NT's - Superior Beings?

[walfin]

It seems we disagree on what it means to be superior. If I can't convince you that a doctor is superior to a garbage collector, then I sure won't be able to convince you that an NT is superior to other types. That's why I asked the question.

I believe the reason why you believe a doctor is superior to a garbage collector is because you believe NTs are superior. Put it this way: if being a garbage collector required more brainwork, you'd say garbage collectors are superior.

An SJ would believe doctors are superior because of the status accorded them.

I believe the only personality dimension in which there's clear superiority/inferiority is neuroticism, which is not measured in the MBTI. And perhaps that's why our tactful INFP Myers did not include it, while the Big 5 (arguably developed by mostly NT psychologists) does.

 

[Toad]

What is the big 5?

 

[Carnap]

The big five, you can google it, is a group of five traits found in people naturally like openness, for example. There are benefits and drawbacks. Ex. openness makes you take risks, makes you express yourself, etc. but it can also be a hinderance.

I think the big five can somehow be related to evolutionary psychology. For example they explain bipolar disorder as if it had fitness benefits in the EEA that cause problems in urban capitalism. Once again with the risk taking. A few bipolar genes make people open, creative, etc, but a lot make them wild, obnoxious, etc.

 

[Deleted member 1424]

I find myself trying to justify some vague form of idealism in this regards to this topic. It is very difficult.

I will define 'superior' as those who possess the most advantageous traits in a given situation. However the human situation as a whole and on an individual level is both complex and transitory. In hunter/gatherer and early agricultural societies I'd imagine ST types to be superior. It may be hard to admit; but the S types are far more 'aware' of their environment; not to mention more physically inclined. NTs are also more likely to question authority and superstition. Humans were not known for their tolerance back then.

However, as we become a more technological society, the more beneficial the NT preference becomes. Ss are designed for a more physical society than we are currently evolving into. In this respect Ns have a distinct advantage. We have a far greater affinity with systems and complexity.

In general I think people are being forced to shift to NT traits and will continue to be. If NTs are superior it is only because we're a little ahead on the psychological bell-curve. The rest of the human race will adapt eventually.

I didn't really feel like touching F types tonight.



On a completely different note. A lot of people on this forum seem to be stuck with the idea that 'ignorance is bliss.' People in general are impossible to satisfy whether they're intelligent or stupid. I guarantee none of you would be happier if you had 20 IQ points lopped off the top. I for one would much prefer an enduring existential crisis than to being the subject of an episode of Maury. (think Jerry Springer if your not familiar)

 

[walfin]

The big five, you can google it, is a group of five traits found in people naturally like openness, for example. There are benefits and drawbacks. Ex. openness makes you take risks, makes you express yourself, etc. but it can also be a hinderance.

I think the big five can somehow be related to evolutionary psychology. For example they explain bipolar disorder as if it had fitness benefits in the EEA that cause problems in urban capitalism. Once again with the risk taking. A few bipolar genes make people open, creative, etc, but a lot make them wild, obnoxious, etc.

Four of those dimensions are strongly correlated with MBTI. The only one that isn't is neuroticism. It's pretty hard to think of much good coming out of high neuroticism.

I guarantee none of you would be happier if you had 20 IQ points lopped off the top.

You would not be happy if you knew that 20 IQ points were lopped off.
But otherwise there is little correlation of IQ with happiness, so yeah, nobody would be happier, but nobody would be much sadder either.

From an evolutionary perspective how advantageous an emergent property is depends on how well it helps an organism to survive and reproduce.
Are the S types more likely to die off, even if they "survive" less well (i.e. are less able to grasp things like advanced technology etc)? Probably not.
Are they going to be less likely to reproduce? If anything I think SPs are probably the ones getting most of the action in bed.
But the NTs aren't going to die off either, and its not as if all NTs are not reproducing. So in that respect we are probably roughly equal.

Another thing I believe is that with the gradual increase in IQ over generations, an S type today is probably more N than some (relative) Ns centuries ago. Even though the MBTI isn't obviously measured relatively like IQ, how people answer the questions is likely to be based on how they perceive themselves in relation to others. Probably less people perceive themselves as Ns.

 

[Deleted member 1424]

You would not be happy if you knew that 20 IQ points were lopped off.
But otherwise there is little correlation of IQ with happiness, so yeah, nobody would be happier, but nobody would be much sadder either.

