# Thread: Why do people hate INTJs?

1. Sorry - these are from posts several pages back; I'm still working my way through the thread. I needed to comment on these ...

Originally Posted by Coriolis
Ni and Se are both perceiving functions. They won't ever really "do" anything unless paired with judging functions, which obviously they are since functions don't operate in a vacuum. It is then someone's Je/Ji functions that provide this direction, guide Ni in positive directions, kick Se out of a rut, etc.
The Je/Ji functions don't every really "do" anything, either.

I think of all functions as maps - even sometimes in the mathematical sense, as "mappings." The map/mapping is "how you approach things". The map doesn't change, I don't think, but rather we gradually become more adept at using it. And then the real magic happens when you realize that a whole bunch of stuff you were confused about is often due to other people having different maps.

Originally Posted by Urarienev
Yes, I believe the judgement function can be the initial step of providing the direction. However I think that some perception functions can sort of get carried away with patterns.

Example: When someone notices that their friend is telling a story, that they've told over and over beforehand.

I would think that's just perception saying "this person keeps telling this story again and again."

I think that's how Ni can get carried away with patterns...So it can almost become "Was it the chicken before the egg?" kind of dilema.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, because I want to understand the boundaries betweeen the functions better.
I think it is useful to regard the functions separately. I interpret your sentence as saying "I think that's how [people with] Ni can get carried away with patterns."

Both Ni and Ne get carried away with patterns. The patterns that the different maps of Ne and Ni apt to see are very different patterns. Ne associates dispersed ideas with what is objectively in front of it. Ni synthesizes ideas based on diverse inputs (and NOT just Se inputs), applying patterns to subjective items inside one's head.

2. Amargith

Good posts, all around. You've been remarkably clear, here.

I really like this part:
Originally Posted by Amargith
People pleasing and accomodation is the norm in a multi-individualed culture like ours - one you dont even seem aware of or if you are, you seem to indicate that all the bending and flexing should come from the other person. That kind of behavior is normally only employed when there is no time to argue and people are expected to fall in line for their own good -and preferably by a leader who has already proven he has the groups wellbeing in mind and has earned goodwill from most of the people there. It s an almost instinctual response. So what is it the intj is seeing but not sharing that requires this falling in line - especially as building goodwill is bypassed. It must be urgent and important as he seems quite serious, adamant, confident about this and competent.

And, can i trust him at all, considering the conversation gave me the feeling that im just a pawn to him anyways. A stupid one at that. Is my wellbeing even considered by this person or am i just collateral damage. Iow, the herdlike insecurity you -as an intj- cause in a person can target their self esteem, their sense of safety, cause paranoia and other fears. Which in turn leads to resentment and feeling like a fool making you the asshole who stressed them apparently just for fun, just coz you couldnt take two seconds, focus on the connection with the person in front of you, establish some goodwill through that warm focus and make them realise you do recognize them as one of your own instead of as an object, prey or cannon fodder.
One interesting thing I've noticed about myself as an INTJ is that the ways I help people are effectively invisible to them. They don't see the planning that kept things from going awry at dozens of different stages. It applies to both social and work situations, but it's a bit easier to describe with respect to work. I have occasionally found myself entering work situations that were remarkably discombobulated, or just barely recovering from discombobulation. Given a short time, I can see most everything that is going wrong.

What is wrong isn't that people don't like each other or don't trust each other or fail to affirm each other and provide social comfort. If anything, they trust each other too much, and assume that the overall work system that they've been using for the past decade works fine as is. Now, unlike your stereotypical immature INTJ, I don't just barge in and tell people to do things differently, and I know I need to gradually earn trust. Once I have that trust, I replace the broken processes (which were fine for the business environment 10 years ago, so they aren't broken so much as needing to be adapted) with working processes (whether pieces of code, actual practices, business procedures, workflows, design architectures, etc.). But even as I do all of this, I become agonizingly aware how no one around me is seeing any of these broken processes. And when I fix them, they take it for granted that it works this smoothly all the time. All the effort I put in is invisible, because I'm working on invisible things, the connections between "this" and "that", which I guess are invisible because people pay attention to "this" or "that, without even seeing the intrinsic connections between the two that, if one of them fails, the "this" and "that" both break. Granted, this is kind of an idealization of what I do, but the main takeaway here should be that what I do, what I see, is invisible to others. For more immature INTJs, they see the same things, wondering why everyone is so concerned with "being a team" and getting along, "putting out fires" instead of removing the fire hazards. How do you even TALK to people who can't see the obvious? Most anything we say is received with the same kind of primal fear you describe, as if we had said, "I see dead people."

