[INTJ] Why do people hate INTJs?

[Coriolis]

Bad Octopus, I really liked your rant. You only spoke what I so often think concerning language and vocabulary. Also, I share the distaste for using a hundred words for what could be said in ten. I think a part of being a good writer is learning to get the most bang for your buck vocabulary-wise. Hence, I agree with, "But that's why having a good vocabulary is important. The more words you have in your arsenal, the easier it will be to express your thoughts clearly and concisely, without a lot of wasted words."

I agree entirely. I never dumb down my vocabulary with anyone, even kids, though with them I try to provide enough context to figure it out when using a word I suspect might be unfamiliar. The exception is when I am explaining the "jargon" of a specific topic. Even then, I will try to get them to understand and explain the concept in the words they do know before giving them the "official" term for it. Science is more than a vocabulary lesson.

Touching on Lewis, [MENTION=20856]grey_beard[/MENTION] and I have spoken of him before. No single writer has influenced my thinking more and while our writing styles are far apart, separated by culture and years, our ways of seeing, of thinking, are not. I connect with Lewis. If there were any way possible (which I know there is not) to have a conversation with an author from the past, he'd be my first choice.

I read some of Lewis' Chronicles of Narnia, and heard so many good things about him. I then went on to read Mere Christianity and a couple other writings, hoping someone with his credentials and reputation could help me understand how an intelligent, rational, educated person can view Christianity in a way that makes sense. I was sorely disappointed in his line of reasoning and thus did not accomplish my goal (though I don't discount that a reasonable case can be made). I forget exactly why as it's been a few years since I read these things. I am more inspired by Joseph Campbell, and scientists like Carl Sagan, Stephen Jay Gould, or even Galileo.

Now, don't get me wrong: I am not being elitist: rather, I think that MANY of the children who are busy attempting to spell out 'A Cat Sat On A Mat'
are being shortchanged by educators, and would be capable of achieving far more, and assimilating far more, than they are commonly given credit for.

"Another little portion of the human heritage has been quietly taken from them before they were old enough to understand."

If someone can't spell out "A cat sat on a mat", he is clearly not ready to be reading Shakespeare. Note I said "reading": he can see it as a play, hear and discuss the story, etc. but the reading of Shakespeare does require some fundamental language skills. Kids (or grownups) at this elementary reading/writing level need good quality books to feed the rest of their intellect while their language skills develop. This was the aim and contribution of Dr Seuss, for instance. The problem comes when students who can read at this level are incorrectly placed in basic or remedial groups.

As for taking away part of the human heritage, that happens at all levels, due to political correctness, academic over-standardization, and simple laziness/inertia. When I was in HS, we had to read Catcher in the Rye, Death of a Salesman, The Crucible, The Old Man and the Sea, and a handful of other books considered "great American literature". The Crucible was the only one worth anything. What's particularly sad and telling is that today's HS students have almost exactly the same reading list. Same for history, music, and even math/science.

 

[Ene]

while I agree I'd *love* to talk to Lewis, there is a small slew of others I'd include at just a small step below him:
G.K. Chesterton, Hilaire Belloc, P.G. Wodehouse...
and Dick Feynman and Newton and Einstein and Niels Bohr

Well, I never said I didn't have my own list of names below his, Smarty pants.

the latter of whom, by way of returning to the point *and* acting as segue) said:

Never express yourself more clearly than you can think.

LOL! Rightly spoken.

Isn't that the default communication mode of the INTJ anyway?

Haha!

Second, communicating with fourth-graders, and moreso to six year olds -- that kind of requires you to break things down into bite-size, first principles chunks. Which kind of ties together the quotes of Feynman, Lewis, and Bohr.

Precisely.

 

[Showbread]

I don't hate INTJs, I just don't generally get along with them particularly well. We tend to disagree a lot, which is usually fine. But, with INTJs I know it doesn't ususally work out very well. Ususally I can see and understand the INTJ's logic, but I'll just fundamentally disagree with the values that are behind the logic. I try to explain this, and they just end up thinking I'm stupid for disagreeing refuse to believe that I DO understand what they are saying. It's like if I still disagree with them, I can't possibly understand the argument. It has to be an Ni/Te thing, because I generally find ISTJs much more willing to agree to disagree.

