- Intuition versus...
Ugh!
Sensing.
Oh, I almost got you there.
What is the real difference
between intuition and sensing?
The N and the S,
that second letter in your 16 Personalities type.
This is, like, one of the more abstract concepts
in Myers-Briggs.
I should just get into the heart of the video, shouldn't I?
Yeah, why keep talking about it?
Let's just get into it.
Let's just talk about...
So first of all, the intuitives,
they prefer to look at overviews of things
and speak in terms of the overviews of things
rather than do what the sensors do,
which is get into the details.
To the sensing types,
the details are important,
the overview is secondary.
We need to establish the details first.
It's the opposite for intuitives,
they're like, let's do the overview first,
the details, we'll fit that in later.
Now, right away, I want you to realize
that both do both.
Maybe they don't always do both,
but they are capable and oftentimes aware of
both the overview and the details,
it's just one takes precedence over the other.
They focus more on one than the other.
And I think with intuitives,
what it is is that they wanna focus on that overview
to give you the context
so that the details can be put together easier.
And maybe you don't have to have all the details.
I'll give you the overview, I'll give you a few details,
and because I gave you the context,
you should now be able to fit it all together yourself.
When intuitives are telling you about something,
they'll usually start with an overview.
They won't jump right into it.
Do a little experiment.
Go on YouTube and watch a bunch of people.
You can identify the intuitives a lot of times
by the fact that they'll start off with this long intro
that's like, "This video is about..."
And it's just like, dude, get into the video.
Now, of course, after a while,
good YouTubers, whether they're intuitive or sensors,
they will figure out, oh, I just need to get into the info.
But intuitives have that learning curve.
They're always gonna do the overview.
The flip side of that is that
sensors not giving you the overview
will sometimes leave you in the dark about
how are these details connected,
why are you telling me this right now,
what's the context?
For them, they're like,
you'll get the context by the end,
why start with the context?
Intuitives, likewise, will summarize, a lot of times,
without giving too much detail.
Whereas the sensing types will give detail
and not summarize.
Again, on YouTube,
you'll see this where intuitives,
if they're not the most experienced YouTubers,
they'll start with an overview,
and then they will do a summary at the end of the video.
It's like, dude,
you don't need to tell me what I just watched.
This isn't a five paragraph essay.
Sensing types don't really like summarizing
and boiling down the details because if you do that,
then you are disrespecting the details
and you might convey something
in a way that is not accurate.
As such, intuitives, a lot of times,
make errors of fact
because they're disrespecting the facts,
they don't care as much about the facts.
Like, sure, I should get the facts right at some point,
but if I got the overview,
if I gave you the summary and the context
and that is all solid,
if I get a few details wrong,
it doesn't really matter.
To the sensors, it's like, no.
Sensors, a lot of times,
won't even say something unless they know it's factual.
They'll be like, okay, don't quote me on this,
but I'm not sure if this is accurate.
It's like, dude,
you don't have to prove everything.
Everything doesn't have to be 100% right.
But for the sensors, yes,
they don't want to make errors of fact.
So to summarize...
Now, moving on to another point,
it's not just about overviews versus details,
it's also about patterns versus the actual events.
So because the intuitives are keeping
their eye on the overview,
they become aware of the patterns very quickly
that the facts create.
And they value those patterns more than the facts themselves
and, of course, if you've caught on to the patterns,
sensing types are the opposite of that.
They prefer to just look at the facts.
To them, it's like, sure, there might be a pattern,
but what I can really see, what I can really prove,
are the facts in front of me.
Let me emphasize this once more.
Oh, I almost got you again.
Both do both.
Intuitives see the facts and the patterns,
they just give way more weight to the patterns.
Sensing types see both,
they just focus on the facts.
I think, a lot of times,
we act like types are robots,
or you got, like, half your brain cut out,
and it's like, I am an intuitive, I do not see facts.
I am a sensor, I am incapable of seeing patterns.
Now, look, yeah, it gets to a point sometimes
where they over-emphasize one over the other so much
that it seems like dude,
why didn't you see that fact right in front of you?
Why didn't you see that pattern
that was clearly developing?
It happens, but it doesn't mean they're incapable
of seeing the other side.
And it gets to the point where they will ignore it.
The intuitives will see facts,
but they will ignore them
if they don't seem to line up with the pattern
that they are perceiving.
