[INTP] Is being INTP a choice or is it inherent?

[Cypocalypse]

This is something that came to my mind. Since the world is pretty much external and an individual's merits are often quantified my observable parameters (good academic grades, well-defined work metrics in a professional career, etc.), I'm thinking that these elements have a strong TJ inclination.

Uhmmm....study hard (Si - pretty much memory centric), make an output by doing computation or implement something (Te), envision an eventuality of things (Ne), making a decision out of this (J).

I'm envisioning an INTP life. We assess relationships of concepts (Ni), bind it with our Ti (logic) while using perception as P the catalyst of this process.

And when we realize things, INTPs thrive in the intangible things. In a world with obvious inclination to external merits of an individual, is being INTP an inherent thing or did it just become a gradual choice of evolution for some people who despised the TJ world or something.

Were there early cues in your life that may have showed an INTP trait?

 

[suzyk]

Everyday. More specifically, in elementary school. I was more interested in abstract concepts rather than ones justified by logic. It got me into a lot of trouble because I'd never study, I would ask questions about the world a lot. No one understood it. I never understood fractions either (lol), basically I wasn't good at anything that was totally logical with no possibilities of something new. I don't think you're born as any of the MBTI types, but the environment you grow up in may make you into one of them.

We assess relationships of concepts (Ni), bind it with our Ti (logic) while using perception as P the catalyst of this process.

True, very true. Perception is an important thing in this world.

 

[Badlands]

I think the standards that typically define merit in society were invented by TJs because they were the ones that wanted control over them most (Te).

Anyway, to your main question, I think it's part genetics, part environment. It's hard to evaluate exactly what goes where, because the environment part of personality is pretty much set in stone by the time the focus of your life shifts away from your parents. The few reports of identical twins separated at birth (and then reunited) seem to mostly indicate a genetic role. I think how N-S and T-F are used is mostly genetic, the I-E and the J-P less so because they are more easily influenced by the environment.

I showed early signs of being an INTP. I could read at age 2 and I spent the bulk of my time discovering things about the world (through reading and asking questions) for several years after, probably until about puberty.

 

[Veneti]

I never understood fractions either (lol)

Thats one thing I'll never get, is that women are so bad at maths (As an average). I've met really smart women who just can do numbers.

Then again there's really smart guys who have no F empathy... Hmmm

I think still think what I've still said in the last 2 sentences is why MBTI used them as a differentiator between Men and Women for job (Err I mean trait) profiling.

 

[Veneti]

This is something that came to my mind. Since the world is pretty much external and an individual's merits are often quantified my observable parameters (good academic grades, well-defined work metrics in a professional career, etc.), I'm thinking that these elements have a strong TJ inclination.

You can blame the division of labour and the industrial revolution for your woes. Systems = productivity.

The biggest hurdle the P has to face is to conform until they can get to use their P more. (P is great at the high levels... but at the coal face its all about J).

Worse still, your divergent ideas will simply be stolen by your J seniors. (although someone high up can give you top cover and pull you through).

One thing though, is that P's are really bad on the contingency mode thinking, they have some huge blind spots... its like they are blinkered down a narrow tunnel and hope like hell that something doesn't get them from left field before they touch down.

Hmm... just maybe I was a P child (I was definitely an E early on)... and beat myself into the J.

 

[Badlands]

I don't think the Industrial Revolution was responsible for the TJ dominance; TJs still dominated making the standards for society's merits well before the Industrial Revolution but in a different way. I will reiterate my point about TJs wanting to make the standards the most through the high amounts of Te in their personalities.

 

[6sticks]

I've felt the pull... sometimes I have looked upon graphs with a hidden lust... often I would find myself trying on a labcoat late at night or fondling a test tube while thinking of Descartes. It got worse later on, as I began to experiment with substances like dihydrogen monoxide.

Fortunately I managed to break the cycle, thanks to a harsh regimen of athletic activity. Don't let this happen to you. INTPness is a choice and it can be cured... don't stay in the closet. Step outside, and let the sunlight embrace your frail, translucent bodies.