I was being figurative. My point was that whether or not your intelligent is not likely to factor in on how 'happy' you are. If you are happy it means your desires are being satisfied. An idiot can have as many unmet desires as a genius. Admittedly they display it in different ways; where one may compose morose poetry and the other beats his wife.

From an evolutionary perspective how advantageous an emergent property is depends on how well it helps an organism to survive and reproduce.
Are the S types more likely to die off, even if they "survive" less well (i.e. are less able to grasp things like advanced technology etc)? Probably not.

Beyond genetics I believe people are also being raised to value NT traits more and more. The modern 'environment' favors NT traits far more than the past ones did. So we can develop these traits even if we are born from a pair of SXJs (like myself). This shift is not driven (though it can be amplified) by genetics; but by a series of technological revolutions. Of course this is all really recent history; so the evolutionary aspect is hard to analyze.

 

[Enne]

Wow, you really think we are the wealthiest Razare?

I heard Donald Trump was an ESTP and Bill Clinton an ESFP.

I'm sure that the majority of the truly wealthy, billionaires and such, stay well out of the public eye. And btw, Bill Gates is an ENTJ.

 

[Toad]

Was Albert Einstein wealthy? I figure INTP's wouldn't be that wealthy seeing as how we would rather just work on stuff than make a lot of money.

 

[Beat Mango]

I'm sure that the majority of the truly wealthy, billionaires and such, stay well out of the public eye. And btw, Bill Gates is an ENTJ.

I've seen him listed as an INTP. I think we should claim him!

 

[Razare]

Wow, you really think we are the wealthiest Razare?

I heard Donald Trump was an ESTP and Bill Clinton an ESFP.

No, I think INTP's are the lowest rung among all NT's. Remember, NT includes ENTJ, INTJ, and the ENTP. I think if you broke it down by pay into the 4 basic types, the NT type would be highest paid on average. It's a guess, you'd have to research it to find the truth. Just let's put it this way, NTJ's make better managers in business. An STJ would also make a good manager if they were smart. The ability to logically analyze and implement is what drives capitalism and those people earn the most. But NT's are also the creative thinkers who innovate where the STJ's probably not so much so.

Any sort of analysis on success (defining success as money earned), would have to be done by averaging what each type earns. The great leaders and icons of society are likely people who were successful in spite of their personality's limitations.

I'll also say that happiness and success is something derived internally. It has very little to do with the external environment and almost everything to do with who you are and how you experience the world. Why? Success is subjective, which means you define success for yourself. Set realistic goals and work towards those and you'll succeed in achieving them. Perhaps it doesn't make a you a millionaire but you're just as successful. Bernie Madoff was richer than any of us, but was he successful? No, he's an utter failure, I'm more successful than him.

 

[Toad]

Wow, I never heard of that guy before. I can't believe his sons turned him in...

 

[Jordan~]

NTs are superior insofar as that I'm one.

 

[Ulysses]

Wow, I never heard of that guy before. I can't believe his sons turned him in...

Stop being shallow.

 

[Citizen X]

King, really, I you wanted to attract everyone's attention you could have simply written your title as "SEX SEX SEX SEX SEX SEX SEX"

It seems that NT's have designed and built most of this world. .

Well, I'm not impressed with this world. We can say that things have gotten out of hand thanks to all the "non NTs" out there who have taken it on themselves to fuck up the NTs' hard work, but I think that might simplify things too much, or maybe today I feel humble, I don't know.

But I do know this, we are not the next step in evolution. Have you taken a look around you? I did give a good hard look at the people around me while having my diner (alone, of course) just a few hours ago. And I'm telling you, Jesus, what a mess it was.

 

[walfin]

We'd worship Madoff if he wasn't caught. I mean, seriously, how many people can con so many for so long? You can't fool all of the people all of the time, but he sure fooled a lot of people for a hell of a long time.

And after all, he did kinda kick start the NASDAQ. That's quite an achievement in its own right, even if you have "moral standards" or whatever. I bet he could've been an INTP.

It's very easy to write-off a man after he's done one stupid thing in his life. That's something I believe SJs especially like indulging in. Can't bloody see more than one side of a human.

And I'm telling you, Jesus, what a mess it was.

God must be an INTP! :P:P

Stop being shallow.

There, there. Go easy on the kid.

 

[Citizen X]

We'd worship Madoff if he wasn't caught. I mean, seriously, how many people can con so many for so long?

The high echelons of the Catholic clergy have coned a good % of the population for hundreds of years.