Sensors will ignore patterns that they have become aware of
but it's just, like,
maybe we should just go back to the information,
back to the facts,
and see if that pattern really is actually there.
This next thing doesn't get talked about a lot,
but it's so interesting.
It is categorizing.
Intuitives love to lump things together.
I mean, it goes a long ways,
overviews and patterns, right,
this is adjacent to that categorizing stuff.
Instead of looking at each thing individually,
let's lump it all together.
Sensing types don't like categorizing things
in that same way.
They would rather keep things separate,
look at each individual thing as its own thing.
Sure, I can see the categories,
but that's not as important as the thing itself.
You'll find when you're talking to intuitives,
that they try to avoid specificity as much as possible
and will stay in the level of categories.
They just don't want to use the brain power to, like,
come up with examples to, like,
pick out specific things that they're talking about.
They're, like, it's just general category.
Pick anything in that category,
it probably fits whatever I'm talking about.
Sensors, on the other hand,
feel like that is reckless.
Why would you do that?
You gotta be specific and talk about
what you are actually talking about.
You need to give examples to prove
whatever you're trying to say.
Sensors are kind of like the people who are, like,
pics or it didn't happen.
I need proof and I can't prove something to you
if I just lump things together.
You gotta watch out,
because I think this is what makes it so interesting
is that a lot of people think,
oh, if I hear someone talking about
the real world all the time,
they must be a sensing type,
but this will trip you up because
intuitives talk about the real world all the time,
they will just lump things together and categorize things,
and this is where you can catch
some of those sneaky intuitives who, on the surface,
you might think they're actually a sensing type,
but when you really listen to what they're saying,
they are categorizing the S out of things.
Literally, they are categorizing the sensing
out of things, oh, my gosh.
Frank, you're not as dumb as you look.
(Frank coughs)
Now, here's a really interesting one.
A lot of intuitives, not all of them,
but a lot of them love to talk in analogies.
In other words, they will be like,
this thing is like this other thing.
Now, this is where you could get tripped up
is that all types,
you can be a sensing type and use analogies.
I think everyone, to a degree,
finds that analogies are a good way of kind of
clarifying what we're talking about.
This is like this
in the same way that this is like this.
You get what I mean?
The thing is that intuitives,
that's the way that they just, like, prefer to talk
in a way where it's, like, you get lost.
An intuitive will be like,
if I just give you a really good analogy,
that's all I have to give you,
I don't even have to talk about the real thing.
Sensors will be more like, okay, yeah,
I can give you analogy to clarify a little bit,
but then I actually have to explain
what I am talking about precisely in the sensory.
Oh, man, I'm trying to come up with an example.
(Frank laughs)
Another thing I've noticed is that
when sensing types make analogies,
which they do often, so don't just say,
"Oh, analogy, that's an intuitive type!"
No, if you do that,
you're gonna mis-type a lot of people.
Sensing types, when they make analogies,
they're often very clear.
I understand exactly what you are talking about
with that analogy
and it's, like, not that much of a leap to say
this thing is analogous to this thing.
To make, like, a stupidly simple example,
it's like, it's not that difficult for me to see intuitively
a car and a garage are analogous to a horse and a barn.
You know what I'm saying?
But they will use very concrete analogies
where it's like, yes,
this thing is exactly the same as this other thing
in the intuitive pattern,
but I can see clearly you're proving the analogy.
Intuitives, though,
they will give you the most, like, obtuse, opaque,
nebulous analogies that it's like,
my neighbor, what are you really trying to say here?
'Cause I could read into this many different ways.
A lot of times, the intuitive analogies will seem like,
oh, wow, that's a really elegant way
of describing that thing,
but it's just, like,
not always the most easy thing to comprehend.
And I'm not saying that, like, oh, they're so smart,
I'm saying, like, actually,
it's not clear to anyone except them.
All right, now, last but not least,
and I think this is the thing that
people like to focus in on first,
but it's actually not always the most obvious thing,
but it's guessing.
It's that future forecasting,
how intuitives are supposed to be able to, like,
see what's gonna happen next,
and I think this, you know,
sometimes a lot of people who are
a little bit more hippy-dippy,
they're like, oh, intuitives,
they're like, you know, these otherworldly creatures,
they can see what is going to happen next.
But they're really just guessing.
Intuitives love guessing and this goes back,
if I could go to the overview here,
it all goes back to intuitives are about
the overview, categorizing, let's not look specifics,
whereas sensors are like,
let's look at the specifics
and see what is in reali-tay.