 

[miss fortune]

isn't it Ne that's the INTPs secondary function instead of Ni? Just dropping in to ask

 

[Veneti]

I don't think the Industrial Revolution was responsible for the TJ dominance; TJs still dominated making the standards for society's merits well before the Industrial Revolution but in a different way. I will reiterate my point about TJs wanting to make the standards the most through the high amounts of Te in their personalities.

How could you be late if there were no clocks.

People before the industrial revolution (out in the country) often only worked 3-4 hours a day (from one thing I read ages ago). So everything was more relative. A P had room.

Now, the world is far more systematic.

I think P is heading towards a preference, but its a call like any other to say its genetic based. (I do believe genetics does play a part).

Its presumptive to assume that TJs prior to the industrial revolution were the dominants (In fact they are a smaller subset of the total population) I think in small local clans it wouldn't be led by a TJ necessarily as systems were not that important to the degree they are now. The TJs might have been dominant in their little spher,e but their sphere wasn't what drove society.

Look at the Church with its power... probably lots of F's. That was pre Industrial revolution. I'd say there was no need for any different assessment between P and J back in time.

 

[Badlands]

The world is far more systematic, yes, but the only "directive" Feeling types (who are inclined to give orders) are NFJs, and even they don't usually direct for their own advantage (the real or imagined advantage of others; that's why they call ENFJ and INFJ Teacher and Counselor). It seems pretty clear to me that people in the Church that wanted to regulate things were usually Thinkers; before the Industrial Revolution, many people didn't "believe" in God because that's what they seriously believe; they did it because the Church would have them by the head or worse if they didn't. I'm sure many Thinkers got into power with the church for their own advantage and desire for control. And even if there wasn't as noticable a difference between J and P, that doesn't mean the distinction didn't exist. TJs already had control before the Industrial Revolution because many of them were willing to sacrifice moral principles to obtain it, and the Industrial Revolution simply gave them an additional advantage over future societal control.

 

[Totenkindly]

I think the standards that typically define merit in society were invented by TJs because they were the ones that wanted control over them most (Te).

Ha, very good. Yes, it's not necessarily that the system is biased towards Te... it's that Te people normally gravitate towards developing systems of control (!). The INTPs (and similar people) meanwhile are led to abdicate involvement, because they just don't care... until it impact their freedom to think.

I was very quiet as a child.

I watched people carefully, to figure them out, not interacting... just observing.

I explored my world thoroughly, always wanting to see what was around the bend, so I could understand how it worked. (And I would play around with things to figure it out.)

I read voraciously, bringing home shopping bags of books weekly. Went through the whole local library, basically.

Fascinated by processes, by the concepts underlying mechanical behavior. I loved Wile E. Coyote cartoons, and the Mousetrap game, and any sort of "systematic behavior" -- I wanted to see how it all worked together to result in a particular outcome. This eventually spilled out into more "human-oriented" systems ... like culture, religion, philosophy, psychology, etc... systems with more ambiguity.

I loved critiquing things -- movies, books, ideas, behavior (judging people by their spoken values versus their actual behavior), religious systems, etc.

The drive/focus towards all that was pretty much instinctive, not learned. It's what I did naturally.

So no, I don't think being an INTP is a choice; we're damned from birth.

Thats one thing I'll never get, is that women are so bad at maths (As an average). I've met really smart women who just can do numbers. Then again there's really smart guys who have no F empathy... Hmmm

My hunch is that the estrogen quotient pushes women to personalize things; it's less the raw ability to do math, more that they are pushed by biology (and then by culture) into approaching things from a more humanist and less technical perspective. It is interesting to see highly technical women switch gears when they get back to the house and their kids are around.

 

[Cypocalypse]

isn't it Ne that's the INTPs secondary function instead of Ni? Just dropping in to ask

Yup. Sorry. I confused one with the other. But you're right.

 

[Ghost of the dead horse]

I can't seem to find the post where Athenian200 said that being an INTP is like being a victim in a car crash

 

[Xander]

I don't think that someone with Te just went around and developed systems without provocation, though they probably thought about it. The Te came in because of a need. People wanted efficiency and Te could deliver.

As for if you're born as an INTP or not... I think that's a point which has been argued about for ages. Personally I'm coming to agree with my father that the core of the type is inborn, the expression is learned. After all how else would I be a P when my sister (who's older), mother and father are all Js. I think the only P in my immediate family is my dad's mother who I didn't see often.

