[INTJ] Testing people

[Rex]

Fellow INTJs.. Do you ever test the people you get to know?

I have been doing it a bit with people from this forum. No one but one (kinda) has made it.

I even stopped doing it and had one emo (as in emotional all the time about just about everything) guy but he vanished on hes own.. (from facebook)

In general this forum sticks out that way. I got more "friends" from dating pages than in total from here. I guess im not trying or something.


Do you ever test people in any way?

 

[shadowjasmine]

Yeah I do

 

[Within]

Do you ever test people in any way?

Sure, if I'm trying to figure someone out.

 

[Tyrinth]

It's not even unique to INTJs. I'd assume just about everyone does this in some form.

 

[AphroditeGoneAwry]

No. Because I don't need to test people.

Testing gives you information about yourself more than the people you 'test'. And I'd wager it's usually about trust issues.

 

[Rasofy]

Dear Aphrodite~ is an INTJ!

 

[Cellmold]

So as you test, thusly you are tested.

You have been found wanting.

 

[Within]

It's not even unique to INTJs. I'd assume just about everyone does this in some form.

He obviously asked because he was curious as to how other INTJ's did this.

Testing gives you information about yourself more than the people you 'test'. And I'd wager it's usually about trust issues.

To test doesn't necessarily mean borderline push and pull, it's nice to see that it's where you went though.

 

[Randomnity]

It's not even unique to INTJs. I'd assume just about everyone does this in some form.

I don't, I think it's a dick move and is not an authentic way to interact with people.

That is, doing things specifically to test people, not just watching how they react to things and judging them for it. The latter is something everyone does, I'd agree.

 

[Ene]

Rex, can you clarify for me?

What do you mean by testing them or should I more accurately ask what we are testing for?

Do you mean to see if he or she is someone you might like to communicate with? Or do you mean that you are testing to see if they authentic? Or something else entirely?

I don't mean to sound dense but I kind of need to know before I can answer.

 

[Coriolis]

Fellow INTJs.. Do you ever test the people you get to know?

Yes, when there is potential for any sort of meaningful relationship.

No. Because I don't need to test people.

Testing gives you information about yourself more than the people you 'test'. And I'd wager it's usually about trust issues.

Then you have not designed your test correctly. What it does tell about you is what measures you consider important, but you have to know that already to structure an effective test. No point in testing for something that is not important to you.

That is, doing things specifically to test people, not just watching how they react to things and judging them for it. The latter is something everyone does, I'd agree.

Yes, the highlighted happens all the time. It is when more info is needed that deliberate testing is done (or sometimes when there is an opportunity too good to pass up).

 

[violet_crown]

I think all Sixes test people. That's just part of their MO. As far as non-E6 INTJs are concerned, I've noticed that INTJ "testing" is more about social experiments that provide feedback on whatever model of the other person they have floating around in their heads. It's data collected because such things are good to have on hand.

ENTJs do some of the same. Being Te-dom we're a bit more blatantly self-interested about it. If we take enough of an interest to feel someone else out it's because we have something at stake. If an INTJ is in the lab dissecting rats, then the ENTJs approach is more of a SWOT analysis.

As I sorta alluded to, I think that difference is more a function of inferior Fi vs tertiary Fi than anything else. An INTJ is gonna require a fuller, more nuanced picture before they say that they "get" someone than an ENTJ who might be more incline to simply highlight effective differences. If there's no difference between Person A and Person B in terms of how they affect the ENTJs approach to the bottom line, then they're functionally the same. I think for INTJs, though, the whole construction is more relative. A more nuanced view of the respective motivations and capabilities of Person A and Person B allows them to manipulate them as dynamic inputs to the strategy.

I get into all this to say that my guess would be that INTJs engage in interpersonal testing because the smart ones can use subjective data to their benefit as readily as they use objective data. It's indicative of the odd combination of sensitivity and charmingly self-absorbed, high-handedness tert Fi seems to confer.

ETA:

I saw Coriolis' post after I added my own. Glad to know I got it right lol.

 

[Within]

I think for INTJs, though, the whole construction is more relative. A more nuanced view of the respective motivations and capabilities of Person A and Person B allows them to manipulate them as dynamic inputs to the strategy.

Or to just sniff out appropriate boundaries in the opening phase of a fresh interpersonal relationship.

'I see, this person does not enjoy dead baby jokes, perhaps I should make a rape joke instead.'

 

[violet_crown]

Or to just sniff out appropriate boundaries in the opening phase of a fresh interpersonal relationship.

'I see, this person does not enjoy dead baby jokes, perhaps I should make a rape joke instead.'

Whatever comes first. My definition of "bottom line" ranges all the way from company profits to successful Saturday night booty call. All in the context.

 

[Randomnity]

I think all Sixes test people.

Again, I don't consciously test people, unless you're defining "testing people" differently than I am.

 

[violet_crown]

Again, I don't consciously test people, unless you're defining "testing people" differently than I am.