In a more humorous vein, INTJs see the world like this:

We aren't trying to use you as cannon fodder, we're trying to save you from happily volunteering to be cannon fodder.

3. Originally Posted by Amargith
Fear of the unknown is certainly a factor.

People dont like talking to a predator. It is a stupid thing to do. They might use what you say against you- especially if they seem to only need a little information and somehow magically get a hold of the rest. For that matter, even if youre secure enough that you can handle yourself, is not fun to endure that kind of conversation where yoy feel like the ant.Not to mention its a fucking useless convo as they refuse to share the info and make you feel like a moron in the process.

But most importantly, our species is a collaborative one. And it is the failure or refusal or unawareness of the need to establish an actual rapport to foster even the most basic trust between you and your tribesmen that is at the base of their response to you, and at the base for their - imho at least somewhat legitimate - perception of you being a potential threat.

People pleasing and accomodation is the norm in a multi-individualed culture like ours - one you dont even seem aware of or if you are, you seem to indicate that all the bending and flexing should come from the other person. That kind of behavior is normally only employed when there is no time to argue and people are expected to fall in line for their own good -and preferably by a leader who has already proven he has the groups wellbeing in mind and has earned goodwill from most of the people there. It s an almost instinctual response. So what is it the intj is seeing but not sharing that requires this falling in line - especially as building goodwill is bypassed. It must be urgent and important as he seems quite serious, adamant, confident about this and competent.

And, can i trust him at all, considering the conversation gave me the feeling that im just a pawn to him anyways. A stupid one at that. Is my wellbeing even considered by this person or am i just collateral damage. Iow, the herdlike insecurity you -as an intj- cause in a person can target their self esteem, their sense of safety, cause paranoia and other fears. Which in turn leads to resentment and feeling like a fool making you the asshole who stressed them apparently just for fun, just coz you couldnt take two seconds, focus on the connection with the person in front of you, establish some goodwill through that warm focus and make them realise you do recognize them as one of your own instead of as an object, prey or cannon fodder.

Its kind of normal to be part of the group and demonstrate that you are as a social animal so others know where they stand with you, and what to expect from you. And that natural need and communication of that kind of basic reassurance seems to pass you by. Which in turn is likely to get you the 'who the fuck are you response fom assertive people and fear, paranoia and avoidance from those that are conflict avoided.

in essence, you're depriving them now of two pieces of information: the information you get through Ni about the situation, and information as to their status with you (Fe information). Lack of information can get you killed. And someone who seems to be deliberately withholding that information from you doesn't exactly inspire a lot of trust, so the INTjs ulterior motives and agendas will be speculated on to make up for the gap in information they're creating.

It's the difference between being invited to an audience with the Godfather, with you sitting down in front of him and him staring you down as he lays out how it's going to be - without informing you what he intends to do with you afterwards, and having a friendly chat with someone you just met who is smiling and inviting you to sit right next to her on a bench. You bet it is threatening and intimidating.

Disclaimer: this is meant as a description of what goes on between people who don't know each other and in a situation where the INTJ would not naturally show warmth towards this person - because he is too young/unaware to use Fi properly, too preoccupied with the situation, too new to this person to display any warmth yet, whatever it be - and a person who expects at least some rapport - be it coz it is a group setting, or a personal setting. Business is often the dominion of Te and there this kind of interaction usually works better as the hierarchy isn't established by group or personal connections; it's established by the position you hold in the company (though even there you can encounter the problem with colleagues in a more informal setting, like during a lunch break).
For what it is worth, I can relate to this description quite a bit as well. Although being SO-dumb I didn't really connect the idea of predator and the godfather thing, which I appreciate as a new angle.