But, all that said, I really don't dislike them. We just bump heads. A lot.

 

[grey_beard]

I agree entirely. I never dumb down my vocabulary with anyone, even kids, though with them I try to provide enough context to figure it out when using a word I suspect might be unfamiliar. The exception is when I am explaining the "jargon" of a specific topic. Even then, I will try to get them to understand and explain the concept in the words they do know before giving them the "official" term for it. Science is more than a vocabulary lesson.


I read some of Lewis' Chronicles of Narnia, and heard so many good things about him. I then went on to read Mere Christianity and a couple other writings, hoping someone with his credentials and reputation could help me understand how an intelligent, rational, educated person can view Christianity in a way that makes sense. I was sorely disappointed in his line of reasoning and thus did not accomplish my goal (though I don't discount that a reasonable case to be made). I forget exactly why as it's been a few years since I read these things. I am more inspired by Joseph Campbell, and scientists like Carl Sagan, Stephen Jay Gould, or even Galileo.


If someone can't spell out "A cat sat on a mat", he is clearly not ready to be reading Shakespeare. Note I said "reading": he can see it as a play, hear and discuss the story, etc. but the reading of Shakespeare does require some fundamental language skills. Kids (or grownups) at this elementary reading/writing level need good quality books to feed the rest of their intellect while their language skills develop. This was the aim and contribution of Dr Seuss, for instance. The problem comes when students who can read at this level are incorrectly placed in basic or remedial groups.

As for taking away part of the human heritage, that happens at all levels, due to political correctness, academic over-standardization, and simple laziness/inertia. When I was in HS, we had to read Catcher in the Rye, Death of a Salesman, The Crucible, The Old Man and the Sea, and a handful of other books considered "great American literature". The Crucible was the only one worth anything. What's particularly sad and telling is that today's HS students have almost exactly the same reading list. Same for history, music, and even math/science.

Your last paragraph encapsulates what I was trying to convey in my earlier post. There *are* people who are capable of tackling advanced reading (or at least a first pass) at a relatively young age; there are those who must wait until they are somewhat older; there are those who are capable but who have no taste for it; there are those for whom no attempt to convey it, will be sufficient.

My take is that the "professional" educators (PC / academic overstandardization / laziness etc.) tend to throw up their hands far too soon (or even as it were "preemptively" and thus keep many youths from enjoying / tasting / being enriched and nourished on these things, *ostensibly* (according to Those Who Determine Such Things (TM) ) because it is too hard for the youth, but probably because of deficits on the part of the educators, either in their own apprehension, or ability to communicate the excitement or universal human themes or elegance of the writing ... but to cover for their own deficits, the children are blamed instead.

Incidentally, and this is another hijack, my personal take is that many of the texts held up as "classic literature" by Those Who Determine Such Things (TM) are actually subtle indoctrination materials against Certain Outmoded Thought (TM) enforced by the ideologues behind professional education. People used to have much more expected of them across the board.

 

[BadOctopus]

I agree entirely. I never dumb down my vocabulary with anyone, even kids, though with them I try to provide enough context to figure it out when using a word I suspect might be unfamiliar. The exception is when I am explaining the "jargon" of a specific topic. Even then, I will try to get them to understand and explain the concept in the words they do know before giving them the "official" term for it. Science is more than a vocabulary lesson.

That's one of the reasons why I love the character of Atticus Finch in To Kill a Mockingbird. He never dumbed down his speech when he talked to his kids. Unless his courtroom language succeeded in genuinely stumping them, in which case he always explained himself in a way that wasn't demeaning.

I am now grossly off-topic. lol

 

[Ene]

[MENTION=9811]Coriolis[/MENTION] Joseph Campbell is on my list.

 

[ReadingRainbows]

That's one of the reasons why I love the character of Atticus Finch in To Kill a Mockingbird. He never dumbed down his speech when he talked to his kids. Unless his courtroom language succeeded in genuinely stumping them, in which case he always explained himself in a way that wasn't demeaning.

