Is INTJ overrepresented here, or are people getting it wrong?

[RaptorWizard]

Emperical research? Poorly constructed theories? Like the kind in your threads about 'cosmology', etc?
You are a perfect example of what I wrote in post #12.
You can call it 'Ni' or whatever escape valve suits you, you can believe that all truth is provisional and therefore requires no proof beyond that it feels right to you, but magical thinking is still magical thinking.

If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants. No great discovery was ever made without a bold guess.

 

[Emotionalogic]

Ego is probably the least likable thing about INTJs.

au contraire:

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/AwesomeEgo

 

[Cellmold]

au contraire:

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/AwesomeEgo

That kind of ego requires the ability to both back it up with feats and some not-too-try-hard-and-arrogant charisma.

 

[Ghost of the dead horse]

Let's see. INTJ are by definition most concerned about inner world of theory-based thoughts and their concepts about them, many of which are based on observations of the past and elaborations on them. Typology central centers of theories about thoughts, thoughts about theories and people's perceptions on them. I'm perplexed as to how those two might have any connections. Having INTJ's overrepresented on a forum like that would surely be suspicious.

 

[garbage]

The 1% stat is taken from the official CPP test results. The test results themselves shouldn't be conflated with 'true type' (if it exists); we make that mistake way too much. We compare test stats to real life to draw authoritative and seemingly objective conclusions that, say, we're victims, misunderstood, in the right, and so on and so forth.

If those who type INTJ on this forum were to take the CPP test, they'd still likely score INTJ, because either (a) well, they fit the bill just as would any first-timer to the CPP test, (b) they've learned about the theory and found themselves to be a 'best-fit' INTJ after being exposed to the test, or (c) [other possibilities that I haven't thought of].

In short, the problem is how we use and interpret test results.

 

[the state i am in]

It seems like every other person on this website claims to be INTJ. Given it's only 1% of the population this cannot possibly be right, or is it? Maybe it's just overrepresented for some reason, but I have no idea why that is. It seems like everyone wants to be INTJ though, but rarely they are.

Secondary question: why aren't there many S's here? They are found everywhere in real life, but barely anyone here claims to be one.

many mistyped Ns here, probably about 30% to me seem like mistypes. this is including many mistyped intjs. i see some especially bizarre ones, estp, esfp, isfj, enfj, mistyping as intj.

A few other sites don't have this problem, Socionics forums mainly. MBTI is pretty jacked on the S/N dichotomy. That, combined with the fact that this site is a spin-off of www.intpcentral.com, is why everyone thinks they are an intuitor.

I was astounded to see a professionally accredited admin on a Socionics forum acknowledge Ni-doms as "sloppy thinkers", because that's about what I've gathered as well. They subvert the actuality of systems in preference of "a priori" knowledge; if a duality were presented, sensors would be objectivists (perhaps facile in understanding, to attribute something negative), and surely many intellectual types around here would be in favor of this approach to reality. But I digress.

for Si objectivists, it's the objective reality of the most commonly circulating interpretations and examples from which those are drawn (Se is more about tropes, about embodied stories/myths that organize how one makes sense of time/cause, at least for broad, complex issues. for immediate causal bodies-in-space assessment, they know how forces interact incredibly quickly). that circulating "meaning system" aspect is what allows the "duality" to be presented in the first place, embodied as a scheme of a-perception that exists before the object does, in a sense, because it has emerged through interactions that are not strictly with the current object but has instead been generally predicted from a larger class of similar ones in relationship with social networks that circulate the information through which organization, identity, is possible. we ride the space between perception and the object more only because we triangulate the relationship with another that creates an artificial space, that creates more surface area to feel out and simulate the underlying interactions, the inner geometries, of the deep structure of something. it relies on getting a feel for the sway, rather than the discrete movement, kind of feels like the monkey bars, going back and forth again and again, but spiraling, like a double helix, yet folding over itself again and again. see: origami.

the difference between N is this kind of analog thinking instead of digital, instead of discrete statisticization. the advantage of recombining the lenses that are commonly employed and being reflexive of the essence of them in the process, allows you to become aware of the paradigm you are operating within. it allows scale and perspective from which to observe to be more open-ended, to deal with a different kind of complexity. in terms of discrete, routinized operationality, if that was your primary criteria for assessing it, it does have clear drawbacks. in terms of immediate plug-and-play semantics, it can be inefficient unless it is able to take a very active role in constructing understanding between the languages it already knows and the language it is encountering. this requires much more complex relationships with teaching and translating, which can be costly and difficult to support.

it's like, Si embodies the blueprints, and Ni reverse engineers what came before them. they both are obviously necessary, highly functional cognitive skills. to know discretely what they are, but to also know them thru the contexts in which we can interpret their meaning beyond the paradigm through which they have been programmed into us. to get at what binds all things is to get at their essences in relationship to other essences. which is simply prioritizing the patterns that connect things, the big pieces of them, rather than prioritizing the nodes that get marked statistically, the individual, isolated states that digitally register a yes.

 

[Standuble]

Hmm, there don't seem to be that many INTJs here from my perspective. Each of the IN types are about the same. Besides there are presumably 60+ million of them worldwide and a few would surely retreat into the internet and over time find their way to places like this. I don't think there is that big a mistype problem here (30% figure seems off to me) at all really. If you want to see a mistype mindfuck then go to one of the IN forums on the other site. They're a mess.

