[INTP] INTPs and their "principles"

[Grungemouse]

Firstly, I apologize if a thread has covered this particular topic. I did check the Typec search engine, but didn't find anything. I suppose I could have checked INTPc, but... *shudder*

ANYWAY. I read in almost every INTP profile, related threads and other sources that INTPs have principles which they stand by. The thing is, I don't think I have any? At first I thought, "Oh crap, maybe I'm mistyped as an INFP?" but I read a couple of INFP threads in the Idyllic and found that I have very little values that i stand by. In fact, I feel embarrassed when I argue about my values because of their subjectivity. I feel vulnerable about them, so I roll over and brush them aside. Perhaps I do have principles, but because I don't know the definition of them, maybe I'm not aware of them.

I'm not sure this constitutes as a principle; I go by the idea that if someone wants to speak to me, they will go up to me and speak to me. If they don't want to, then they won't. So I won't go up to someone if they aren't talking to me, because they clearly don't want to. Hopefully that was understandable?

So, a couple of questions if you don't mind:

1) What does it mean by an INTP having principles?

2) If you're an INTP, do you have principles? If so, what are they?

 

[EcK]

You're what i'd call a real "Ti and Ne" user,
I suspect the other guys are just frauds.

Welcome in the 'family' though.
Enjoy the free cupcakes

 

[sculpting]

Fi has values.
Ti has principles.

Both are sets of "rules" developed to help make decisions.
Both are developed based upon feedback from the enviornment.
Fi "feels" others pain and out of avoidance develops "rules" to minimize that pain.
Ti "thinks" others thoughts and develops "rules" to avoid logical fallacies that provoke internal frustration (Sound right? I lack Ti, it's a guess...)


Fi "rules" work very well on very fuzzy, complex, people contamintaed problems where incertainity in human interaction has to be accounted for.

Ti "rules" work very well on precise, concrete, well defined problems where answers are either CORRECT or INCORRECT -think of logical reasoning equations.

however I am not an intp or an infp so I cant help with your two Q's. sorry!

 

[Eruca]

Dont hurt others, mentally or physically, unless they deserve it. Its amazing how many people only follow this one when it suits them.

Little white lies are fine but when it comes to serious stuff the truth is more important than my credibility.

Im often lazy but if I have accepted a contract or made a promise I follow through with my duty.

 

[Grungemouse]

Fi has values.
Ti has principles.

Both are sets of "rules" developed to help make decisions.
Both are developed based upon feedback from the enviornment.
Fi "feels" others pain and out of avoidance develops "rules" to minimize that pain.
Ti "thinks" others thoughts and develops "rules" to avoid logical fallacies that provoke internal frustration (Sound right? I lack Ti, it's a guess...)


Fi "rules" work very well on very fuzzy, complex, people contamintaed problems where incertainity in human interaction has to be accounted for.

Ti "rules" work very well on precise, concrete, well defined problems where answers are either right or wrong-think of logical reasoning equations.

however I am not an intp or an infp so I cant help with your two Q's. sorry!

No, that was helpful. I was just confused about the whole "INTPs have principles, INFPs have core values". I just needed clarification as to what INTP principles stemmed from.

 

[Fluffywolf]

I have principles and values. It's confusing sometimes.

Without principles, I would do unneccesary harm to people.

Without values, I would not be as optimistic/happy as I am.

I make it a principle not to subdue to values too much in order to keep seeing reality to the best of my ability. (ie. not starting to believe in lies, or seek easy way outs without reason, etc.)

 

[Totenkindly]

In one sense, principles and values are all part of rulesets.

Rulesets (Ti or Fi) are like code that processes data.

INFPs rulesets, as F values, seem more individually driven. I would like to say internally, but many of the rules are probably derived from external data (i.e., patterns of what seems to be true). However, even building a list of conscious personal values demands a prior judging mechanism to decide which rules are important.

I think the difference here is the INFP, when constructing the ruleset, says, "Which values best explain this and are most meaningful to me?" and the INTP says, "Which principles seem to most reflect Reality (both inside and outside me) regardless of my involvement?" i.e., the latter is defined more by detachment and removal from the world to third-part overseer, the former by some sort of self-positioning to the world that demands meaningful engagement as a legitimate part of the truth.

INTPs do have principles, that's why there are many threads here where INTPs are tearing apart someone's constructed arguments or thinking process; we use our principles as the rules by which we do that.

 

[JocktheMotie]

I don't see "principles" as things like personal directives for behavior like a Fi user may see them; they're little more than rules that I use for judging data. For example, "efficiency" of a process or system is something I think any good system or theory incorporates. If it's dirty or messy, I don't like it, doesn't fit my idea of what a good theory or system is.

You'll notice that as Einstein got older, he had several ideas about the Universe that he found difficult to accept because they violated those principles. He hated Quantum Mechanics because he loved the idea of a deterministic universe, and he hated the idea of a dynamic universe, because he had always thought it eternal. It's why he invented things like the cosmological constant, simply to satisfy those principles.

