Well, SiTe combination actually is rather logical one. We collect loads of factual information around us, and use tried n' tested methods and commonly seek to use the best known practices. "If it worked well before, it will work well in the future."
Exactly, complete clarity, none of that messy Ne to muddy the waters.
Due to growth in technology, our society values analytical and logical traits.
In the newer, technological generation, it seems natural for the ISTJ to adapt these qualities as a norm of society. (ie. Engineering is a respectable job.)
Type has little to do with the potential for intelligence, only the amount we choose to use it.
An ISTJ with the correct motivations can easily develop the above qualities, it would just be for different reasons than those of an INTP.
(Personal example): An ISTJ friend of mine is a great programmer, and very efficient in both maths and sciences, far more than I am capable. The difference is that she's motivated by job security... not curiosity. But she still developed her intelligence to incredible heights, because job security was a good motivator for her.
How many ISTJs give a damn about MBTI in the first place?
They're too busy about their working lives to introspect heavily, let alone, spend considerable time on something that needs a certain degree of analysis to understand, like MBTI, unlike INTPs that have so much time in their hands.
Speaking from experience though, one thing good about INTP, which the extroverted crowd can possibly envy about, is that the INTP can easily project an image of being smart (publicly), even if he may not necessarily be the smartest guy around (INTPs doubt their intelligence, even if it's their most defining asset). But it can always be perceived as an anti-social behavior if not used right.
The only time, I think, that an ISTJ can be jealous of an INTP is if the ISTJ perceives that he is boring, and he wants to be a cool geek, which the INTP can easily be good at. Often times though, I don't think ISTJs recognize that they are.
There's this time though that an ISTJ got really pissed off of me because I can easily connect better (gazillion times better) to the ENFJ chick we both fancy. Though I consider this an isolated case, I don't wanna consider this a reflection of something that may not necessarily occur that often.
This is based basically on sightings on INTPc. According to this hypotesis, the "defining" traits of an INTP, such as highly "analytical", "logical", even "intellectually superior" in worst cases, may very well mislead an average ISTJ, who encounters the MBTI for the first time. Because it is not uncommon for an ISTJ to take pride in his "rational", "logical" thinking, the misfortunate ISTJ will assume that indeed he must be the INTP - the most logical and rational type.
At the first sight, he may appear to be one - analyzing and rationalizing everything like the world's biggest scientist, but there are definite deviations from INTP archetype once observed closely.
They are among us.
What do you think? I am not claiming anything, that's why I call it hypotesis. (Also, I do not claim that the percentage of ISTJs mistyped in this way is disproportionally big.)
There's a logical fallacy here. The derivation doesn't always point to the source.
There are lots of reason why these adjectives are attributed to certain types and they hold at most 70% accuracy (from the MBTI manual). The logical fallacy is in taking the adjective and going backwards to determine a type. (this is stereotyping)
There are many reasons why someone may be analytical and certainly, the INTP type doesn't have a monopoly on those adjectives.
the proper way to type someone is to measure responses to each of the 4 dimensions. In the case that there isn't a clear match, one can go into the cognitive function testing and determine which is most natural to someone. And if lastly that doesn't work, you can watch your own responses to the person, are you kindred spirits or war children? Observing the dynamic helps with the typing.
INTPs aren't analytical and logical. Why do people think that?
Could you elaborate on this? How would it help?
Socionics comes to mind. True the systems are mostly similar, but it does give insight into the other person's type using yourself as a reference point.
First impressions and in depth conversations can characterize the dynamics between two people. But understanding these dynamics, it'll help with typing.
For instance, ENFx have this light spirited quality about them and they use metaphors/analogies a lot. If I find myself painting pictures in my head as they communication, then I find that I'm mostly correct. I'm dealing with an ENFx.
So me, this is a much faster way of typing someone. If properly trained, it's a heck of a lot faster and more discrete than asking a lot of invasive questions.
I think most of the ideas of INTP superiority are bullshit. But it is true that these MBTI places often begin projecting the image that INTPs are superior (probably just because they tend to be populated primarily by INTPs).
I do believe that there are probably more Sensors here than labels imply. I think the unreasonable monopoly that INTPs (and NTs in general) have been accredited on rationality, combined with the hostility and condescension toward Sensors, would likely result in a lot of Sensors presuming themselves to instead be NTs.
PS: Archetypes are for suckers.
And this is why INTPc is, itself, total bullshit.
If anything INTPs are wannabe ENTPs (yes, we know how jealous you are of our ability to actually, you know, talk to women and be sociable. Don't pretend.)
ISTJs really don't have too much in common in with INTPs. Digest is right that it's easier to confuse ISTJ/INTJ. What a dumb fucking post by whatever INTPc member originally made that; he's probably on the phone with his mom finding out when she's bringing home the new Dungeon Master's Guide as we speak.
If you could be anything you want, I bet you'd be disappointed--am I right?