 

[LucielaMinerva]

I believe the reason why you believe a doctor is superior to a garbage collector is because you believe NTs are superior. Put it this way: if being a garbage collector required more brainwork, you'd say garbage collectors are superior.

An SJ would believe doctors are superior because of the status accorded them.

I believe the only personality dimension in which there's clear superiority/inferiority is neuroticism, which is not measured in the MBTI. And perhaps that's why our tactful INFP Myers did not include it, while the Big 5 (arguably developed by mostly NT psychologists) does.

Actually for me, a doctor is superior to a garbage collector because he actually has the intellectual capacity, passion, drive and hard work to go though med school and help people in a medical sense; not because he is an NT, or his status or how much more he earns. Such reasoning is rubbish to me anyway. There must be an objective and logical explanation for people to hold doctors in higher regards than say, a rubbish collector.

Or it can be seen that a doctor can be a garbage collector but a garbage collector cannot be a doctor.

Yes, vasopressin and oxytocin are hormones, but that's not logic and if love were that easily conquered and explained, we would be having workable love potions and anti-love potions now haha.

 

[scorpiomover]

I used to think so. Then I took up driving lessons. It was really hard for me. I discovered that it relies on an entirely different type of thinking. The type of thinking it relies on, is one that I was vaguely aware that average people use effectively all the time, but intellectuals seem to really struggle with. When I came across this site, it was still fresh in my mind. I realised that I was looking at S-thinking.

The amazing thing about S-thinking, is that it looks like it doesn't do much. But actually, it's incredibly effective. Driving is one of the few situations in which city folk put their lives into the hands of amateurs, that we don't even know, several times, every day. Considering the IQ of the people who drive, it's astounding that any of us make it through a single day, without crashing. The number of risks alone dictates that we should all be dead from driving. But we are not. Driving, which is done by amateurs with average IQs, is way safer than flying, where you are flown by trained professionals, and where every eventuality is controlled for. Even more, driving requires constant balancing of several simultaneous factors. There is a computerised equivalent, the auto-pilot in 747s. But an auto-pilot is one of the most advanced calculating machines known to man, and an auto-pilot cannot do half the things that humans do.

So it is quite clear to me that S-thinking is an unbelievably advanced type of thinking.

NT-thinking is also incredibly useful. It is useful for long-term analysis of static behaviour. It shows us where we can improve S-thinking, especially in potentially lethal situations.

However, the majority of situations are suited to S-thinking.

Plus, because NT-thinking is based on improving S-thinking, if we have remove NT-thinking, we still have a viable civilisation, like that before the Renaissance.

But, if we remove S-thinking, and just leave NT-thinking, then what do we have? A society of Stephen Hawkings, Richard Dawkins and Charles Darwins. Who is going to clean the sewage? Who is going to arrest the rapists? Let's get real. IMHO, a society of NTs, is a society which would disappear in less than 50 years.

NTs are like turbo boost on a car. They make everything much faster and more efficient. But without the car, turbo boost is so much hot air. Useless.

 

[SkyWalker]

NTs have the eyes of the collective (they see far), but the mind of an individual.

 

[Jelly Rev]

But, if we remove S-thinking, and just leave NT-thinking, then what do we have? A society of Stephen Hawkings, Richard Dawkins and Charles Darwins. Who is going to clean the sewage? Who is going to arrest the rapists? Let's get real. IMHO, a society of NTs, is a society which would disappear in less than 50 years.

NTs are like turbo boost on a car. They make everything much faster and more efficient. But without the car, turbo boost is so much hot air. Useless.

lets get real????? that was def not any INTP thinking there
Free markets take care of all of this. Wages would go up because the undesirability of the job, hence garbage pickup prices go up, as would being a police officer. The higher cost of collecting trash would increase the rate of innovation in trash collection bc of the higher potential profits due to increased trash collection rates.

no one wants to pick up trash? wages go to $50 bucks n hour. Want to pick up trash now? yea for $50 bucks an hour TY.

Where r my intps at turn up the brainpower and stop the short term sensor retortions.

what would really be different in an NT society?
without SJ's we lose some of the stability of society and family structure but without them we'd progress as society way faster, they hold us back

without SP's we'd lose some of the excitement, the entertainment factor would be much lower, but without them all the entertainment would not be as much needed

Without NF's we'd lose some depth, some care. but without them we wont waste time with such stuff anyways as NT's

the world would be much colder, detatched, family structure would not be quite the same, but society would take leap after leap, without some SJ values holding us down