 

[Shimmy]

Firstly, I apologize if a thread has covered this particular topic. I did check the Typec search engine, but didn't find anything. I suppose I could have checked INTPc, but... *shudder*

ANYWAY. I read in almost every INTP profile, related threads and other sources that INTPs have principles which they stand by. The thing is, I don't think I have any? At first I thought, "Oh crap, maybe I'm mistyped as an INFP?" but I read a couple of INFP threads in the Idyllic and found that I have very little values that i stand by. In fact, I feel embarrassed when I argue about my values because of their subjectivity. I feel vulnerable about them, so I roll over and brush them aside. Perhaps I do have principles, but because I don't know the definition of them, maybe I'm not aware of them.

I'm not sure this constitutes as a principle; I go by the idea that if someone wants to speak to me, they will go up to me and speak to me. If they don't want to, then they won't. So I won't go up to someone if they aren't talking to me, because they clearly don't want to. Hopefully that was understandable?

So, a couple of questions if you don't mind:

1) What does it mean by an INTP having principles?

2) If you're an INTP, do you have principles? If so, what are they?

1. For me, my principles are the rules which I follow in live and expect others around me to follow as well, at least if they want to be friends with me. If I break these rules myself I will feel like shit and try to make up. If others break my rules I will inevitably be very mad and likely cut them out of my life.

2. I have these principles. Some important ones are: "Do not do to others what you would not like to be done to you." "Everybody is free to do whatever they want, as long as they don't infringe on other peoples lives in the process." And for myself: "I am the most important person in my world, everything is allowed for self-preservation." And "There is no objective wrong or right, there's merely different ways of doing things."

 

[thisGuy]

dont worry about not having any...they are the basis about what you may call a 'conscience'...they will be there when you need them

 

[Totenkindly]

I don't see "principles" as things like personal directives for behavior like a Fi user may see them;

Maybe that's a good way to put it -- Fi sees "directives for behavior."

I do have some "relational rules" that I've derived that seem to create maximum potency and efficiency for relationships, but they're still more principles to me ("these things work") and THEN comes any value I attach to them personally.

For example, "efficiency" of a process or system is something I think any good system or theory incorporates. If it's dirty or messy, I don't like it, doesn't fit my idea of what a good theory or system is.

Exactly. Clean and elegant is a priority. Then again, could we call this a 'value' for INTPs? After all, not everyone shares it, and it's an arbitrary rule that we apply to what crosses our desk.

You'll notice that as Einstein got older, he had several ideas about the Universe that he found difficult to accept because they violated those principles. He hated Quantum Mechanics because he loved the idea of a deterministic universe, and he hated the idea of a dynamic universe, because he had always thought it eternal. It's why he invented things like the cosmological constant, simply to satisfy those principles.

Yup, good anecdote.

 

[Matthew_Z]

2. As part of the core of my ethics, there is the Axiom of Non-aggression. There's also a few cliches in there such as "don't do unto other what you would not want done unto you." I would define these as my "principles."

 

[JocktheMotie]

Exactly. Clean and elegant is a priority. Then again, could we call this a 'value' for INTPs? After all, not everyone shares it, and it's an arbitrary rule that we apply to what crosses our desk.

I suppose we could, it essentially serves a similar purpose, however I just hate the term "value" . Typical, I know. Partially because, I think I do have a rudimentary set of values that really don't serve a logical purpose beyond, like I said, directives for relational behavior and just seem to stem from upbringing instead of consciously derived truths. The problem is, when you ask me what they are, I couldn't tell you, and my mind would say they're more like guidelines than actual values

 

[Kollin]

I think it would depend on how one defined principle. I was looking at the profile on intp.org. It referred to it in reference to their detachment and their mission to provide clarity. I look at these principles as something that rubs them the wrong way and they've got to do something to correct it.

 

[Totenkindly]

... The problem is, when you ask me what they are, I couldn't tell you, and my mind would say they're more like guidelines than actual values

well, yeah, of course. I have a few things I feel strongly about (and even a lesser subset that I can actually articulate, normally they're "vague" like you describe)... but I will still flex them in a situation because I know they're just personal feelings and I instinctively want to be open.

"Logical" principles are a different matter, I'm bound by them and can't ignore them.

 

[ygolo]

Principles are notions about how the universe works---the immutable invariants of the universe.

I am gong to speak metaphorically for a bit.

We have, at best, a tentative grasp of the principles at work in any system, at any level of abstraction.

Nevertheless, we would be wise to heed these principles. Though tentatively grasped, a principle is believed to be invariably strong, if we do indeed have hold of principle.

If what we believe is a principle turns out to not be one, that is, if it is not invariant, then we need to try and grab hold of what is believed to be a true relevant principle.

Now to speak more concretely. There are many ideas that a particular person could think is a principle. Examples include

1) Honesty is the best policy.
2) The truth shall set you free.
3) Work can be fun.

