Why Do Sensors Mistype As Intuitives?
It’s extremely common for sensors to mistype as intuitives, for a variety of reasons. Of course, anyone can mistype as anything due to misunderstanding themselves or misunderstanding the eight cognitive functions that form all sixteen personality types. In this article, I want to get a bit more specific than that, and focus specifically on what leads sensors to mistype as intuitives.
Most typology content concerning the Myers-Briggs theory (and other 16 personalities theories) is created by intuitives. That’s fairly well known. The founders of Myers-Briggs were both self-proclaimed INFJs, and nearly every popular blog, website, or book you come across is, at the very least, run by an intuitive type. In many cases, it’s one of the INXX types. As a result, there is an over-representation of intuitive content.
Why So Few Sensors?
Well, intuitives are believed to be more interested in personality theory, for a few different reasons that I won’t get into right now. So, perhaps, the abundance of intuitive content is a good thing, if approached from that angle. However, sensors often feel like they’re misrepresented by much of the content out there, to such an extent that many mistype as intuitives. If you’ve been in the typology community for any length of time, I’m sure you’ve heard the term “intuitive bias.” Many people are aware that this exists, but don’t really understand it until they begin to identify as a sensor themselves.
Of course, it is possible that there are far more sensors involved in personality theory than people believe, due to their tendency to mistype as an intuitive. That’s difficult to say for sure.
So, Why Do Sensors Mistype As Intuitives?
I reached out to various sensors within the community who used to be mistyped as intuitives and asked them to explain why it happened. Below, I’m not only going to provide the cumulative list of reasons that I was given (or am aware of), with a brief explanation. I’ve incorporated quotes from various sensors, so you can get first-person perspectives on the subject. I hope you find it insightful!
Some of these points overlap, but I’m making them distinct because to match the feedback I received from sensors. I want to clearly label the struggles people had so that there’s absolutely no confusion.
The Reasons Sensors Mistype As Intuitives
1. Sensors are portrayed as shallow, lacking depth
Sensors, and SPs especially, are often described as people who are overly concerned with trends, aesthetics, and visual appearances. They’re described as taking everything at face value, never looking beneath the surface or considering anything beyond what they can see right in front of them. These are misconceptions, or extremely imbalanced individuals at best. (For the record, not all SPs care about aesthetics and trends. That’s not what Se is about.)
“Because intuitive type descriptions make it sound like anyone with a brain is intuitive.
I’m an ESFJ- I’ve mistyped as ENFJ, INxP and even ENTP, because of sh**** superficial type descriptions.
I have always been someone who enjoys things like philosophy, politics and generally abstract topics. I preferred “deep” conversations to shallow ones, as most people do. the truth is, no one fits the weird caricatures of most sensor types, especially the SJ descriptions. Everyone wants to discuss important matters, and even if someone doesn’t want to it doesn’t mean they’re somehow less intelligent or more shallow.” – ESFJ
2. Creativity and imagination is overly associated with intuitives
While intuitives certainly do have an imaginative and creative tendency, these traits are not limited to the intuitives. Unfortunately, personality type descriptions often make it seem like that is the case.
3. Intuitives are more intelligent; sensors just have tactile intelligence
I‘ve heard intuitives describe sensors as street smart or talented when it comes to hands-on tasks. I think they believe they’re being fair and balanced by giving sensors this domain. However, the ability to perform physical tasks is not limited to sensors, just like the ability to be intelligent in the academic sense is not limited to intuition. This over-association makes it sound like sensors are only truly capable of grunt work.
Intelligence spans beyond sensing versus intuition. Many sensors are actually book smart, rather than street smart.
4. Ideas and ingenuity are overly associated with intuitives
Similar to point number two. Everyone has ideas. This can be a byproduct of intuition, but it does not define someone as an intuitive.
5. Sensors always prefer practical or physical activities like chores and sports
This a trap young typology enthusiasts fall into. For instance, no kid wants to do chores, so when they read type descriptions, they automatically assume they’re an intuitive. However, no one wants to do that stuff. Unfortunately, most people (unless you’re rich or something) have to learn how to do practical tasks to some degree of effectiveness because life demands it.
