• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

[INTJ] INTJ: Do you/they resermble the descriptions?

Zarathustra

Let Go Of Your Team
Joined
Oct 31, 2009
Messages
8,110
But that is only the truth of your own subjective being, your Ni, so to speak.

Wrong.

It is the truth of the world.

It is Te truth.

But you fail to understand this, as you don't value Te.

And, just as fled our pm conversation, your ego doesn't want to recognize this is the truth.

Sorry, but I just wouldn't make for a very good cult member standing in the front of your mob of followers so I can stare up at you in awe, an intellectual giant on the stage, while you pontificate on your personal notion of truth and life in general, but while trying to ignore the glaring reality of the nose hairs that reveal the imperfections underneath the appearances.

I'm not looking to start a cult.

Nor, based on what I've seen from you, would I want you to be a member of any organization with whom I'm trying to accomplish something.

Which is probably how the INTJ who works with you feels, which is probably why you were asking in the first place.

Frankly, I see where he's coming from.

I just realized the obvious fact that Carlos Castaneda, who developed a So. Californian cult in the 1980s, was an INTJ.

Congratulations.

Once again, this has been a very revealing conversation.

I completely agree.

I don't have standing friendships with INTJs, I have working friendships which would quickly dissolve if any of us quit the job and moved on. I have an INTJ classmate "friend" on facebook, but he's not a friend per se and in high school he never invited me to his D&D games with the other nerds.

One of my best friends who I've known for over 2/3 of my life is an INTP.

The thing is, his commitment to the truth is strong.

And he's probably the nicest person I've ever had the pleasure of knowing (well, tied with my Grandfather).

If I have a "weak commitment" to truth, it's because I don't believe in Truth with a capital T as you do.

You know little to nothing about my conception of truth.

Your weak commitment to the truth is demonstrated not by what you say, but by what you've done.

Which is run away once I've revealed your blatant logical inconsistency, and then try to deny that this was the case.

That is not up to interpretation, that is a fact. It's what happened. It is the truth.

Your behavior is also a large part of the reason why INTJs often complain that NTPs (ENTPs, moreso) lack integrity.

And it's probably a large part of the reason why you have no INTJ friends.

I tried it on for size many years ago, and it didn't suit my character or thinking style.

Putting aside the full-of-shit aspect of what you're saying, this once again sounds like your rejection of Te in favor of Ti.

The sooner you come to realize this the better.

INTJ philosophers such as Rand and Nietzsche don't provide Truths, as they think they do, only guidelines.

:yapyapyap:
 

Zarathustra

Let Go Of Your Team
Joined
Oct 31, 2009
Messages
8,110
I would like to point out that not all INTJs are atheists.

Wow, what a revelation.

:bored:

However, I would have to say that INTJs tend to be atheists, while INTPs tend to be agnostics. But that is only because INTPs prefer to leave at least one thread untied, while INTJs (even the theists) prefer to tie up all the ends and then melt the knots with fire just to make sure the rug never, ever comes unraveled.

From my rep to [MENTION=13260]Rasofy[/MENTION] about his post: Atheist INTJs bother me as well. They usually have Pi tunnel vision. If an INTJ doesn't leave some room for agnosticism, they most likely have Pi tunnel vision.
 

Mal12345

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 19, 2011
Messages
14,532
MBTI Type
IxTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Wrong.

It is the truth of the world.

It is Te truth.

But you fail to understand this, as you don't value Te.

And, just as fled our pm conversation, your ego doesn't want to recognize this is the truth.



I'm not looking to start a cult.

Nor, based on what I've seen from you, would I want you to be a member of any organization with whom I'm trying to accomplish something.

Which is probably how the INTJ who works with you feels, which is probably why you were asking in the first place.

Frankly, I see where he's coming from.



Congratulations.



I completely agree.



One of my best friends who I've known for over 2/3 of my life is an INTP.

The thing is, his commitment to the truth is strong.

And he's probably the nicest person I've ever had the pleasure of knowing (well, tied with my Grandfather).



You know little to nothing about my conception of truth.

