Am I an Intuitive or a Sensor?

Am I an intuitive or a sensor? Many people think that the answer to that question is obvious, that the differences between sensors and intuitives are obvious. However, in reality, sensing and intuition is actually more misunderstood than people realize. In fact, I personally believe that the divide between sensing and intuition has been exaggerated far beyond what it is actually is. So, who really is an intuitive, and who really is a sensor? This article will be focusing on that subject.

Beware of Bias

I could go on and on and on about the bias centered around sensing vs intuition. I won’t though, because I don’t want to turn this article into a rant. Suffice it to say, that no personality type is better than the other. There are legitimate downfalls to being an intuitive, just like there are legitimate downfalls to being a sensor. (Although, these downfalls may not be what you think.) Sensors and intuitives are equally capable of being deep, intelligent, dumb, shallow, successful, etcetera. I see a lot of sites that like to pigeonhole sensors into being street smart, while giving intuitives classic, academic intelligence. Ignore information like that.

If you wish to read more about the intuitive bias, check out “Why Do Sensors Mistype as Intuitives?”, “Intuitive Bias: Here’s What You Need To Know”, and “Bias and Misconceptions: How NJs Stole Perception from the SJs.” Otherwise, continue on down the page, and try to keep an open mind.

Intuition vs Sensing: The Myers-Briggs Dichotomy

If you’re new to the 16 personalities, here are a few things that you need to know. (1) Carl Jung defined 4 dichotomies (iNtuition, Sensing, Thinking, Feeling) and 8 cognitive functions (Ne, Ni, Se, Si, Te, Ti, Fe, Fi). He theorized that each individual would have one of these functions as their dominant, and that dominant function would play the greatest role in how their personality type manifests. (2) Myers and Briggs came along, studied his work, and reformed it into 16 personality types, based on how he described the framework. In the process, they identified similarities between cognitive functions within the same dichotomy, and created generalized descriptions based on these similarities. In other words, Extraverted Sensors (Se users) and Introverted Sensors (Si users) were grouped into a general Sensing description, while Extraverted Intuitives (Ne users) and Introverted Intuitives (Ni users) were grouped into a general Intuition description.

While the Myers-Briggs theory does recognize the cognitive functions and have reasonably good descriptions of them, the most popular form of their theory focuses solely on their generalized dichotomy descriptions. Therefore, I deviate from the Myers-Briggs theory in this subject, because some of these generalizations have popularized inaccuracies.

Related Article: Carl Jung’s Psychological Types: A Look at the Framework

Misconceptions About Intuition and Sensing

1. Misconception: Sensors can’t be abstract and can’t read between the lines

It’s extremely important to understand that sensing and intuition, like all the other dichotomies, define a preference, not a capability. In other words, sensors can use intuition, and intuitives can use sensing. In fact, every sensor has an intuition function, albeit lower in their function stack, just like every intuitive has a sensing function in their function stack. Anyone who has developed their personality type to a reasonable degree can interact with that lower function, and utilize it. Ultimately, when they use it and how they use it will come down to preference.

2. Misconception: Intuitives can’t be practical or successful in the real world

Oftentimes, intuitives are described as being idealistic, impractical, and even naive. They’re even described as being bad at the mundane, day-to-day stuff, and not knowing how to interact with reality. The degree to which this is emphasized, actually describes inexperience, not intuition. (Many teenagers relate to this stuff, regardless of personality type, because they’re still learning how to interact with the world effectively. Not even sensors magically know how to be successful or like doing chores.) Sure, many intuitives are idealistic. However, every responsible adult learns how to deal with the day-to-day reality and be practical, at least to some degree, even if they don’t prefer to do so. That includes intuitives.

3. Misconception: Someone who is detached from reality is an intuitive

It’s important to understand that there are multiple reasons why someone might feel detached from reality, and only one of these has to do with being an intuitive.

Read More: Detached from Reality: Intuitive?

