Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
creativity often takes the form of restoration rather than creation.<br />
Safer/bigger, not different, is the goal of an intelligent Guardian, and security rather than<br />
improvement is the prize sought after. The Guardian directs their attention towards multiplying and<br />
safeguarding their resources by making wise, careful investments; forestalling threats, and<br />
constantly maintaining and monitoring their domain.<br />
Myers and Myers (1980) offer additional insight into the intelligence of Guardians. (It should be<br />
noted that while the authors were supposedly discussing the intelligence of all Sensors, in reality<br />
they seem to have focused mainly upon the SJs. All the intelligence-related examples they gave<br />
were for SJs, and they noted that most Sensors are Judgers. They also divided the Sensors up into<br />
the SF and ST categories rather than SP and SJ categories used later by Keirsey and also in this<br />
book. Considering all of this, I have decided to deal with their results as if they applied mainly to<br />
SJs.)<br />
One of the most salient points that emerged was that Guardians seem to get higher scores on<br />
intelligence tests when they rush themselves. Guardians care very much about “making sure,”<br />
which means reading a question multiple times, double checking their work, and choosing slower<br />
but more certain methods. But many intelligence tests are timed; this puts an immediate penalty on<br />
the SJs because they cannot answer as many questions. Whereas the Artisan’s style of intelligence<br />
is fast but error-prone, the Guardian’s style of intelligence is more accurate, but slower.<br />
(Painstaking accuracy and “soundness of understanding” are the Guardian’s strengths.)<br />
What kind of difference does this make in terms of scores? In the example that Myers and Myers<br />
gave, an ISFJ got a score 10 points higher on an IQ test after she stopped reading the questions<br />
multiple times before answering. (In case you’re wondering, the ISFJ took a parallel form of the<br />
test; it wasn’t the same one over again.)<br />
If we were to create an intelligence test that is fair to Guardians, it should be untimed and<br />
emphasize accuracy. It should be a “power” test rather than a “speed” test. Note that there are<br />
Guardians that achieve truly exceptional scores on I.Q. tests. Like the Artisans, they accomplish<br />
this in spite of the test structure rather than because of it.<br />
Rational Strategic Intelligence<br />
Rationals have the type of intelligence that is popularly recognized as such. They excel in science<br />
and math; they solve abstract problems; they design complex systems, they create long range<br />
strategies, they focus on accumulating knowledge and building theories. We will examine the<br />
manifestations of this intelligence in INTJ geniuses shortly.<br />
The Value of I.Q. Tests, Continued<br />
Despite the problems that intelligence tests present for Guardians and Artisans, I.Q. tests do<br />
accurately measure intelligence for certain types--mainly INs and ENPs, and to a lesser extent all<br />
Intuitives. For Introverted Intuitives and ENPs alone, an I.Q. test is more or less fair, and can be put<br />
to valid use for comparative purposes. An INTJ with an I.Q. of 150 is really smarter than an INTJ<br />
with an I.Q. of 140, provided that both INTJs have the same levels of Introversion, Intuition,<br />
Thinking, and Judging rather than being borderline on one of the preferences. But an I.Q. test<br />
cannot tell you whether an INTJ with an I.Q. of 150 is smarter than an ESFP with an I.Q. of 140,<br />
because the inherent bias of the test renders the data invalid for ESFPs. Essentially, most Sensing<br />
types cannot be tested because the confounding factors are too strong to permit real intertype