Your weak commitment to the truth is demonstrated not by what you say, but by what you've done.

Which is run away once I've revealed your blatant logical inconsistency, and then try to deny that this was the case.

That is not up to interpretation, that is a fact. It's what happened. It is the truth.

Your behavior is also a large part of the reason why INTJs often complain that NTPs (ENTPs, moreso) lack integrity.

And it's probably a large part of the reason why you have no INTJ friends.



Putting aside the full-of-shit aspect of what you're saying, this once again sounds like your rejection of Te in favor of Ti.

The sooner you come to realize this the better.



:yapyapyap:

There's no meat to any of your statements. I myself do actually put some work into adding content to the conversation. I want to say something interesting, even if it only interests me. That's nice that you have an INTP friend, they can be pleasant conversationalists although a bit air-headed, lost in structures that have no end.

Your statement "it is truth of the world" is revealingly pathological, even if you're not out to start a cult. It is not Te per se that I find so nauseating, it's the subjectifying of the objective realm as a realm of Platonic Ideas to which the world is to conform. And in the main, such a mindset has, historically speaking, been capable of widespread destruction.
 

Mal12345

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 19, 2011
Messages
14,532
MBTI Type
IxTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Wow, what a revelation.

:worthy::bored::wack::rolleyes::coffee::greatscott:



From my rep to [MENTION=13260]Rasofy[/MENTION] about his post: Atheist INTJs bother me as well. They usually have Pi tunnel vision. If an INTJ doesn't leave some room for agnosticism, they most likely have Pi tunnel vision.

The phrase "Pi tunnel vision" has no meaning.
 

Zarathustra

Let Go Of Your Team
Joined
Oct 31, 2009
Messages
8,110
There's no meat to any of your statements.

Actually, there's tons.

You're just too detached from reality to recognize it.

The people I've been getting reps from recognize this as well.

I myself do actually put some work into adding content to the conversation.

Unfortunately, you largely fail.

At least in this case.

I want to say something interesting, even if it only interests me.

And I want to say something true, but only if it is true of the world.

Welcome to Ti vs Te.

That's nice that you have an INTP friend, they can be pleasant conversationalists although a bit air-headed, lost in structures that have no end.

In your case, I can certainly see the latter two.

In my friends case, he is very grounded and intelligent.

Your statement "it is truth of the world" is revealingly pathological...

Wrong again.

But your response once again shows your lack of Te, and how they very notion of Te/objective truth gnaws at you.

It is not Te per se that I find so nauseating...

I don't know whether you find it nauseating, but it is what rubs you the wrong way.

You just fail to understand that this is the case.

...it's the subjectifying of the objective realm...

:rofl1:

You mean Ti?

C'mon man, don't hate yourself as well...

...as a realm of Platonic Ideas to which the world is to conform. And in the main, such a mindset has, historically speaking, been capable of widespread destruction.

:yapyapyap:
 

Mal12345

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 19, 2011
Messages
14,532
MBTI Type
IxTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Actually, there's tons.

You're just too detached from reality to recognize it.

The people I've been getting reps from recognize this as well.



Unfortunately, you largely fail.

At least in this case.



And I want to say something true, but only if it is true of the world.

Welcome to Ti vs Te.



In your case, I can certainly see the latter two.

In my friends case, he is very grounded and intelligent.



Wrong again.

But your response once again shows your lack of Te, and how they very notion of Te/objective truth gnaws at you.



I don't know whether you find it nauseating, but it is what rubs you the wrong way.

You just fail to understand that this is the case.



:rofl1:

You mean Ti?

C'mon man, don't hate yourself as well...



:yapyapyap:

Your post is empty of content, there is literally nothing to respond to. You have attained the reductio ad absurdum of your type.
 

Zarathustra

Let Go Of Your Team
Joined
Oct 31, 2009
Messages
8,110
Your post is empty of content, there is literally nothing to respond to. You have attained the reductio ad absurdum of your type.

Yes, just as "Pi tunnel vision has no meaning"...