These are simplistic. But when I was younger I thought all of these to be principles. Even today, I find these to ring true. Though there is some doubt cast on them lately.

 

[nocebo]

After studying information gathered in different contexts (experimentation through Ne), there's some things that remain the same despite context.

These eventually become things that I expect to remain the same no matter what, and build upon them. Sometimes, I need to go back and alter them based on new data, but until then... I can accept the constants as always being so.

ex. "Something thrown in the air always comes back down" would be a principle, something we believe is always constant due to the numerous trials that agree. But then... after studying gravity and space (gathering new info), the principle will need to be fixed before we can build on it.

I think that for INTPs, this method carries over to our philosophy on life also, but it's not limited to just that.

 

[ChocolateMoose123]

I think you'll figure out your "principles" or "values" when and if they are challenged. You'll be surprised at what acts or words instantly grab your attention. Then there's that immediate "I won't stand for this" feeling you get when you hear something said or see someone act in a certain manner that doesn't jive with your internal beliefs. It will be instantaneous. No use thinking about it beforehand. It always sneaks up on you anyway.

 

[INTPness]

I totally understand what some have said about things being clean, organized, and "tidy". An example of this is when any one of my loved ones call me on the telephone. Especially if I'm working or heavily engaged in Ti (analyzing something, reading something really interesting, or researching something I want to learn), I sometimes don't want to pick up the phone because I know, logically, that I only have 24 hours in a day and if I spend 1 hour on the phone, that's one hour less that I have to research, learn, explore, engage my Ti, work, sleep, eat, exercise, etc. So, I want to keep it "clean" and "neat" by thinking to myself, "I will talk to this person because I love them, but I really need to be off the phone in 15 minutes. 15 minutes is a fair amount of time to talk and catch up on things - especially since we'll probably talk again in 2 days." And I will make a mental note of what time it is at that moment (because these conversations often drag on far longer than I'd like and I feel like I've wasted time). So, after 30 minutes have gone by and they're still talking away (and I've had a failed attempt or three to end the conversation politely), it starts to get into that "messy" territory for me. Some of these conversations have gone on for more than an hour after I specifically told myself "15 minutes max". That violates a principle of mine, I suppose - because I know it's cutting into my productivity - and as INTP's know, we have this "zone" we get in - where we don't want to be interrupted - because we're on a roll. And sometimes when we are interrupted it can be difficult for us to get back into something at the same level of intensity/concentration.

Anyways, to bring "values" into this, I often feel something inside of me that makes me feel "bad" (on various levels - depending on who is calling and "how important" the conversation happens to be) for having to cut them off. I have hurt people's feelings at this point. When it gets really "messy" for me and is cutting into my idea of "neat" and "tidy", my friends/family that are "F" have gotten very offended and hurt by me cutting them off (even if I explain my reasoning). So, there are some "values" down in there that make me feel bad for not giving them the time that they want from me. I will sometimes think, "I shouldn't 'limit' my time with family" or, "One day I'll have a child and limiting my kid to 15 minutes of interaction here or there would be selfish and unloving". And I don't think I would do that to my child, but I still find myself doing it to other family members.

But, being an INTP, my "principles" usually win out. I may have some values inside of me that are making me feel bad or selfish for not being more generous with my time, but I just can't stand the inefficiency of some of these conversations. I will think, "This just isn't GOING anywhere. We have lost all logic in this conversation. We're talking about what the waiter said to you at the restaurant yesterday. I just don't care very much and it's cutting into my time." So, I will try to politely get off the phone.

I am trying to be more balanced in this area. It's a challenge for sure, but I believe it's good for us INTP's to be giving of our time and of ourselves because, afterall, it isn't all about us. And if we let Ti and our "principles" run wild, we will push away/hurt a lot of people. And that's never good. I think we are wired to keep our list of close friends fairly short, but I would like to be an unselfish friend to those individuals.

That said, I still don't want to talk on the phone for more than 15 minutes, if I can help it. Let's talk, and let's get to the point, and keep the conversation meaningful and logical." And then we'll catch up again in a few days. Unless you're an "N", then we may be able to talk into the wee hours of the night. Sometimes those "N" to "N" conversations can go for hours and you still don't want to stop talking.

 

[Orangey]

The problem is, when you ask me what they are, I couldn't tell you, and my mind would say they're more like guidelines than actual values

I think you'll figure out your "principles" or "values" when and if they are challenged. You'll be surprised at what acts or words instantly grab your attention. Then there's that immediate "I won't stand for this" feeling you get when you hear something said or see someone act in a certain manner that doesn't jive with your internal beliefs. It will be instantaneous. No use thinking about it beforehand. It always sneaks up on you anyway.

These two things ring true for me. If someone asked me to make my values or principles explicit, I would probably stare at them blankly. However, in situations where one of them gets violated, I usually have a sense of what is wrong.