I am now grossly off-topic. lol

Harper Lee, the author of To Kill a Mockingbird is pretty fantastic herself. A school board tried to ban her book on the basis it was immoral so she sent them this -

Letters of Note: The problem is one of illiteracy, not Marxism

 

[Coriolis]

Incidentally, and this is another hijack, my personal take is that many of the texts held up as "classic literature" by Those Who Determine Such Things (TM) are actually subtle indoctrination materials against Certain Outmoded Thought (TM) enforced by the ideologues behind professional education. People used to have much more expected of them across the board.

It may not be that off-topic. I suspect one of the reasons people may not like INTJs IRL is that we don't let them get away with this nonsense, especially if it has a direct impact on us.

 

[Evastover]

Wait, what?

People hate INTJ's?

I must have been living under a sparkly pink idealistic rock all these years ._.

 

[grey_beard]

It may not be that off-topic. I suspect one of the reasons people may not like INTJs IRL is that we don't let them get away with this nonsense, especially if it has a direct impact on us.

I'm sorry to bring this up, as I now understand you are not a big fan of Feynman: but two examples of this were

a) his "ENERGY makes it go!" from the school textbook, and his input on the school textbook selection process
b) his investigation of the Challenger disaster and the gyrations and politics he ran into along the way

 

[grey_beard]

Well, I never said I didn't have my own list of names below his, Smarty pants.


LOL! Rightly spoken.



Haha!



Precisely.

Hmm, at the risk of getting *both* feet in my mouth --

didn't I read somewhere that you were into martial arts?

*IF* so, can you compare and contrast how to break up and prepare your speech into well-ordered, concise, comprehensible bite-size chunks for the fledgling learner, to how one breaks up the essential components of motion when teaching a kata, or kick, or block, or strike?

(humble-at-least-for-an-INTJ-hat-in-hand-begging-mode): please, please, PLEASE, [MENTION=16382]Ene[/MENTION], if you have an example of a specific move you break down in order to teach it, could you type in a sample explanation? I'd love to try to intuitively reverse-engineer the thought process and body awareness.

 

[BadOctopus]

Wait, what?

People hate INTJ's?

I must have been living under a sparkly pink idealistic rock all these years ._.

You INFPs are so adorable.

Everyone else, however, tends to associate INTJs with this guy:

Also this guy:

I'll admit, the case for us is not great.

 

[Obsidius]

A lot of the time I think the reason people distain INTJ's is for two reasons;

1. Where most people seek emotional comfort and understanding, we often employ reason. This comes off as cold, and I've heard a lot of people tell me, and the two INTJ friends that I have in real life, that it makes us hard to deal with.

2. Our confrontational and argumentative nature can be a bit too much for people, especially because we seem to offend people with our criticisms of ideas.

---

Oh that's another thing, the way we criticise every new idea and suggestion can come off as though we aren't open to new ideas or suggestions. I've heard this as a common criticism of our type, and it's fair enough I guess. But just to inform everyone, we're not denying your idea or your suggestion, we're just testing if it holds even a mL of water before we put it to any use, learn the difference.

 

[Ene]

[MENTION=20856]grey_beard[/MENTION]

Hmm, at the risk of getting *both* feet in my mouth –

Haha…not to worry.

didn't I read somewhere that you were into martial arts?

You most likely did.

I am a first degree black sash in Baguazhang [not that it means so much, except I earned my rank on the anniversary of Bruce Lee’s death. For some reason that felt significant to me, because I didn’t realize what day it was until I got home and saw it on the news. It seemed like a good omen, or a bad one, depending on how you look at it, or maybe just a neat incident of synchronicity.]

*IF* so, can you compare and contrast how to break up and prepare your speech into well-ordered, concise, comprehensible bite-size chunks for the fledgling learner, to how one breaks up the essential components of motion when teaching a kata, or kick, or block, or strike?

I will do my best.

[humble-at-least-for-an-INTJ-hat-in-hand-begging-mode): please, please, PLEASE, [MENTION=16382]Ene[/MENTION], if you have an example of a specific move you break down in order to teach it, could you type in a sample explanation? I'd love to try to intuitively reverse-engineer the thought process and body awareness

.