Your problem is that you think meaning is derived only from your subjective interpretation.

It is not.

There's plenty of meaning in there.

Your ego just doesn't want to consider what's being said.
 

Mal12345

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 19, 2011
Messages
14,532
MBTI Type
IxTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Yes, just as "Pi tunnel vision has no meaning"...

Your problem is that you think meaning is derived from your subjective interpretation.

It is not.

There's plenty of meaning in there.

Your ego just doesn't want to consider what's being said.

I fully realize that something is being said. Obviously, something is being said. But empty narcissism is just like so much hot air.
 

Jack427

New member
Joined
Sep 25, 2011
Messages
314
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
If you open the link in a new tab/window, it works. It just cannot be imbedded in the forum. Proof: It shows a hissing cat.

Indeed, it is a hissing cat.
 

Redbone

Orisha
Joined
Apr 27, 2010
Messages
2,882
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
9w8
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
I know two INTJs. One, I have been very close friends with for over 15 years. The other I know well but I only talk to him occasionally now.

self-confident and sometimes seen as arrogant

I don't see her as self-confident or arrogant. I see it more as she knows what she is doing and does it. If she doesn't know, then she will learn about it, quickly and well. If a goal comes to her, she places herself in that stream to get to the destination. I don't even know if she stops and thinks about whether she can or cannot. She just does it.

The other INTJ, hmm. I think he probably comes across as highly arrogant and an ass. To me, it's not that big of a deal.

perfectionists
Yes.

may reject authority
Yes.

hard-working and reliable
Very much so.

information gatherers
Yes. But unlike me, she is more prone to doing this in order to gain or master skills rather than pure interest.
The other one shows very little interest in information gathering unless he can use it.

imaginative

She can be.
He is not. Got sick of him asking, "Where do you get all these ideas from? How did you think of that?"

insightful
Yes.
Him, yes but also quite clueless at times.

ambitious
In her own way, yes.
Him, extremely so. Owns a successful software company.

often spend a lot of time in their own minds
Yep.

not emotionally demonstrative
This is a little hard to answer. Her, I would probably say yes.
Him a little less because he is prone to nervousness around people. He compensates by being extremely blunt or dismissive. I think to some this would be interpreted as anger.
 

AphroditeGoneAwry

failure to thrive
Joined
Feb 20, 2009
Messages
5,585
MBTI Type
INfj
Enneagram
451
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
Zara, I'm actually quite flabbergasted that a fellow dom Ni would criticize me for thinking out of the box and for stating my own truth as I know it. This is where your Te seems to trump your Ni. There is nothing wrong with that per se, but you come off sounding like you are the only one who knows the truth and everyone else (in this case me) is a moron. Because this is in reference to my very own signature, it makes it even worse. My signature, my blog, my bra size, are not subjects that are necessarily fair game in this thread. You seem to have boundary issues like that.


I've tested my functions numerous times and contemplated them for years. Function 'theory' too. I've studied some Jung, and some others (the main ones). I've never claimed to be a Jungian scholar. But I don't have to be to know what functions I use or defer to. No theorist lives in my head. I would consider the opinions of anybody who knows me well and who knows function theory well to give me feedback on what functions I seem to use, etc., but I've always been forthright that I don't buy the whole function line-up like most people do, beyond the dom/aux functions. And those only if a person has had a reasonably safe childhood to develop them. Beyond that, environment plays too much of a role in people's lives to have rote orders. I got used to Sim putting me down for not adhering to function hierarchies, but you? And why do you assume that this makes your more right, and me ignorant?


Sorry, but I trust my own guided contemplation over textbook theories. I'm responding not so much to argue, but just to let you know you are way off the mark with your previous response to me.


G'day. :)
 

highlander

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 23, 2009
Messages
26,562
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
6w5
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Actually, I don't exhibit bullying behavior at all.

Nor am I a hypocrite.

This is what you consistently fail to comprehend.

And, a large part of the reason for that, is that you falsely think you're a Te-user.

(Now you've even switched it up to you being an Ni/Si-dom, which is truly retarded.)