I will say however that I do agree that in real life many people mistype as intuitive (especially INJs) and its probably mostly amongst the young. Most adults (sensors and intuitives alike) would stop caring as much about it and if they were to take the test would be more inclined to answer truthfully and receive better results. Despite this I would not trust the statistics gathered. I've always been sceptical of the NFP scores which IIRC tend to be more common that STPs. It seems less like Jung's "Se and Thinking is a rare combination" and more like "they couldn't be bothered."

 

[taylord]

Let's see. INTJ are by definition most concerned about inner world of theory-based thoughts and their concepts about them, many of which are based on observations of the past and elaborations on them. Typology central centers of theories about thoughts, thoughts about theories and people's perceptions on them. I'm perplexed as to how those two might have any connections. Having INTJ's overrepresented on a forum like that would surely be suspicious.

It just seems like someone with the typical skill set of an INTJ would have better things to do than talk about their type on a message board.

 

[PimpinMcBoltage]

I lot of INTJs would probably fit into the Functional Thinking dominants than an actual intutive dominant. About 50/50 Ti/Te wise.

I think INTJ is also the most likely type for say a nerd to get into dichotomy wise, because I = I don't like to talk to other people, N = I prefer fantasy over reality, T = I am logical, J = I am an autistic spazz.

Which is fairly fair and accurate. Most people who say that INTJs are over typed are mostly doing it out of heresey from the internet, and out of a desire to assassinate the character of other people so that they can claim the "unique" typing for themselves. That also was true whenever I agreed with them, though I might just be ~*Projecting*~

 

[Stigmata]

It seems like every other person on this website claims to be INTJ. Given it's only 1% of the population this cannot possibly be right, or is it? Maybe it's just overrepresented for some reason, but I have no idea why that is. It seems like everyone wants to be INTJ though, but rarely they are.

I would've thought this thread necessary for INFJ's way before INTJ's here. It seems like there's some factory somewhere within the darkest, most heavily incest riddled crevasses of the United States mid-west where they're just mass-producing female INFJ's, each unit coming standard with a obscure sounding nonsensical username, coupled with a innate, possibly programmed affinity for overly color saturated, melancholic toned avatars of girls in fields releasing feathers from their hands as white doves flying overhead shed tears of blood and sadness, or some slight variation of that premise.

Also, let's not get started on the robotic, hyperlogical as a defensive measure to mask loneliness and social awkwardness INTP trope -- It reeks out the pours of this place as if our only solid food diet has consisted of cloves of garlic for weeks on end.

 

[taylord]

INFJ is pretty overrepresented too. It's like the rarest personality according to some and somehow there are so many of them. By the way funny post.

 

[Nicodemus]

We also have an underrepresentation of complete idiots. Sure, there are some, but not as many as humanity has to offer.

Coincidence?

 

[ndovjtjcaqidthi]

I would've thought this thread necessary for INFJ's way before INTJ's here. It seems like there's some factory somewhere within the darkest, most heavily incest riddled crevasses of the United States mid-west where they're just mass-producing female INFJ's, each unit coming standard with a obscure sounding nonsensical username, coupled with a innate, possibly programmed affinity for overly color saturated, melancholic toned avatars of girls in fields releasing feathers from their hands as white doves flying overhead shed tears of blood and sadness, or some slight variation of that premise.

Oh my! Perfect!

 

[Zarathustra]

That kind of ego requires the ability to both back it up with feats and some not-too-try-hard-and-arrogant charisma.

Both of which we have in spades.

 

[Cellmold]

Both of which we have in spades.

My word, every single one of you?

I'm surprised the planet doesn't implode from the awesomeness.

I suspect however that the real winner here is determinism. After all being born a glorious INTJ was not a choice of yours or any others, it merely happened by whatever bizarre collection of variables come together to determine it.

In a way that's a bit of a bugger, you're awesome, but it's not like you chose to be so the merit of awesome is being lessened by the lack of choice in the matter.

You may as well be an ESFJ and be shitty, for all the difference it makes.

I'm just playing along /joke. You're all alright with me. Insightful people are always alright, it's what makes me awesome too even if I am not an INTJ.

 

[Azure Flame]

INTJ is usually the type taken by ENTJ's who think being scared of humans is a symptom of introversion, and INTP's who think their Ti makes them a judger. In both cases they are mistaken.

There are also those feelers who identify a more thinking aspect to their psyche who think this makes them INTJ.

INTJ's are the guys you see making their own chainmail and flaunting it at rennaisance festivals, haha.

INTP's usually have jew fros and wear suits.

 

[Zarathustra]

My word, every single one of you?

I was using the Royal "We"

 

[Cellmold]

I was using the Royal "We"

I did suspect. Still one cannot be supposed to know what we want even if wanting is what a we wants for ones self.

 

[Emotionalogic]

INTJ is usually the type taken by ENTJ's who think being scared of humans is a symptom of introversion, and INTP's who think their Ti makes them a judger. In both cases they are mistaken.

There are also those feelers who identify a more thinking aspect to their psyche who think this makes them INTJ.

INTJ's are the guys you see making their own chainmail and flaunting it at rennaisance festivals, haha.

INTP's usually have jew fros and wear suits.

Very True.

 

[The Great One]

What about the ENTP's? There's hardly any of them on this site. Let's see, there's me, [MENTION=15291]Mane[/MENTION], and [MENTION=18694]Magic Qwan[/MENTION] (he just doesn't know it yet, but he's also ENTP), and that's about it.