I think sometimes that fear is caused by knowing you have blindspots but don't really know what is laying IN those blindspots... and these blindspots are often laying well in the comfy zone of the INTJ. and to have that info flung at you is very uncomfortable, even when the INTJ does it out of kindness/the greater good. Used as a weapon... *shudder*

4. Originally Posted by Urarienev
I am still not reading her posts like this. I find this kind of laughable. Must be some emotional tone I'm missing.
What you are missing is that my posts to you were not about a single person, but you continue to behave as if they were.
If you want to continue to gossip about someone's personal relationship, go start a thread about it in the relationship forum.

5. Originally Posted by Urarienev
May I ask...and don't take this as sarcastic...do you know your language? ....cause that's what this sounds like to me. Seems like you prefer acts of service maybe? And it doesn't just refer to intimate relationships...it refers to all relationships. I find that if I incorporate all 5 languages into my daily interactions then it's easier for me to get people to like me.

(And that stuff's not superficial to an Fe dom btws. It's very much the reasonable action they see as a way of judging others.)
I don't think someone who works for my company, who I have never met, never talked to on the phone or communicated in any other way except by email, someone I have a relationship with. And if they don't return an email in a reasonable amount of time, yeah, that's a problem. If they don't address a problem that's part of their job, yeah that's a problem. I'm not an acts of service love language at all, and I agree with everything Coriolis said in this respect.

6. Originally Posted by ceecee
I don't think someone who works for my company, who I have never met, never talked to on the phone or communicated in any other way except by email, someone I have a relationship with. And if they don't return an email in a reasonable amount of time, yeah, that's a problem. If they don't address a problem that's part of their job, yeah that's a problem. I'm not an acts of service love language at all, and I agree with everything Coriolis said in this respect.
Yes it's the difference in definition of the word relationship here...

The one I'm going by is much more generously termed : would be the way in which two or more concepts, objects, or people are connected; a thing's effect on or relevance to another

Connected defined as: which a person, thing, or idea is linked or associated with something else.

I often define things much more loosely which leaves room for too many interpretations. So I appologize if it caused any miscommunication.

I would say that I'm linked or associate with people I have never met in which I interact with. But that may not be so for you. That's fine. I can understand that.

Either way, is it just Te then?

Or maybe something to do with Edit: SO blind spot?

Originally Posted by uumlau
The Je/Ji functions don't every really "do" anything, either.

I think of all functions as maps - even sometimes in the mathematical sense, as "mappings." The map/mapping is "how you approach things". The map doesn't change, I don't think, but rather we gradually become more adept at using it. And then the real magic happens when you realize that a whole bunch of stuff you were confused about is often due to other people having different maps.

I think it is useful to regard the functions separately. I interpret your sentence as saying "I think that's how [people with] Ni can get carried away with patterns."

Both Ni and Ne get carried away with patterns. The patterns that the different maps of Ne and Ni apt to see are very different patterns. Ne associates dispersed ideas with what is objectively in front of it. Ni synthesizes ideas based on diverse inputs (and NOT just Se inputs), applying patterns to subjective items inside one's head.
Exactly

Originally Posted by uumlau
One interesting thing I've noticed about myself as an INTJ is that the ways I help people are effectively invisible to them. They don't see the planning that kept things from going awry at dozens of different stages. It applies to both social and work situations, but it's a bit easier to describe with respect to work. I have occasionally found myself entering work situations that were remarkably discombobulated, or just barely recovering from discombobulation. Given a short time, I can see most everything that is going wrong.

But even as I do all of this, I become agonizingly aware how no one around me is seeing any of these broken processes. And when I fix them, they take it for granted that it works this smoothly all the time. All the effort I put in is invisible, because I'm working on invisible things, the connections between "this" and "that", which I guess are invisible because people pay attention to "this" or "that, without even seeing the intrinsic connections between the two that, if one of them fails, the "this" and "that" both break. Granted, this is kind of an idealization of what I do, but the main takeaway here should be that what I do, what I see, is invisible to others. Most anything we say is received with the same kind of primal fear you describe, as if we had said, "I see dead people.

We aren't trying to use you as cannon fodder, we're trying to save you from happily volunteering to be cannon fodder.
Yea I really relate to this. Great post.