A lot of the guessing that intuitives do is necessary
because they haven't been paying attention
to the facts or anything,
so it's like, yeah, you've gotta do a lot of guessing
if you're only looking at categories and overviews
and you're like,
I don't know if these facts are right or not,
let me just guess at how they're all connected.
Let me just guess at what's gonna happen next
'cause Lord knows I haven't been paying attention
to what has actually been happening.
Intuitives naturally anticipate
what's gonna happen next in the future
and they've been doing it their whole lives
because they've preferred intuition their whole lives,
they've been using it so much that they get good at it
to the point where they just take it for granted
that yeah, what I'm guessing is gonna happen next,
what I see the pattern is,
yeah, that's what's gonna happen next.
It's not magical,
it's not like they're some oracle peering into the future,
it's really just, like pattern recognition,
to the point where it might be, like,
totally unconscious.
They might not realize what the pattern is,
they might not be able to say to you,
oh, I know it because of this, this, and this.
It's just it arises in their brain,
they're like, here's the intuitive connection
that I am guessing at.
Intuitives love to jump to conclusions
when they get the gist of what the facts seem to suggest.
Sensing types will sometimes jump to conclusions,
but it's, like, usually not good because
they don't use the intuition as much,
they don't rely on it,
so when they're jumping to a conclusion,
it's like, dude,
just stick to the facts, okay?
Yeah, intuitives will naturally just guess
at what is going on with very few details
and, once again,
because they've been doing it their whole life,
a lot of times they're pretty good at it,
or at least they think they're pretty good,
or at least they feel good about making that guess
even if they have a track record of being wrong.
The sensing types,
it pains them to guess at that kind of stuff
'cause they're like, we don't really know
what's gonna happen next.
If you're not looking closely at the facts,
you're gonna make a mistake at some point.
And the intuitives do make a lot of mistakes.
I mean, doesn't everyone?
We're only human.
But it makes sensing types super uncomfortable to be like,
we have very few details,
we can't just, like, guess at what's gonna happen next.
That makes the sensing types much better suited
for situations like making important decisions
that require a lot of data,
like business decisions and things like that.
Intuitive types are the kind who will, like,
try stuff over and over and guess at what's going wrong
and then one of their sensing friends is like,
hey, have you actually just written down the numbers
and looked at what's actually happening here?
And the intuitive's like, no,
I figured it out intuitively.
And the sensing type is like, okay, cool,
I'm actually just gonna, you know, figure out the data
and that will point me in the direction of reality.
Okay, now that leads us into the imagination aspect of this
because I think one of the misconceptions is,
oh, intuitives, they're really imaginative people,
and sensing types, they don't have an imagination.
Now, here's where this comes from,
'cause there's a little bit of truth to it,
intuitives are using their imagination all the time
because, I mean, they're imagining future outcomes,
they're imagining where are things gonna go next,
they're processing what is the pattern going on here?
Now, let me make a distinction,
imagination is not the same as intuition.
Like, intuition is the process, generally,
of, you know, becoming aware of that abstract stuff,
of the overviews, of the patterns,
and imagination is, like, the tool in your mind
that can be used for that, among other things.
So sensing types have an imagination,
everyone has an imagination, duh.
But the thing is the sensing types
are just using their imagination when they have to.
It's another tool in their toolbox to be used.
They don't have to use it all the time
because they are relying on the sensing,
they're relying on the facts
and what is actually observable.
Here's the thing, though, with those sensing types,
because they're not using their imagination all the time
for all these silly reasons like the intuitives,
when they do rely on their intuition,
they know when to pull it out,
when are the most appropriate times to make a guess,
to think about the future,
to do a little bit of that brainstorming,
think of all the possibilities.
When those sensors get a little more confident
in that intuition,
it's scary, you know,
it could even blow the intuitives out of the water
because the intuitives are just a mess,
they just use their imagination all the time.
It's like, dude,
now is not the time to be relying on intuition.
But they're like, "Yes, it is.
Every time all the time is the time
to be using my intuition."
(Frank laughs)
Yeah.
So everyone's got an imagination.
That was my summary.
Let me know in the comments section
if I confused you even more.
What questions you may have about intuition versus sensing,
or anything else having to do with the 16 Personalities.
Until next time, stay cool and attractive.
♪ They say a stranger's come to town ♪
♪ They call him Mr. Frank James ♪