Ns versus Ss

[lynkemma]

I was having a discussion with an ISTJ friend last night, and she expressed some dismay at an attitude she'd come across in an Intuitive community - that is, the idea that Sensors are somehow inherently inferior to Intuitives. She'd come across many statements along the lines of "I could never be close friends with a Sensor," and "Sensors are

Comments

[saeble]

S's outnumber N's 3 to 1, as a consequence its always an uphill battle through life for an 'N', the whole world is essentially built around an 'S' friendly framework. That's always going to add up to resentful 'N's.

In some settings n's are superior, in others, S's are.

What really bugs me is that, (even given my bias), the majority of situations actually favour an 'N' perspective. It's a very rare occasion where a pure 'S' approach will net the quickest/best outcome. Sadly, in a good many circumstances, the S's hold sway/power, so the painful plodding is status quo. :)

[lynkemma]

the painful plodding is status quo.

I think this is the core of my question, really. Why is it that from an N-perspective, Sensors are seen as people who plod painfully, rather than people who work systematically, carefully, responsibly, whatever - i.e. why is the view of the Sensing approach automatically so negative?

...Having said that, I'm bang alongside you about the reason why Ns might feel resentful. Numbers account for a lot.

[lynkemma]

*nods* We certainly need both. And frankly, I think the Sly approach is, in many cases, of more value and use in the real world than the Nly one. I have plenty of Ns around in my RL, and a lot of them (especially the NPs) are maddeningly impractical.

[saeble]

its speed, speed is, in the majority of situations, a much better thing than tiny incremental steps.

for example :

I've damaged a nerve in my hand. I went into hospital for an outpatient assessment. A 4th year med student and a 1st year intern in the Orthopedics department of the hospital came in, made assessments and started formulating diagnoses. Both I can fairly safely say, were S's.

The actual Ortho doctor walks in... makes his diagnosis and then asks the young guys to offer thiers, they dither, they can't offer anything that fits.

The doc offers six clues before he finally explains it because he hasnt got the time for the younguns to work it out.

I got it from the first clue and I never got any further than the last year of high school biology...

[lynkemma]

speed is, in the majority of situations, a much better thing than tiny incremental steps.

I disagree, especially since the N-type speed is often unreliable. We're good at flashes of inspiration, but most of us are bad at consistency. And we lack patience with details, which is a very very very bad thing in a lot of cases - medicine, for one.

Moreover, there are a lot of jobs that can only be done with patience and exactitude. For instance, a Sensing friend of mine completed a 7-year PhD in physics a while ago. Her work was considered groundbreaking, even sensational, but the work was the result of seven years of recording exactly what happened to a bunch of tiny grains in a given set of circumstances. She did experiment after experiment after experiment. An Intuitive, with sufficient insight into her field, might have been able to hazard a guess as to roughly where the results would be, but only a Sensor would have had the patience and the detail-focus to provide the proof, and thus advance a whole field of science.

[saeble]

...and so, we see the mighty S / N chasm yawning in all its glory

~~~~~~

just because something falls one side or the other of Occam's razor in our current understanding, doesn't make it any less real or possible

perhaps an N may have jumped to the right type of experiment rather than a series of seven to find the right one to net the results she theorised...

just like anything else, there's good N and theres bad N

on the whole, an intelligent and well practised N will make the right choices that lead to a success and on balance, faster than any S can possibly hope for.

[lynkemma]

perhaps an N may have jumped to the right type of experiment rather than a series of seven to find the right one to net the results she theorised...

Uh, sorry? I said she spend seven years doing her work, not that she tried seven different experiments.

on the whole, an intelligent and well practised N will make the right choices that lead to a success and on balance, faster than any S can possibly hope for.

Now, that is quite a statement, and I'd be interested in hearing what sources you can give me to back it up, other than your own opinion.

Also, speed isn't everything. To be honest, while I intend to use my INTJly powers to assume world domination, I'd much sooner have S-minions than N ones. Even if it were proven that Ns work faster. I just trust the Sensors to do their work correctly, which is sometimes too much to ask of an Intuitive.

[saeble]

lols

INTJs=kryptonite

me=ENTP

I smelled the J early on.

lets just agree to differ

this arguement is already circular enough, no-one is going to 'win'

[lynkemma]

Had no idea we were arguing, I thought we were discussing, but that's fine, of course.

[saeble]

hairsplitter !

INTJ much ???

Neener neener ! :D

[lynkemma]

*snerks and runs off, uncharacteristically late*

[beholdhaecceity]

I had the debate about discussing/arguing with a friend last month. I said we were discussing, she said arguing - I would not have been so up in arms had she not inferred that argument is something so inferior to discussion... I ended up consulting the Oxford Dictionary

Argument - 2. Debate, esp. heated one
Discussion - 1. Examination by argument
and for clarity. Debate - 1. Dispute about; Discuss.

Nicely circuitous, eh?

Funnily enough, I'm INTP and she's ENTJ.

[lynkemma]

Hee, dictionaries are a bit annoying like that. I think the addition "esp. a heated one" is where my personal distinction comes in: an argument is a (sometimes irrational) heated discussion...

[saeble]

dammit !

I cant resist !

I subconsciously picked up the '7' in my example. I'm saying that she, if she was an NP, may have been able to skip some of her steps if she trusted her intuitive impulses rather than going through the standard S process of methodical elimination.

why the onus of proof ?? thats a very S way of looking at things... only stuff you can 'prove' is real...

S and J really are peas and carrots, methinks you may find its the P you object to as much as anything else. You obviously dislike impulsiveness and are naturally distrustful of someone who does things 'on-the-fly'.

[lynkemma]

why the onus of proof ?? thats a very S way of looking at things...

No, that's a very scientific way of looking at things.

methinks you may find its the P you object to as much as anything else. You obviously dislike impulsiveness and are naturally distrustful of someone who does things 'on-the-fly'.

Oh, certainly I have trouble with Ps, especially NPs. :-)

And much as I'm enjoying the discussion, I really have to go offline now, I'm sorry to say.