7. Originally Posted by Urarienev
This second paragraph makes me believe that other people are not reacting to you the way you want them to. Even if you are on time and keep your promises and what not? Or do you think that the first and second paragraph don't have anything to do with one another?
They represent a continuum of interaction and relationship. Some people do not react the way I would hope. Also, people are different. Someone I have just met would notice only the most basic courtesies of interaction, things like a handshake, clear self-introduction, eye contact and attention to what they are saying, and a reasonable and relevant response. I run across many people who don't even do that much. People who interact with me more often will start to realize some of the other things. Many people start to take it for granted that I will do what I say, meet deadlines with quality work, etc. Even the few who question my motivations, if asked, would probably agree that I have never let them or the group down. They would probably also admit being very skeptical that I could pull off some of what I signed up for, but that's where the track record comes in. I suppose it is just a disconnect between observable facts, and (incorrect) assumptions.

Originally Posted by Urarienev
May I ask...and don't take this as sarcastic...do you know your language? ....cause that's what this sounds like to me. Seems like you prefer acts of service maybe? And it doesn't just refer to intimate relationships...it refers to all relationships. I find that if I incorporate all 5 languages into my daily interactions then it's easier for me to get people to like me.
Mine is quality time, but I agree with @ceecee that it's irrelevant, especially in a professional setting or business transaction.

8. I only read a few bits and pieces of the thread. But I thought I would jump in with my own impressions.

I worked with lots of INTJs in the workplace, and I knew a few socially through Mensa. I register them as intense, cagey (in the sense of controlling the conversation and the flow of information), and frequenly obtuse about social conventions.

But none of that was a deal-breaker for me. I register similar problems in interactions with just about every other personality type: INTPs are peevish and irritable, INFPs are whiny, INFJs are formal and finicky, ENFPs are flakey, ENTPs engage in one-upsmanship, ENTJs are gruff and blustery, and so on.

In other words INTJs have their idiosyncracies, just like every other type. As long as those idiosyncracies don't make one's interactions with them too miserable, then it shouldn't be too big a deal. Sometimes I feel like I have to mentally "gird my loins" to deal with INTJs, but the same can be said for preparing to deal with any of the other personality types as well. Communications can be a struggle when dealing with an immature, idiosyncratic version of any personality type.

On the plus side, INTJs can be quite urbane and witty when they make an effort to work on their social skills.

9. Originally Posted by RaptorWizard
They seem to be viewed as narcissistic elitists by many people of other types (or perhaps even by some within their own type), and I'm wondering how accurate these perceptions really may be, or why people actually develop them to begin with.
well to begin with I think you are an INTP, not an INTJ.

and yes, INTJ's are quite full of themselves. socionics actually talks about how NiTe types get hostile with people they judge as incompetent or undereducated on a subject.

Unhealthy INTJ's need someone to constantly kiss their ass. Also, INTJ's make fucking horrible gymnasts. I want to beat all of my INTJ students to death sometimes.

Also, many INTJ's are diagnosed with ass burgers.

On a more positive note, INTJ's are often locked into a bad cycle of ego replenishment. with Ni and Fi, their whole world literally revolves around them and their self judgement. When you criticize their ideas, they will actually take offense that you don't think its a genius Idea. It takes practice but INTJ's eventually gain access to their Te where they can analyze the objectivity of their own statements without taking offense to criticism.

10. Originally Posted by uumlau
We aren't trying to use you as cannon fodder, we're trying to save you from happily volunteering to be cannon fodder.
This assumes once again that the INTJ knows best where most often, the INTJ might know what's best for themselves but not necessarily for others. Consider how Fi and Se are the lowest function in the order.

How could an INTJ know what's best for others, including emotionally best, when they have such difficulty with emotional, social and concrete signals from others since they're so inwardly focused, where their inner 'visions' dispose of what their inner world considers irrelevant?

As with everything in life, there isn't just one approach even based on probabilities where when INTJs are inexperienced in life, their probability calcs won't include most of the necessary variables.

#### Posting Permissions

• You may not post new threads
• You may not post replies
• You may not post attachments
• You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO