Oaky
Travelling mind
- Joined
- Jan 15, 2009
- Messages
- 6,185
- MBTI Type
- INTJ
- Enneagram
- 5w6
- Instinctual Variant
- sp/so
It is common problem in each types own way, however, this is mostly in the field of debate and argument and I would say the INTPs fall prone to such misunderstandings because of the meta-analysis of the words used.Ah, I could see how that could be a problem. Is this not a common problem facing all types though? We can only other stand other points of view by attempting to mirror them, but in doing so we mix in our own set of experiences and our own understanding of what others are trying to say.
You are describing the thought processes within the general INTP mindset according to the functions. But it is precisely that process that brings about the misunderstanding of the other individuals the INTP would be communicating to. The contradiction that is pointed out is where I play within the idea of the misunderstandings. It happens because the INTP notices the logical fallacy within what the individual says by the specific wordings used. So is it the mistake of the INTP not getting what the individual means or the individual not using the correct terminology in great accuracy?You are disregarding some things that make the system work properly. INTP doesent add to the meaning with the Ti analysis(unlike INTJ with Te), but removes from the context that you communicate using T(what is it) analysis(creates what is not type of analysis). because INTP is P type, he will mainly add to the context from perception of what you say.
-> what you say is taken in fully(every word you say), but the parts that doesent make sense(contradict what you said earlier or i experienced earlier(Si) or is illogical(Ti)) is removed from what you say and isnt taken into further consideration.
These contradictions in your thinking(what you communicated) are pointed out
-> "why do you say that?"
if you cant give me a reason for contradictions, you lack something in your thinking
-> "you are wrong because of X"
if you can explain the contradiction, i lacked something in my perception that would had an effect to my thinking(this usually happens because the other party didnt communicate some central point in his argument
-> "i was wrong because i lacked X"
Sounds like the description of any typical N profile.dunno if you know this, but quite many INTP descriptions say that usually when INTP comes to false conclusions, its not because of poor logic, but because of overlooking details.
I believe two of these are what is to be brought about with the thought of the misunderstanding INTP. There may be a lack of awareness in the individual themselves which brings the INTP to filter the information in as if given raw, giving the INTP the inability to use external subjective information as a guide to connect to the conclusions of the individual.This same thing can happen when talking with people, but the 'overlooking details' part comes from the other person not communicating some central point to the context that you try to communicate. its either missing in his thinking(he is wrong), its there but not communicated(his communication is flawed) or im missing something that i can use to combine what seems illogical to other info to make it logical(im missing some info or had wrong info about something).
And so with the Fi abstraction the previous statement folds on. The lack of that worth with the INTPs filtering things out. The lack of empathetic alignment of the individual throws off the INTP when the individual does not communicate in exact terms. A difference with the INTJ.Then ofc there is the differences in communication between Ni dom and Ti dom. INTJ communicates abstraction(things that seem relevant) about his internal perception, INTP communicates abstraction of logic(central points that can be used to build logical understanding).
Also these abstractions are made from different elements. with INTJ the internal perception(Ni abstraction) is built from details and facts from external world, INTJ also uses abstraction of worth(Fi) which tells what is worth to be takwn into the abstraction. with INTP the logical bastraction is built from worth of things in external world(Fe, including what some info is worth/is it worth taking into consideration) and big picture perception(Ne), INTP also uses abstraction based of what is(Si).
And degree of worth abstraction(Fi) in INTJ changes based on the external perceptions(Se) and external facts(Te). same with INTPs Si abstraction, but it changes on principles of Fe and Ne.
Bingo. You need to be very accurate to the INTP in your wording. My initial statement in the OP regarded as INTPs being most prone to the such misunderstanding.What you said about INTPs drawing false conclusions(thinking he understands, but in reality doesent) is true in communication if you fail to communicate properly.
The thread is highlighting each NT type falling to the misunderstanding of the arguments of another. Not each type being wrong in their arguments. INTJs will understand what you say and how you see things but may not agree with it (because of the ego or whatever else). The conflict arises at such a point with such arguments.but what way more annoying is that INTJs are prone of doing the same thing, but when gathering information freely from a source. because what INTJ is doing is sort of reprogramming his whole thinking about the subject and will communicate things that are simply not true, but the INTJ will be convinced that it is. thats because of Fi is doing the rational abstractions -> he thinks that some info thats not even true is relevant to his conclusions and he wont let go of his false conclusions, because the whole system of thought would fail and ego doesent want that to happen.