4. Misconception: Someone who feels like a misfit and an outcast is an intuitive

Some intuitives describe a struggle to fit into the world around them, because it’s dominated by sensors. I’m not going to speak specifically to the legitimacy of that statement, but realize that if the world as a whole truly is dominated by sensors, that doesn’t guarantee your world will be. In other words, a sensor can find themselves in an environment surrounded by intuitives, thus feeling out of place. In addition, there are multiple reasons why someone might feel like an outcast that has nothing to do with intuition vs sensing. For instance, female thinkers often describe struggling to fit in. In other words, while some intuitives will legitimately struggle with feeling out of place, it’s important to understand that it’s not a problem that’s exclusive to them.

5. Misconception: Only intuitives see the big picture

Intuition focuses on patterns that can be broadly applied. People like to call this the big picture, but I’m wary about using that term. In my opinion, every personality type sees a piece of the big picture. No one can claim it exclusively. A pattern applied wrong will miss the big picture, the same way focusing on the wrong details will.

3 Real Differences Between Intuitives and Sensors

1. Intuitives prioritize abstract data, while sensors prioritize concrete data

Intuitives (within the context of personality theory) have a preference for abstraction. This means they prefer the theoretical, or seeing beyond what’s actually in front of them. You could say that intuition is tuned to recognize possibilities that have no physical, immediate link to reality. (In other words, they jump to the possibility without an identifiable, concrete data point.) Intuitives will naturally tend to prioritize their vision or possibilities above what reality dictates. They expect reality to eventually catch up with their intuition, eventually.

In contrast, sensors are going to prioritize concrete, identifiable data. Many sensors do enjoy abstractions, but they will not prioritize these when push comes to shove. For instance, an ISTP may get a “hunch” about something, but they’ll have a hard time trusting that hunch (and fully committing to it mentally) if there’s no way to prove it or tie it back to reality. They may dismiss the hunch entirely after brief consideration, or perhaps decide to watch and wait, just in case. Ultimately, sensors will feel more comfortable trusting what their experiences with reality indicate.

When discussing this subject, intuitives are often framed as the intelligent ones, because they can read between the lines, and sensors only see face value. This, however, is not true. Sensors can and do read between the lines. Any reasonably intelligent person can. But, most everyday situations in which someone has to read between the lines will have physical cues to hint at the abstract. Those are what sensors will rely on to help make their intuitive leaps. Intuitives, on the other hand, often make intuitive leaps before they know if there are physical cues to back it up. In addition, be careful that you don’t mix up emotion-based intuition with general intuition. Feelers (whether intuitive or sensor) often have an intuitive understanding of people’s emotions, while thinkers (intuitive or sensor) will struggle to pick up on that data.

2. Intuitives enjoy theorizing for the sake of it, while sensors usually need a reason

There is a bit of variance here, because many ESFJs and ESTJs (due to playful tertiary Ne) enjoy theorizing a lot, while ENTJs (due to Te-Se) often prefer the theorizing to be leading to action of some kind. However, generally speaking, intuitives are going to see theorizing as a main activity, a thing they do for fun, while sensors usually need to see some kind of purpose in it, if theorizing is the sole activity. For instance, anyone into personality theory is obviously finding some enjoyment in theorizing, but usually there’s a reason that people get into personality to begin with. Sensors will likely draw attention to the practical or personal applications of personality theory.

3. Intuitives speak more abstractly, while sensors focus on clarity

Relative to sensors, intuitives more naturally use metaphorical or figurative language. (This can make them prone to sounding flowery and dramatic, or vague and cryptic, depending on the person.) As a result, when intuitives relay information, you may find that they focus more on explaining a concept, then being precise or specific.

Sensors, on the other hand, value speaking more literally. They want to be understood clearly, and want things to be relayed in a straightforward manner. Therefore, they will focus on being precise or specific when relaying information. They won’t want to leave room for ambiguity.

Of course, don’t take any of this too extreme. Intuitives won’t sound like aliens, and sensors will use the occasional metaphor, especially if it’s a commonly recognized expression.