking functions are predictors of giftedness."

You can essentially deduce the relative positions of each category (rationals, intuitives etc.) and most of the types from that statement alone

Edited April 6, 2021 by Carl-Richard

[integral]

loool, still not getting why we use the word "giftedness" for "the need for understanding and truth". Calling it gifted is very misleading, seeing as INTPs are terrible at the things the ESFJs are good at... "Gifted" is not the word.

Even a simple break down into multiple intelligences makes more sense. 

Edited April 6, 2021 by integral

[integral]

NOW where getting somewhere, lmao, every INTP ive met IRL is pretty miserable. They got that strong sense that there surrounded by idiots and nothings right and nothing matters lol. Perfect combination. 

This is a better representation, shows how some types can still perform well on the INTP (IQ) test. 

I wonder how well a INTP would do on a ESFJ test? 

Edited April 6, 2021 by integral

[Moksha]

Define "giftedness". The person listed in the Watkins Review as the most spiritually influential person in the world is an INFJ:

[lmfao]

@integral So what you're commenting on is arrogance around the desire to search for truth? Plus some other MBTI shit. I used to be in MBTI circles. 

I know I have that arrogance, it is what it is. 

Arguing for and against superiority of intuitives and all that shit... With such discussion and patterns, it's not about facts.

I wrote this post because I think you and Carl Richards are arguing over nothing. Oh and because I'm distracting myself from something by typing this in the first place haha 

 

If you're seeking truth or are on whatever path, then complaining and demonising the "normies" /sensors/"sheep" can be a trap. Projection, victim mentality, responsibility 101, etc 

Edited April 6, 2021 by lmfao

[Carl-Richard]

16 minutes ago, Moksha said:

Define "giftedness". The person listed in the Watkins Review as the most spiritually influential person in the world is an INFJ:

The study uses academic giftedness (they sampled the academic perfomance of students). It could be used as a rough measurement for intellectual giftedness.

Edited April 6, 2021 by Carl-Richard

[integral]

@lmfao naa does charts where for fun to counter @Carl-Richards posts (in a joke way), i think wtv study is behind does charts are one dimensional/shallow, or well the IQ aspect of it is. Was trying to point out that IQ is a narrow view of intelligence and that chart carl has been posting around is misleading in many ways. But he knows all this, hes posting it to measure "people who are passionate about truth" and thats fine. its the "giftedness" word that pinches me every time i read it. Compeles me to comment on it.  lol

[Moksha]

9 minutes ago, Carl-Richard said:

The study uses academic giftedness (they sampled the academic perfomance of students). It could be used as a rough measurement for intellectual giftedness.

That explains why "T" was high. Spiritual giftedness, it could be argued, is the capacity for letting go of "T" and simply being. Not to say there aren't plenty of woke folks across all categories

[Carl-Richard]

@integral I don't get the frustration. It's like you've been assigned to count fruits in a basket but you insist on calling it apples. That is besides the point my man 

[Carl-Richard]

2 minutes ago, Moksha said:

Spiritual giftedness, it could be argued, is the capacity for letting go of "T" and simply being. Not to say there aren't plenty of woke folks across all categories

Thanks — now I want a chart for that too 

[lmfao]

@integral @Carl-Richard I've seen that bloody MBTI IQ chart a million times, what's even the original source or study lmao. Does it even exist 

I understand why you feel compelled to speak when someone uses the word "giftedness" like that

Edited April 6, 2021 by lmfao

[integral]

13 hours ago, Carl-Richard said:

@integral I don't get the frustration. It's like you've been assigned to count fruits in a basket but you insist on calling it apples. That is besides the point my man 

lmaooo Right again CAaaaaaARL. 

1 hour ago, lmfao said:

@integral @Carl-Richard I've seen that bloody MBTI IQ chart a million times, what's even the original source or study lmao. Does it even exist 

Ive only heard rumor's of it loool. in my search for this treasure i discord another interesting chart.

The trick is to get distracted, this resolves any need to answer the question. lolol

Edited April 6, 2021 by integral

[Carl-Richard]

3 hours ago, lmfao said:

I've seen that bloody MBTI IQ chart a million times, what's even the original source or study lmao. Does it even exist 

None of the images are linked to the original source, but you can search through Google Scholar and find similar studies with similar numbers. This one seems the most promising:

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.4219/jsge-2004-449?casa_token=FP3maiTlUFgAAAAA:0KhGSw94xqC7yCiHXfB8VM2wOMBw2CZ3ldRVrv39q4rlebQw7LgupoOFquFPmMq9yj_75uumTgc

The ratios in this table seem to roughly fit the chart after you divide them by a factor of 2. For example, INTP = (12.05/3.54)/2 = 1.70. The person who made the chart may have done that for aesthetic reasons.

The numbers might have also been adjusted slightly if the chart comes from a later study (or a completely different one), which might explain why INTP ratio is 1.76 and not 1.70 in the chart. I can't find a table for that though.

Edited April 6, 2021 by Carl-Richard

[Megan Alecia]

Openness to experience