First of all, I'm defining "testing people" as things people do interpersonally to understand another individual in an active way. The connotation being that the interaction will somehow expose what's beneath the other parties' facade. I define the term as distinct from "games", because I feel those are for the purpose of eliciting a desired emotional response. Someone who tests has no end in mind; they simply seek more knowledge.

That said, I still maintain that all Sixes test, regardless of what you feel your proclivities are. All Sixes are looking for the same information: is the other person trustworthy? How that Six approaches that information is gonna depend on whether they're phobic or counterphobic. I feel that phobics are gonna be more likely to consciously and deliberately do things to determine the trustworthiness of the person that they're dealing with.

A CP Six, on the other hand, (which is what I think you are, if I'm not mistakened) is fighting against the recognition of that anxiety in the first place. Testing is still gonna happen, but it's going to be "unconscious" and rationalized. One strategy that I've experienced personally is for the Six to do their natural on-again, off-again thing and see if the other person sticks around. The Six may naturally run hot and cold, but the fact that that weeds out the unreliable is not a coincidence. Another approach that's possible is to do "boundary testing" behaviors to see if the other person can "handle" them. It's the same game an Eight may play, but differently motivated.

I'm not mentioning these to the exclusion of other testing strategies. I'm making the point with these examples that an average CP Six is gonna test in a way that allows them to avoid the underlying anxiety that's driving the behavior. If you're a better integrated Six, then it's possible that you may manage your anxiety in a way such that you don't engage in such behaviors. [MENTION=8936]highlander[/MENTION], for instance, is one of the better integrated Sixes in my acquaintance, and you don't get the sense from him that he is doing anything but living his life. Doesn't mean he's never done such things, but that's the sense of where he is now. Same could be true of you.

 

[ptgatsby]

I don't, I think it's a dick move and is not an authentic way to interact with people.

That is, doing things specifically to test people, not just watching how they react to things and judging them for it. The latter is something everyone does, I'd agree.

I would add that I have found that testing is rarely done for observation. I find it most common as a defense mechanism, using a feeling of superiority over others as a distancing tool.

Out of this thread's context, I would just see it as a general insecurity/feedback mechanism. You see it more plainly in romantic relationships.

 

[Randomnity]

First of all, I'm defining "testing people" as things people do interpersonally to understand another individual in an active way. The connotation being that the interaction will somehow expose what's beneath the other parties' facade. I define the term as distinct from "games", because I feel those are for the purpose of eliciting a desired emotional response. Someone who tests has no end in mind; they simply seek more knowledge.

That said, I still maintain that all Sixes test, regardless of what you feel your proclivities are. All Sixes are looking for the same information: is the other person trustworthy?

The bolded is absolutely true (and is true for all types, I'd argue), but does not require "testing" to assess - observation is sufficient, and probably even more accurate, since it's a more authentic setting. I'll maintain that doing behaviours specifically to see how people react to them is not something that I do. I'll also be pretty unhappy with anyone I think is "testing" me, as it comes off as very manipulative and dishonest. Needless to say this is a huge red flag for me in a partner.

How that Six approaches that information is gonna depend on whether they're phobic or counterphobic. I feel that phobics are gonna be more likely to consciously and deliberately do things to determine the trustworthiness of the person that they're dealing with.

A CP Six, on the other hand, (which is what I think you are, if I'm not mistakened) is fighting against the recognition of that anxiety in the first place. Testing is still gonna happen, but it's going to be "unconscious" and rationalized. One strategy that I've experienced personally is for the Six to do their natural on-again, off-again thing and see if the other person sticks around. The Six may naturally run hot and cold, but the fact that that weeds out the unreliable is not a coincidence. Another approach that's possible is to do "boundary testing" behaviors to see if the other person can "handle" them. It's the same game an Eight may play, but differently motivated.

I believe I'm phobic, FWIW, but I could be wrong (have not read much about CP vs. P, but identify FAR more with phobic than CP 6 descriptions). The on-again, off-again thing is something that I never do, and do not tolerate in others without an exceptionally good explanation (including good reason to believe things will not continue in that vein). It's either manipulative (if deliberate) or suggests the person has issues with uncertainty/lack of commitment/immaturity/instability (if not deliberate).

Anyway, I'm just responding to your suggestion that all sixes test people. I still don't think I do, at least as far as you seem to be describing it.

edit: I realize this thread is directed at INTJs so if you want to take this discussion about sixes much further it's probably best to take elsewhere.

 

[Tyrinth]

I don't, I think it's a dick move and is not an authentic way to interact with people.

That is, doing things specifically to test people, not just watching how they react to things and judging them for it. The latter is something everyone does, I'd agree.

I do both. Though, admittedly, the former is something I do on the internet far more than in person.

 

[Tyrinth]

He obviously asked because he was curious as to how other INTJ's did this.

I know. I just couldn't help but reply, because I recognize it as something I enjoy doing from time to time.