As for physical activities, you can’t type someone off of the activities they participate in. There are multiple factors that influence what someone chooses to do, such as cultural pressure, social circles, and etc. I know plenty of sensors who participate in stereotypically intuitive hobbies, like coding, reading, and writing. Some people, sensor or otherwise, simply have no interest in going outside and sweating.
6. Sensors can’t appreciate symbolism, philosophy, and abstract pondering
It’s true that sensors prefer concrete information when making decisions. However, many sensors can and do appreciate abstract or theoretical conversations. Although, you may not get to see this side of them right away, because many are hesitant to flex that intuition function around people they’re not comfortable with.
I guess I also thought intuitives were more easy-going and relaxed than sensors. I never stressed about day-to-day life and I liked feeling ‘intuitive’ more than doing practical things (like chores). I wanted to do adventurous things sure, but I remembered thinking about the ‘deeper meaning’ or drawing ‘big picture life lessons’ while imagining myself traveling. Kind of like the hero’s journey. Imagining myself going through it and drawing some deeper meaning out of what was actually happening (in my head or irl).
I guess another one, if it counts, is I’ve always been drawn towards intuitive people. Philosophical people, having ‘deep’ conversations, blah blah blah. But what distinguishes me from an actual intuitive is that I like imagining it or the idea of those conversations and feeling that 2 am feeling – which I mistakened for intuition. Sensing sounded super bland and just ‘meh’ while intuition (like Ne as an INFP) sounded deeper, more abstract. Sensors sounded like normal people who did day-to-day physical things and liked it, whike intuitives (to me) sounded more laid back, chillax, more likely to ponder life’s greatest questions and ✨️ be deep ✨️” – ESTJ
7. Sensors are normal, common, every day people who always fit in
The idea that the intuitives are always the misfits and the odd ones out is completely wrong. There’s a multitude of reasons why someone might not fit in. Many intuitives choose to cite statistics in regard to this, claiming that sensors are more common so of course they fit in better. However, those statistics, even if they are correct (which I highly doubt because type is self-reported so how could they be?), don’t account for density. In other words, being a sensor doesn’t guarantee you’re surrounded by other sensors. A sensor can be raised in a intuitive family, making the sensor feel more like the misfit. In addition, a sensor can be the loser at school, or the one with quirky interests.
It’s almost as if sensors aren’t allowed the right to feel out of place or alone, because they are described as having a natural leg up in life. That’s false. Intuitives are just as capable of excelling in the real world, as sensors are capable of struggling in the real world. Your personality type does not predispose you for success.
8. Sensors lack a rich, inner world
This ties closely into previous points. The inner world of intuitives is often over-emphasized, while sensor description focus more on tangible reality. However, introverts, regardless of sensing versus intuition, frequently have a rich inner world, because their primary focus is internal.
READ MORE: Detached from Reality: Intuitive?
9. Clumsiness is exclusive to intuitives
Sensors are focused on the concrete world or concrete information so many people translate this to mean that they’ll constantly be aware of their bodies and their physical surroundings. In other words, sensors, especially SPs, can’t be clumsy or distracted. This is not realistic. (And in the reverse, not all intuitives are clumsy. There are other factors that go into this.)
Hi there, reader! If you enjoyed that article, leave us a quick comment to encourage us to keep writing. In addition, if you've found our content helpful in some way, please consider Buying Us A Coffee to support our efforts and help keep this website running. Thank you!
Thank you so much for this article. Hope it will be widely read and understood !
As many Sensors, I first thought I was an Intuitive type. Realising my true type (ISFP, not INFP) was a bit of a shock. It hit a nerve : coming from a family where Ne is highly valued, I always felt like the misfit, just like described.
And “you lack of depth” is such a terrible comment to hear for a Fi dom 😀
I think all those judgmental prejudices about what S really is are actually quite repulsive for a lot of Sensors, more than any theoretical lectures about MBTI. This might also explain why Sensors are under-represented in psychological theory communities. After all, who would be appealed to study a theory or join a community that basically tells you’re idiot, unconsistent, and very boring ?