But are INTPs willing to
fight? Not really. INTPs do not like to make waves, and they will wait and wait to air an issue when it
would be better just to go for it. In the meantime, they will have the fight out within their mind,
effortlessly envisioning their partner's responses for them. INTPs will also
withdraw after a fight and
not communicate. There may be silence after an argument, or both parties may shut down rather than
deal with conflict (leaving the issue unresolved or letting it fester). This tendency is amplified if their
partner is a fellow introvert, and even more particularly if their partner is an introverted feeler.
An INTP hopes to learn something from each conflict that will help them next time. One interesting
side effect of this is that for an INTP, each fight is perceived as
setting a precedent.
To people of
other types, fights happen on a case by case basis. But for an INTP, each case is merely one
embodiment of an overall principle.
For example, let's say that a room has two light switches, meaning that the “up†and “down†positions
are flexible depending on which switch is used to turn on and off the light. The INTP's partner, a
Judger, has a compulsive need to maintain the switches so as to keep “up†equivalent to “on.†The
INTP, however, couldn't care less what positions the switches are in.
For a long time, the INTP simply ignores their partner's occasional complaints. But, after a stressful
day, a minor argument finally erupts over the situation. For the Judger, the argument is about the light
switches and the light switches alone. For the INTP, the argument is an embodiment or a larger
principle: “Should the Judger have the right to control me to the extent that they dictate my minor
habits?†The Judger has many little preferences of this sort—the way shirts should be folded, the place
the car should be parked, etc. If the INTP gave in on the light switches, they would perceive
themselves to be agreeing with the entire principle underlying the example. They would feel like they
were saying, “Yes, I will let you control the way I use the light switches, the way I fold shirts, the
volume I leave the TV at before turning it off, the cupboard I put the coffee away in, the way I load
bowls into the dishwasher, etc.†When the INTP refuses to care about the light switches they are
standing up for a principle. The light switch situation itself is insignificant. To the INTP, each fight
goes straight to the Supreme Court to be used as an example for all future judicial decisions.
Picture, if you will, what the reaction would be if one country demanded that a neighboring country
hand over one square kilometer of territory. Will the other country say, “Well, it's only a tiny square
kilometer. Sure, okay.â€
Never. It is the principle of sovereignty that is at stake, not the size of the
demanded turf. In a similar way, INTPs are fighting not only for that one kilometer of turf, but for
every kilometer that might ever be demanded. Yet from their partner's perspective, it is frustratingly
incomprehensible why the INTP will not yield on such a tiny matter.
hand over one square kilometer of territory. Will the other country say, “Well, it's only a tiny square
kilometer. Sure, okay.â€
Never
. It is the principle of sovereignty that is at stake, not the size of the
demanded turf. In a similar way, INTPs are fighting not only for that one kilometer of turf, but for
every kilometer that might ever be demanded. Yet from their partner's perspective, it is frustratingly
incomprehensible why the INTP will not yield on such a tiny matter.
An INTP's partner can prevent fights of this sort by making it clear from the start that the situation is a
unique case. For example, the spouse might say, “This light switch thing is really bothering me. You
know I don't care too much about the other little stuff, but this light switch is wearing on my nerves.
Can we agree to leave it in just one position or else just use one switch?†By making the case unique,
i.e. a problem that stands out to the Judger as being
particularly
bothersome, the Judger separates the
case in question from a multitude of other cases that would ordinarily be included under the blanket
category “minor habits that annoy the Judger.†Indeed, the light switches are no longer part of the
“minor habits that annoy Judger†group at all—rather, they have graduated to a new group, “Things
that irritate the Judger significantly more than usual.†The INTP's principles dictate that items falling
into this smaller, more serious, and more exclusive group deserve greater consideration than those of
the former category. Giving in on items in this group does not imply that the INTP would be giving in
on shirt folding, dish washer packing, etc—those items are ruled by different operating principles.
The INTP is still fighting for a principle, but the principle now applies to such a narrow range of cases
that it doesn't matter much to them anymore. Thus the INTP now perceives the request to be
“reasonable†(or they will at least be more willing to humor the Judger).
Upon making a concession, the INTP will remember the outcome and save it for future reference. If
another, similar situation comes along, the INTP will remember the former outcome and compare the
two situations, trying to decide if there is a pattern and if the principles need to be reexamined in light
of new data. Suppose the INTP's partner thinks they now know how to get concessions out of the
INTP, and becomes “particularly bothered†about the way shirts are folded and bowls are put away.
Since the INTP stores up and remembers each case for tracking purposes, they will immediately notice
the change in behavior. Previously “particularly bothersome†things happened to the Judger once every
four or five months. Now they are occurring every few weeks. Upon further examination, the recorded
data suggests the Judger is crying wolf. The INTP will adjust their definitions to give less weight to the
Judger's now-unreliable claims and stop making concessions. The Judger, seeing that the magic
approach is not working anymore, will give up. But for the INTP this is new data too; they have
learned something. They will remember this incidence of unreliable exaggeration next time there is an
argument. The Judger, on the other hand, will more or less forget everything in a few weeks.
Everything is back to normal as though nothing had ever happened. They assume the INTP has
forgotten too.
To other types, life is like an episodic TV show where everything goes back to the status quo at
beginning of the next episode. To the INTP, each episode builds upon the other, and things that change
stay changed—for years. When the INTP says, “In Season 1, episode 3, it was established that we
could borrow things from each other without asking so long as we put them back within the week. I've
been holding up my end ever since, but you haven't? Why?†The INTP's spouse looks at them in
bewilderment. “We're in Season 5 now. I don't even remember what happened in season 3, much less
season 1. What happened in episode 3 anyway?†To INTPs, other people can seem inconsistent and
forgetful.
