Intuition and Sensing, Left and Right Brain (dichotomies I hate)

[chacusha]

So I am (slowly) working on a MBTI-related thing for my Disney post series and so am reminded once again how much I dislike the sensing vs. intuition dichotomy, so here's a rant about it. (This post is public because I'll probably be linking it when I actually post my Disney MBTI thing.)

Comments

[hamsterwoman]

(i.e. He CAN separate his interpretations from his initial observations.) Okay well, I suppose that makes sense. In that case, maybe this IS a cognitive difference/personality trait.

I kind of do think it's this, but I think there's also a bit more to it. I tend to work really well in partnership or under the direction of N-types because they complement my strong S, and what I've noticed is, they tend to make conclusions or see the big picture -- but it's not just integrated knowledge raised to the level of "intuition" -- it definitely seems to be a personality-driven tendency. Like, my best friend in college, VT, was very much a "hunch and hand-wave" person. He was not always right, but that's where his mind went, and then he'd kind of try to work backwards from the conclusion to his starting point, and if he ran into a contradiction, he'd make another conclusion, and start again. Similarly, my best manager at work would be like, "Hey, we could do X! Figure it out." -- and I'd come back awhile later, having done the detailed analysis, and say, "Yep, you were right, X makes sense, and here's why" or "Actually, I ran the numbers, and Y would be better than X" and he would shrug and be like, OK, good, now we know.

So to me, the way the N designation makes sense, is as a way to label those people who tend to jump to the conclusion without doing the work in between. The better they are, the more experienced they are in their chosen field, the more often their conclusions will be right. But the tendency to jump to the end is, I think, a personality trait. Because I am always, always a "show your work" kind of person, even when dealing with a subject I am an expert in (and when nobody is asking me to).

But, yeah, I don't know that it actually very accurately maps onto all this stuff that's associated with N vs S or not.

I suspect most of the internet thinks Sherlock is an N so they could map him onto INTJ, Mastermind (as Moriarty's opposite number). I definitely agree that his approach is so, so S-driven, which is one of the reasons he appeals to me as a character so.

[chacusha]

I can see why 3/5 and 6/8 would be related -- or, at least, they seem to be for me (which might be correlation, not causation, or just random coincidence, so, dunno). I'm a pretty strong S, and the reason I find hands-on learning more effective, I think, is that it gives me access to more sensory data to integrate and remember.
I also take notes everywhere, but I'm not sure if that's related to hands-on learning for me. I always thought it was just a way for me to digest what I'm writing (because if you're just reading, you can skim a line and not understand any of it, whereas if you copy that line, you notice every part of it) or it triggered some kind of memory mechanism or something. Then again, I'm not even quite sure what counts as hands-on learning?? I think my time as a computer scientist has sort of mixed me up and made me forget how people normally define hands-on vs. theoretical or concrete vs. abstract theories. Because like... in CS, "theory" means rigorous math and proofs and defining concepts (is this N...?), and "application" means coding / building a system or end product (is this S...?).

And yeah, I agree about the 2/3/5 connection -- it makes sense assuming we're talking about people who jump to patterns rather than examine the data first.

That said, I'm a very detail-oriented right-handed person who is awful at spatial perception, very averse to risk-taking, bored by philosophy and religion because they are way too abstract, far prefers logic vs feelings, and basically checks off every column in the left brain vs right brain list, which makes it difficult to argue from personal example :P
Lol, yeah, I'm a bit more mixed. I'm a moderately visual/spatial person and not too bored by philosophy and religion, but otherwise I fall under the left column as well. Although someone would probably look at the example of us two and conclude that it's my right brain influence that makes me more mixed or something. :P

Also, female intuition, LOL. I used to read a lot of 19th century and earlier books, and it was totally a thing, which I always found laughable as applied to myself. Heey, maybe it's because I'm a Fire sign ruled by the Sun! ;P
Lol XD

So to me, the way the N designation makes sense, is as a way to label those people who tend to jump to the conclusion without doing the work in between. The better they are, the more experienced they are in their chosen field, the more often their conclusions will be right. But the tendency to jump to the end is, I think, a personality trait. Because I am always, always a "show your work" kind of person, even when dealing with a subject I am an expert in (and when nobody is asking me to).

But, yeah, I don't know that it actually very accurately maps onto all this stuff that's associated with N vs S or not.

Ah yeah, that definitely makes sense. In that case, I can see how 4/7 (future/possibilities) might sort of go with the N type, in a sense, because they're proposing an end goal (future) without putting thought into what steps would be needed to get there (current). Well, I guess it represents "future-thinking" in a symbolic sense, because it's not really about "I can see the Land of Tomorrow!" so much as "We should end up at Point B."

But yeah, I do still think the N traits are a veritable hodge-podge.

I suspect most of the internet thinks Sherlock is an N so they could map him onto INTJ, Mastermind (as Moriarty's opposite number). I definitely agree that his approach is so, so S-driven, which is one of the reasons he appeals to me as a character so.
Ah, I see. He IS an S, though, I'm sure of it. :P