Yep, I can see where the INTP falls to arguments with an INTJ. My initial post said the ENTJ tend to be the worst but I can certainly see the inclinations. I've seen a bit of your trouble with INTJs on the many threads you reply to them but what I'd really like to have a look at is the play you'd give in a debate with an ENTJ.From what i have noticed INTJs are the worst type to communicate properly AND worst type to give reasoning for thought, also one of the most stubborn type to change conclusions, even tho their thought has been totally debunked.. even my mentally ill INFP is doing so good on this that i got no problems on communicating with him properly(he gives sufficient reasoning if i ask for it or changes his perception if he cant reason, except ofc when it comes to matter of worth), no problems with ENTP(he does seem to be able to communicate with INTJ better than me). also INFP and INTJ(who are room mates) have hard time communicating properly.
Anyways cba to write more now
Thanks for that. Yes, absolutely, It brings about clarity in the functions of each type when giving out thoughts. The relation with every constructed argument and word used within the analysis bring about a certain importance it seems. The trouble is caused when the individual is expected to be a construction manual laying things out word-for-word in precision and would be unable to do so.I think one thing you are seeing is the difference between Ne and Ti being in charge. Ne is a big-picture perspective and is seeking to find broad patterns of similarity among things, connecting them together. Maybe that is the best word for it -- it is a "connecting" perspective, just as it is used in brainstorming to leap from one idea to another that has SOME aspect in similar to the prior one. So Ne in discussion/argument will use this connective style to both form a tighter bond between ideas (if they are working to agree with you) or else use it to surprise you (to win a point / get the upper hand) or even explore a completely new region of the discussion that was being ignored.
Meanwhile, Ti is a "precision" function. It describes the exact relationship of one idea to the other; it is not interested in showing loose connection, it needs to show exact connection and it also shows flow since logic is sequential. As such, it actually ends up describing the differences more than the similarities (since everything outside the nuanced logic of what is being described is less correct/precise).
If you are building a watch, or the Space Shuttle, or a skyscraper, for example, you cannot afford to not be precise; if the system does not fit together precisely, then something will not function efficiently or perhaps even not at all. You will have cogs that do not mesh nor fit inside the casing; you will have a space vehicle that is not air-tight and that might not even fly or could even explode when taking off; you will have buildings with gaps in the foundation, ruining their structural safety. Even a small deviation can cause huge errors. Likewise, T is used to "architect ideas" to the same degree of precision, and the wings of a butterfly fluttering on one side of the world might create larger deviations in air currents elsewhere.
(For example, something as trivial as a specific date gotten wrong in a history discussion could change the entire context of what a particular fact means, thus misrepresenting the statement and leading to an untruth or a lesser truth. Or a particular word used in the wrong place would put stress on the wrong part of the logical statement, altering its meaning... and that mistake in meaning could magnify to result in a bad assumption later in the argument.)
So that's the issue. This is why ambiable ENTPs often seem to be engaging conversation and moving it along, whereas INTPs can seem to drag down the pace of the conversation and get hung up on small items that seem irrelevant to those painting with a broader brush but to the INTP can seem very crucial to the accuracy of the argument. And if something is inaccurate, then it is undependable and arbitrary and can't be used for anything, so why even bother?
That, I think, is the typical reasoning being used.
I'd suppose ENTPs who fall to Ti usage within debate scatter themselves with inaccurate conclusions based on Ne pattern inducing and Ti connections.
Personally, intuitively speaking, I would say ENTPs tend to be greatly inaccurate approximately 1 out of 5 times in their deductions. I'd assume it's fair.
I'd assume many INTJs tend to either expect you to do your self work to figure it out or to take them for granted with what they say. The difference between the levels of maturity within different INTJs would perhaps be the tact used to give out the given information. The blind spot is perhaps the thought that the other individual may have the given empathy to figure it out and so types like the INTP might tend to fall short on such things.I'm not sure about that; and really, you're an INTJ so of course you understand them, while I typically can read an INTP's comments and understand exactly what they're saying and why, even if I disagree with it because I think they've overlooked something or have wrongly emphasized something.
To be honest, NTJ's kind of confound me; I can't "see into you" and see how you got to where you are and thus understand it, because you don't typically explain your logic. I do typically have NTJs nod and smile when I talk to them and explain, and they sound like they get what I'm saying and/or agree, but I don't get back that explanation in turn so I can see and follow their own thinking and see that we are in sync.