A thought on I and E.

[dark]

I thought of this idea last night before I went to sleep so I want to see if it makes any sense to anyone.

Commonly people see extraverts as unintelligent. (edited thanks to thoumyvision)

Also commonly introverts are seen as intelligent. (edited thanks to thoumyvision)

But I find both misleading. Mostly this is because introverts are more apt to using "big words" as extraverts will use common language.

Reason: since extraverts are almost always conversing, they already know the common usage of words that the average person knows, so the intelligent extravert will not be using big words at all, they will use words everyone can understand because they are speaking so others can hear them. On the other hand, introverts end up saying big words often because they are not as adept in the socializing skill as the extraverts. They have not become accustomed to speaking to lesser intelligent people, so the people listening may not be able to understand what is being spoken.

This does not show that either introverts or extraverts are more intelligent, all it shows is that because extraverts have more skill in socializing and introverts don't, extraverts have the ability to speak in common speech, whereas an equally intelligent introvert will end up speaking over the heads of everyone not as intelligent as they are.

 

[Glordag]

I actually saw an article once that said that research showed the opposite: more outspoken, energetic speakers are usually regarded as more intelligent, while more reserved, quiet, soft-spoken individuals are often seen as "slow" or "unintelligent." Of course, this depends on the individual doing the listening and exactly what is said, but I think, often, extraverts are more commonly seen as intelligent.

 

[thoumyvision]

Commonly people see extraverts as unintelligible.

Also commonly introverts are seen as intelligible.

Intelligible = able to be understood by the listener. Given this definition your post doesn't make a lot of sense.

It would make sense either if you meant to use "intelligent" or you meant to say that extroverts were perceived as intelligible and introverts as unintelligible.

Other than that I'd agree, an introvert who hasn't learned to distill ideas into something a layman can understand will only ever be understood by those in his or her field.

 

[Artsu Tharaz]

Introverts tend towards a consistent store of perceptions from which to base judgments on. They continually update this store to make it superior to what it was before, and thus are dealing with higher quality information than someone who doesn't do this, and are more flexible in their judgments as a result.

Extroverts tend to deal with perceptions as they arise in the situation. They don't have this consistent upgrading of their perceptions - rather they upgrade their judgements to more efficiently deal with information as it arises.

The first picture has a greater correlation with what we often think of as intelligence, however the second is nonetheless a very useful way to deal with information in a real-time manner.

note: we can represent the above descriptions through further subscripting functions with p and j, where p refers to real time adaptation, and j refers to long term upgrading.

Thus the INTP for example is Tip Nej (introverts have j perception and p judgment), whereas the ENTP is Nep Tij (extroverts have p perception and j judgment). Thus we don't even have to consider function order any more, we just need to include subscripts.

This is a bit confusing since you would think j = judgment always, but this downside was already present in the four letter type codes, due to J and P, and so we denote it like that for consistency (i.e. symmetry in the sense that I/E determines j/p in the same way that P/J determines i/e).

Interesting to note: perception is dominant if it is ep or ij, judgment is dominant if it is ej or ip. Why is this?

Perhaps it implies that the external world operates on p perceptions and j judgments, whereas the internal world operates on j perceptions and p judgments, so if your external primary function doesn't match up with how the external world works, you tend to see things from the internal/subjective point of view, whereas if your i function doesn't match up with how the inner world works, then you will instead view things from the external/objective perspective. Your dominant function has a view consistent with what it deals with, so it works directly. The auxiliary function can only work indirectly - it is out of sync with how things operate, so instead works by feeing into the dominant.

I'm not totally sure of the mechanisms at work here.

/post 777

 

[Anthrocide]

I thought of this idea last night before I went to sleep so I want to see if it makes any sense to anyone.

Commonly people see extraverts as unintelligible.

Also commonly introverts are seen as intelligible.

But I find both misleading. Mostly this is because introverts are more apt to using "big words" as extraverts will use common language.

Reason: since extraverts are almost always conversing, they already know the common usage of words that the average person knows, so the intelligent extravert will not be using big words at all, they will use words everyone can understand because they are speaking so others can hear them. On the other hand, introverts end up saying big words often because they are not as adept in the socializing skill as the extraverts. They have not become accustomed to speaking to lesser intelligent people, so the people listening may not be able to understand what is being spoken.

This does not show that either introverts or extraverts are more intelligent, all it shows is that because extraverts have more skill in socializing and introverts don't, extraverts have the ability to speak in common speech, whereas an equally intelligent introvert will end up speaking over the heads of everyone not as intelligent as they are.

I agree, especially since extroverts tend to think as they speak. This puts vocabulary on the backburner. A lot of verbal communication is reaction. However, well-read, forward thinking extroverts can champion broad vocabularies if they are comfortable with holding power in the conversation. This caste of extroverts can be very electic in conversation.

 

[dark]

@ thoumyvision, yes I think you are right, I confused the words there, maybe I could edit it and make a note to say that I did it

 

[Roran]

One of the best divisions of I and E I have seen (imho) (can't remember where it was) said that extroverts solve problems externally, by talking to people and stuff like that. Introverts (supposedly) solve problems through introspection and thought.

 

[pjoa09]

wat.

If I talk to myself in slang while no one is around am I an extrovert or introvert? I am verbally communicating to myself. Now I am an extrointrovert.

Yeah I understand that is still introvert but it's funny to think about.

I suppose that would make me think that I am an unintelligent baboon despite appearing as a wise orangutan to everyone else.