How could I refuse a fellow Ni-dom with his hat in his hand? That is not a sight I see everyday. See the bolded; I think that’s a cool idea.

But without being able to demonstrate the physical actions, this may be hard to do. Demonstration is a huge part of martial arts training. I am taking one very small, simple technique and breaking it down. It, of course, is a piece of a much larger puzzle that I would later begin to help my students put together. Bagua is an art that is built up over many years and everything is completely connected to everything else.

As with any body of knowledge, martial arts are very varied and comprehensive, spanning the globe, so I will zero in on my particular chosen style and from that I will zero in on one particular concept.

So let’s pretend you are a new student, who maybe just walked in off the street, showing up at one of my regular classes. Let’s say you asked me to teach you just one concept, whichever one we happen to be working on that day. Maybe you say you are doing it for an experiment in how cognitive functions affect a teacher’s communication. [That’s not stretching our pretending too far.]

How would you like to learn a basic concept of our family lineage’s Southern-Style Chinese staff fighting today? That’s what we’re working on in class today.
[My partner and I would demonstrate some staff fighting and all of the students would say…cool or bad…or awesome…or maybe, “I’m out of here. These people are nuts.”]

So, let’s take just one of those concepts, how to control your staff.

Now, keep in mind that even though we’re using a bamboo staff in today’s class, anything with a handle can be a weapon and I do mean anything, a broom, a mop, a cane, a hoe, a rake, a bat, anything.

Now, I want you to hold your staff like this. Your right hand should be between six inches and a foot from the end of your staff and your left hand should be about a foot from your right one. [Demonstrate and check to make sure every student is doing it correctly. If they’re not, I help them.] This position allows for the maximum output of energy with minimum effort on your part. We do it this way because it is the most efficient way we’ve found.

The right knuckles face upward and are curled just tight enough to guide the stick but are relaxed and loose enough to let it slide, and the left fingers face upward as they curl around the stick. Now, we are going to learn to control the stick with the left hand, unless you are left-handed, then we are going to switch sides and do it the opposite way because in this technique the weak hand controls the bottom of the stick. The strong hand guides the stick. [Demonstrate it both ways. I watch and make sure everybody’s got the feel of it.]

Now, make small, tight circles with the hand near the back end of your stick, usually the left, [I demonstrate it] and you will notice that this causes the other end of your stick, the longer end that is in front of the left side of your body where you should be holding your stick, to make much wider circles. This exercise is to help you be able to do this. My partner here comes in on me to attack me [my partner comes at me as if attempting to attack me] and instead of hitting him with my stick; I shove the back of my stick forward right through the loose fingers of my right hand as if shooting pool. See, as he came at me he was expecting me to hit him, not shoot him as if he were a pool ball. This is very much like controlling a pool stick. The hand at the back of the stick generates the power and momentum and the resulting impact is much greater than if I just whacked him over the head. Much of kung fu depends on understanding how energy is moved from point A to point B in the most efficient way.

It’s important that you don’t think of the staff, or any weapon for that matter, as something separate from yourself, but rather as an extension of yourself. It’s an extension of your arm. Never focus on the weapon. And don’t “try” to be fast. Instead, be fluid. Remember, that smoothness, fluidity, is speed. Again, don’t worry about being fast in a technique. Concentrate on making it a natural part of your own movement. Practice it until it is fluid, until it flows and you don’t even have to think about it. Commit it to your muscle memory. Keep doing it over and over, until you can do a move without thinking about it, like a reflex. Until it becomes a natural part of your physical and mental makeup, you haven’t learned it. You must internalize it so that it becomes an external part of yourself. You are not holding a weapon, you are the weapon. To my younger students I might ask them to tell me what I just said in my own words. I would have the students practice this movement over and over and over.

I would then place some small rings around the walls of the room and have the students practice controlling that stick with their weak hand until they could get a strike through the ring. We would work on precision and then I would make the ring smaller. When the student had mastered that technique, I would instruct them to practice it at home and go back and work on previously learned skills or perhaps introduce the next concept, but I rarely teach more than one or two new concepts in a single session. Most people can’t handle more than one or two new techniques per lesson.