Hardly scientific proof but there again I always doubt their certainty anyway.

 

[suzyk]

Thats one thing I'll never get, is that women are so bad at maths (As an average). I've met really smart women who just can do numbers.

Then again there's really smart guys who have no F empathy... Hmmm

I think still think what I've still said in the last 2 sentences is why MBTI used them as a differentiator between Men and Women for job (Err I mean trait) profiling.

You know, I was the first girl who posted, and that doesn't mean all females are bad at math. I've had problems with math ever since I was a little kid. Unless you did a census, you don't have any proof that women are bad at math. Plus, I've seen a lot of female accountants in Asian countries.

 

[Veneti]

You know, I was the first girl who posted, and that doesn't mean all females are bad at math. I've had problems with math ever since I was a little kid. Unless you did a census, you don't have any proof that women are bad at math. Plus, I've seen a lot of female accountants in Asian countries.

I've seen plenty of accountants that are women, I did the equiv of a US CPA. Asians have a preference for J type activities. It might be a function of their process orientated education or a genetic trait. I know people from Sg and I know how they study at school. Look at Japanese culture and Indian propensity for IT.... Its J all over.

Accountancy isn't a good representation of "math", you don't need to be good at math to be good at accountancy, just good at rules and attention to detail.

Before even looking for stats on the relative merits and abilities of Men and Women at Math (And I'm sure there is evidence, I've observed enough of it) try looking at the differences in the configeration of Male and Female brains, how they "feel" how they use Grey and White matter... you might just see some quite interesting differences.

One thing people should always realise... Nature is not politically correct.

 

[Veneti]

Oh yes, While it can be argued that men and women have potentially the same ability at math (and you need to be careful about citing wrote learning at school) there is definite proof that men and women have different propensity for variability in IQ. (WHich I believe is based on the double XX versus the XY like in the peopensity to have other conditions).

As like in this slide for instance.

pinker_Page_41

Hence, given I tend to be involved in a workplace where the highest IQ is paid for its not surprising that a lot of genetically abnormal high end IQ types are male (Its a positive handicap rather than a negative one), maths is pattern forming and pattern forming seems often to be the emphasis within IQ tests. Obviously we can argue till the cows come home. As a population we might be average, but in varability we are not.

 

[Haphazard]

Oh yes, While it can be argued that men and women have potentially the same ability at math (and you need to be careful about citing wrote learning at school) there is definite proof that men and women have different propensity for variability in IQ. (WHich I believe is based on the double XX versus the XY like in the peopensity to have other conditions).

XX tends to create a 'safer' personality and intelligence range than XY -- you know, men being more expendable in the long run to the human race. (Nature is not politically correct).

This leads to a lot of men on the high end of IQ and math proficiency, and also a lot of men on the low end of IQ and math proficiency... Women tend to be closer to an average. This average is likely forced down by societal norms that women are forced to conform to, because women are usually affected more by these things than men.

I've heard notes that men also tend to have more 'experimental' MBTI types than women. What exactly 'experimental' means I have no idea, but I'm guessing it might be more P (which may be potentially dangerous to a population) and maybe even more N. Then again, I've also heard that the general break between men on T/F was 60%/40%, while for women, the break was 40%/60%. The break doesn't look like that much, but it certainly seems like enough to cause stereotypes that aren't accurate enough and also cause the ruination of male/female relations...

but here I am, off speculating.

 

[Blackmail!]

One thing people should always realise... Nature is not politically correct.

What makes you think IQ is related to "nature"??
A lot of scientific studies would rather show IQ scores are heavily culturally biased.
See, Gould's essay, for instance...

---

Why am I not surprised to see you handle such a complex concept as "nature", and blend it with political values? :rolli:

 

[sriv]

This leads to a lot of men on the high end of IQ and math proficiency, and also a lot of men on the low end of IQ and math proficiency... Women tend to be closer to an average. This average is likely forced down by societal norms that women are forced to conform to, because women are usually affected more by these things than men.

Woman are more Se and environment affected? Sounds accurate, but this is probably because of the culture they are born into having different expectations for a woman.