(If you actually understood the theory, and weren't just making up your own as you go [hello, tertiary Ti], you would know this.)

I value truth, and could give a shit about the social harmony aspect (i.e., I care about Te far more than Fe).

You could give a shit about the truth, and you highly value the social harmony aspect (i.e., you care about Fe far more than Te).

You call me a bully, but I don't go around here being mean to people at random, or because they are "weak".

I get in arguments with people when I know what they're saying is bullshit, and then I show why it is so.

You, however, as someone who values Fe and doesn't value Te, don't understand this.

And as long as you keep deluding yourself with your bullshit theory, and don't learn the real ones, you never will.

Actually, I'm not sure it has anything to do with her thinking she is a Te user at all or necessarily even use of Fe. I think Aphrodite is simply observing and making comments on objective behavior. That's how I see it anyway.
 

Zarathustra

Let Go Of Your Team
Joined
Oct 31, 2009
Messages
8,110
Zara, I'm actually quite flabbergasted that a fellow dom Ni would criticize me for thinking out of the box and for stating my own truth as I know it.

That's because INTJs balance there Ni with Te.

That's what makes us more objective than INFJs.

That's why INFJs are the ones who are "up on the moon, in their imaginary spaceship".

"Stating your own truth as you know it"?

Are you kidding me?

You think that's the mark of a Te-user?!?

That's the mark of a Ti-user!

And the fact that you don't get this is why no matter how much contemplating of your own functions or function theory you have done, you obviously still don't know what you're talking about. I'm not saying this to be mean, but you accurately understanding Te and Ti is not congruent with that statement and your signature.

This is where your Te seems to trump your Ni.

:rofl1:

It regulates my Ni!

That's what you don't get.

Ni can come up with all kinds of bizarre shit.

Te and Se are what keeps an INTJ grounded in reality.

For you, it's Fe and Se (hence your going around making ethical judgments and your strong sexuality).

But you are a Ti-user! I told you that when you first asked me, and I'm telling you again.

Ti and Fe are two sides of a coin. As are Te and Fi.

Since you last were a contributing member on this forum, I have done a lot of work studying this shit, and continue to understand it better each day. And I cannot tell you any more flatly: you are an Ni-Se user, and Fe-Ti user. Your comments about "stating your truth as you know it" are enough alone to show that you're not a Te-user. To us, truth is objective. It is not our truth, it is THE truth.

There is nothing wrong with that per se, but you come off sounding like you are the only one who knows the truth and everyone else (in this case me) is a moron.

I'm NOT saying everyone else is a moron.

I'm not even saying you're a moron.

I'm saying that your functional theories are moronic.

Everybody on here who has a strong grounding in functional theory thinks so.

Because this is in reference to my very own signature, it makes it even worse.

Your Fe value judgment means nothing here.

There is no objective truth to what you are saying.

My signature, my blog, my bra size, are not subjects that are necessarily fair game in this thread.

Well, I didn't bring up your blog or your bra size, and as long as you keep going around dropping in on my discussions with other people and making your Fe value judgments, I see no objective reason why your signature is not fair game. Frankly, your signature could be fair game in any situation.

You seem to have boundary issues like that.

You seem to have boundary issues with your Fe value judgments.

And I am by no means the only one who thinks so.

I'm not the one who swooped in on a discussion you were having with someone else and decided to drop my evaluation of the behavior that was going on.

I've tested my functions numerous times...

And the more you know about typology, the more you know the tests are for shit...

...and contemplated them for years. Function 'theory' too.

Yeah, well, there's good contemplation, bad contemplation, and everything in between.

Based on the conclusions you've drawn, yours seems to be somewhere among the latter two.

I've studied some Jung, and some others (the main ones).

And I urge you to continue...

I've never claimed to be a Jungian scholar.

Nor would anybody (knowledgable) mistake you for one.

But I don't have to be to know what functions I use or defer to.

Well, all other things being equal, it probably wouldn't hurt.

Especially considering, in this case, being a Jungian scholar would essentially mean having studied Jung and his offshoots enough to have an accurate understanding of what you're talking about.