Oh, I have to end this lesson for now. I am supposed to see a movie with an ISTJ. Have you ever been late to do something with an ISTJ? It's like the unpardonable sin.

 

[Coriolis]

I'm sorry to bring this up, as I now understand you are not a big fan of Feynman:

I am sure he would not have been a big fan of me.

Hmm, at the risk of getting *both* feet in my mouth --

didn't I read somewhere that you were into martial arts?

*IF* so, can you compare and contrast how to break up and prepare your speech into well-ordered, concise, comprehensible bite-size chunks for the fledgling learner, to how one breaks up the essential components of motion when teaching a kata, or kick, or block, or strike?

As a student of martial arts (though far less accomplished than [MENTION=16382]Ene[/MENTION]), I find I do better by seeing the entire technique first, and in fact that is how my instructors teach. Otherwise I have no context or frame of reference for those individual steps. They are like the steps of a party scavenger hunt, where you don't know where you will be sent next. In practice as we gain experience we can often anticipate the next move in a new technique, if not accurately at least suitably, but seeing it beginning to end is like having the box lid of the jigsaw puzzle.

Interestingly, we do have a manual of techniques that we are fed level by level, but the descriptions are almost useless until you have actually studied the techniques. Then they are useful as a reminder, should you forget whether this strike or that comes after the kick, etc.

Wait, what?

People hate INTJ's?

I must have been living under a sparkly pink idealistic rock all these years ._.

Most assuredly.

You INFPs are so adorable.

Everyone else, however, tends to associate INTJs with this guy:

No way. He's too obvious. We are more like this fellow in that we keep you guessing:

 

[BadOctopus]

No way. He's too obvious. We are more like this fellow in that we keep you guessing:

Well, most people do go for the obvious association.

The picture isn't showing up for some reason, but from the link, I see you're referring to Snape. Hell YES.

 

[grey_beard]

Well, most people do go for the obvious association.

The picture isn't showing up for some reason, but from the link, I see you're referring to Snape. Hell YES.

[MENTION=9811]Coriolis[/MENTION], [MENTION=23115]BadOctopus[/MENTION]. Crud. I couldn't even see the link!

(Thanks, [MENTION=23115]BadOctopus[/MENTION], for clueing me in.)

 

[prplchknz]

cuz I can't figure out anywords that INTJ rearanged makes

 

[johnnyyukon]

A lot of the time I think the reason people distain INTJ's is for two reasons;

1. Where most people seek emotional comfort and understanding, we often employ reason. This comes off as cold, and I've heard a lot of people tell me, and the two INTJ friends that I have in real life, that it makes us hard to deal with.

2. Our confrontational and argumentative nature can be a bit too much for people, especially because we seem to offend people with our criticisms of ideas.

But see, aren't those ENTP characteristics too? Maybe not coming off as cold, but certainly as unattached (and yeah, ENTPs can be annoying as well).

I suppose it's a little harder for me to see the INTJ "flaws," perhaps cuz many are my own.

Oh, btw, INTJs totally drool on themselves when they sleep.

 

[grey_beard]

[MENTION=20856]grey_beard[/MENTION]




How could I refuse a fellow Ni-dom with his hat in his hand? That is not a sight I see everyday. See the bolded; I think that’s a cool idea.

But without being able to demonstrate the physical actions, this may be hard to do. Demonstration is a huge part of martial arts training. I am taking one very small, simple technique and breaking it down. It, of course, is a piece of a much larger puzzle that I would later begin to help my students put together. Bagua is an art that is built up over many years and everything is completely connected to everything else.

As with any body of knowledge, martial arts are very varied and comprehensive, spanning the globe, so I will zero in on my particular chosen style and from that I will zero in on one particular concept.

(snip)

Oh, I have to end this lesson for now. I am supposed to see a movie with an ISTJ. Have you ever been late to do something with an ISTJ? It's like the unpardonable sin.

[MENTION=16382]Ene[/MENTION] -- thank you!
[MENTION=9310]uumlau[/MENTION] -- I *saw* you thank that post. Would you be willing to do the same thing for a beginning dance move? Say, the first couple of steps in a waltz?