No theorist lives in my head. I would consider the opinions of anybody who knows me well and who knows function theory well to give me feedback on what functions I seem to use, etc., but I've always been forthright that I don't buy the whole function line-up like most people do, beyond the dom/aux functions.

Yeah, well, that's cuz you don't seem to understand the the dominant and the inferior are intrinsically linked: one does not exist without the other.

- If your dominant is Ni, then your inferior is Se, as Ni requires the suppression of Se (it also has related effects on Ne and Si).
- If your dominant is Se, then your inferior is Ni, as Se requires the suppression of Ni (it also has related effects on Si and Ne).

Same goes for all the other functions, by definition.

Just as Ni and Se are flipsides of the same coin, so are:

- Ne and Si
- Te and Fi
- Ti and Fe

There's a similar, albeit different, relationship with:

- Ne and Ni
- Se and Si
- Te and Ti
- Fe and Fi

But these are relationships of opposition, not dominant and inferior.

Thus, an Ni-dom:

  • inherently suppresses Se the most of any function in order to use Ni.
  • he also introverts his iNtuition, thereby rejecting his opposite personality, an Ne dom (thus forming the "shadow").
  • he then "chooses" a judging function: in healthy development, it will be an extroverted function.
    • if it's Te, then he will become an INTJ, and suppress Fi (albeit to a lesser extent than Se, thus making it his tertiary).
    • if it's Fe, then he will become an INFJ, and suppress Ti (albeit to a lesser extent than Se, thus making it his tertiary).
  • by "choosing" either the TeFi axis or the FeTi axis, he inherently rejects the other (much like he "rejected" Ne for Ni).
    • hence, the consistent disagreements b/w INFJs and INTJs.
  • eventually, we learn to let go of the suppression of our tertiary and inferior a bit, and can start developing them. When we confront our Jungian shadow (this time, using "shadow" to refer to the tertiary/inferior), we have a realization of the axis: that there is an inherent relationship between our two most dominant functions, and the two functions that we actually suppress the most (our tertiary and inferior). By recognizing this (whether we understand the terminology or not -- when I first recognized it, I did not know the terminology), we gain a new level of awareness (that of our shadow [once again, referring this time to our tertiary/inferior]), and can work on reconciling the two (in an INTJ's case: recognizing when his Te judgments are actually tinged with Fi judgments [et al]; and recognizing that his Ni vision is limited in scope to what his Se has had the opportunity to perceive [et al]), as well as developing those which we have previously been suppressing.

Plenty more can be said about typology, but I'd highly recommend learning that model, and learning it well, before making an assertion as ridiculous as Ni and Si both being your top two functions. By definition, essentially, those two functions cannot be your top two functions. I was just explaining this to [MENTION=14458]earthtrekker1775[/MENTION] on his wall yesterday. I recommend you read those posts so you can see why this is the case. One settles on a single way of looking at things (the conventional/proven way, as they see it), and the other rejects the conventional/"proven" way, and tries to make something entirely new, looking at things from a new perspective. These two do not go together. If one dominantly uses one, he/she inherently, by definition, does not use the other. This is why Beebe calls Si the demonic function of Ni doms, and vice versa. It is the single most ignored function in an Ni dom's mind. Why do you think almost any SJ would've told you that you're being fucking ridiculous with your decision-making a year or two ago? Your Ni was going crazy, coming up with all kinds of unconventional ideas. If Si were so high up in your function order, there's no fucking way you would've thought what you were doing was a good idea! (And, fyi, I don't think you necessarily did the wrong thing. Your decision-making about a lot of the small things seemed dumb and clueless, but your decision-making was probably, in the long run, what you actually needed most. Sometimes short-term mistakes are the price we must pay for the correct long-term goal. Your marriage seemed over, and you needed to start anew. Yeah, you made some dumb decisions to gain that freedom, but you got the freedom that you needed.)

Anyway, hopefully you realize that I'm not trying to be a dick. I'm just trying to offer you the truth (not just my subjective take on it, but the actual objective truth).

And those only if a person has had a reasonably safe childhood to develop them. Beyond that, environment plays too much of a role in people's lives to have rote orders.

Look, I agree with this, and, if you read my blog and what not, you'll see that I have always said as much (and will continue to do so).

But these functions are defined in specific ways, and, while there's certainly something to be said about individual development (I totally don't think that individuals of the same type necessarily use their functions in the same way, or to the same extent, or don't develop their shadow functions differently -- trust me, I do), there's also a lot to be said about having a strong understanding of the dominant models and giving as much consideration as possible to them (if you were actually an Si-person you would be doing this more!).

I was a lot more like you for awhile, but, after enough study, while I still hold onto a lot of the tenets of my personal take on typology, and I think they are meaningful things to consider when it comes to actual individuals, I do have a lot of respect for the dominant models that are out there.

I got used to Sim putting me down for not adhering to function hierarchies, but you?

Yeah, I know, it would seem pretty crazy.

I bet I would still get in all kinds of arguments with Sim, but I've studied a lot of Eric B's shit, and, while I'm sure I'd argue with him about it too, there's a lot to be said for what's already been proposed. I know we Ni doms like to come up with shit ourselves, but the Si structure that's out there is already pretty good. I recommend learning it as best as possible, and having your own theories serve more as addendums to it, to cover things that the dominant models might not cover that well, as opposed to throwing their observations out completely, and starting completely from scratch. It's just not a wise thing to do, especially if you haven't first been that camel, and really come to understand the existing structure from the fundamentals up.

And why do you assume that this makes your more right, and me ignorant?

Because, based on everything I've seen you say about typology, you don't seem to have a very good grasp of the fundamental building blocks of the dominant models.

Sorry, but I trust my own guided contemplation over textbook theories.

[I wrote these responses before most of the above, so... yeah, take them for what they're worth. They don't make much sense anymore]

The problem is that your guide isn't good.

I doubt you even know my arguments as to why your theory is problematic.

And that's the problem: you don't have a good grounding in the theories to begin with.

You like Nietzsche, and I know you've used this metaphor before: yellow camel first.

I'm responding not so much to argue, but just to let you know you are way off the mark with your previous response to me.

I'm not the one who dropped in casting her little judgments about another's behavior that had absolutely nothing to do with the topic being discussed.

You were off the mark as soon as you came in and did that.

The sooner you recognize this the better.

*

Per a recent conversation with an INTP about Alan Moore's MBTI type:

"Yeah, but he's not one of those annoying INFJs who goes around judging everybody's conduct.

He's one of the cool ones who just does his own thing and then provides us with amazing creations."
 

Zarathustra

Let Go Of Your Team
Joined
Oct 31, 2009
Messages
8,110
Actually, I'm not sure it has anything to do with her thinking she is a Te user at all or necessarily even use of Fe. I think Aphrodite is simply observing and making comments on objective behavior. That's how I see it anyway.

I don't think you're seeing it accurately.

She shows absolutely no regard for the discussion taking place -- the ideas being discussed are completely irrelevant.

Someone with a high preference for Te will put the ideas being discussed at the forefront, before any judgment of behavior.

Because, to Te dom's/aux's, the behavior can generally only be judged when one accurately understands the content of the discussion.

There is a slight caveat to that, in that a Te person might be willing to say, "yeah, that guy's kinda being a dick about it...", but they will generally not find the behavior particularly offensive, if what that person is saying is true (if what they're saying is not true, however, they will think the person an idiot, and a dick). There might also be a slight difference here w/r/t/ NTJs vs STJs (due to Si users tending to have more narrow, defined, and rigid codes of proper conduct than Ni users).

For an Fe dom/aux, on the other hand, the truth content of what the person is saying falls almost completely to the back -- for them, regardless of the truth content, it's the behavior that matters.

If you look at the history of Aphrodite doing this stuff to me, it's never about the truth content, it's always about the behavior.

Hence, Fe judgment is occurring.

Not Te.
 
Top