Ok lets settle this right now!

[FranG]

SW

INTJs are more analytical (yes they are ) then INTPs. Since Ni is abstract which is what analysis is. Analysis is an art not a science. Adding and subtracting is a science. INTJs are better at the former; INTPs the latter. N is abstract and T concrete.

["?"]

Jung posited that Te applies as rational to the extenral world and Ne applies as irrational to that as well. And he gave an argument for this. Same argument could be applied to how Ti applies as rational to the internal and Ni as irrational to the internal. Same argument that Jung gave for Te/Ne applies here as well. I see no reason why it would not.

I don't disagree with you SW, however consider what your theory most likely will imply. Jung also used the terms Judging and Perceiving. Thus, it would be most likely that Jung would disagree with Meyers on how the functions are determined for introverts. Most likely if he agreed that all judgers have a dominant rational function, whether extraverted or introverted, then the INTJ would use Ti, the INTP Ni, etc. Meyers' theory would be completlely wrong in believing it's the auxilary function that determines rational/irrational for introverts. Either way, IJs would still be considered rational types, and IPs irrational types like their extraverted cousins.

[FranG]

^^^
I agree with this. Socionics makes more sense in this regard.

[SolitaryWalker]

I don't disagree with you SW, however consider what your theory most likely will imply. Jung also used the terms Judging and Perceiving. Thus, it would be most likely that Jung would disagree with Meyers on how the functions are determined for introverts. Most likely if he agreed that all judgers have a dominant rational function, whether extraverted or introverted, then the INTJ would use Ti, the INTP Ni, etc. Meyers' theory would be completlely wrong in believing it's the auxilary function that determines rational/irrational for introverts. Either way, IJs would still be considered rational types, and IPs irrational types like their extraverted cousins.

Yes. INTJ is a more appropriate way to say TiNe because the leading function is a rational one.

[logan235711]

I didn't read all the posts, I'll say it straight up. But perhaps they are more analytical because they can take their introspection from and Ni and Te, external and internal, so they move from first some intuitive form ending in a more external thinking so they can have more to look at since more people exist externally than in ones mind to draw from, also things in the world in general from our senses, while an INTP is Ti and Ne making it so they end up with an experience that combined external with something more personal (i.e. their intuition) rather than how people think of Thinking as something more objective in the world. Also an INTP starts with Thinking internally so drawing both at internal standards while an INTJ draws both from external standards thus has to deal more with comparing their ideas to others/external things--thus more conflicts can immediately arise causing an INTJ to either fix them or perish before the idea gets off the ground, thus they have to take more things into consideration at first glance leading to the deeper analysis.

[booyalab]

If we say being analytical is associated with Thinking, than wouldnt the type that has Thinking in the first function tend to be more analytical than the type that has thinking in the second place?

Or how about, if we say that Intuition is the salient factor concerning creativity, wouldnt this suggest that the type that has Intuition in the first place would be more creative?

I don't think of INTJs as more analytical than INTPs. Extroverted thinking has more to do with causality and goal-setting than analysis. But I do tend to think of INTPs as more creative because of the difference between introverted intuition and extroverted intuition. When I think of INTJs, I think of confidence, autonomy, and clarity of ideas.

["?"]

I don't think of INTJs as more analytical than INTPs. Extroverted thinking has more to do with causality and goal-setting than analysis. But I do tend to think of INTPs as more creative because of the difference between introverted intuition and extroverted intuition. When I think of INTJs, I think of confidence, autonomy, and clarity of ideas.

Agreed. There is a "look-a-like" distinction made by Linda V. Berens and Dario Nardi, regarding comparison of the types. I will post when I have the information in front of me. For now I can say that both Ni and Ti have a love for complexity. Ni doesn't necessarily need a basis, however Ti can easily determine the principles (or something like that).

["?"]

Yes. INTJ is a more appropriate way to say TiNe because the leading function is a rational one.

So do we revisit the Socionics theory as being correct? MBTI based their theory on the fact that introverts do not show their real selves to the world. I think the example Briggs gives is a general (dominant function) and their trusted assistant (auxiliary). Extraverts are like generals who converse directly with the betallion (the world), and introverts are like generals who allow their message to be conveyed through their assistants.

[Ginkgo]

... oh god, I love it when SW takes control like this... <swoon>

*digs thumbnails deep into eye sockets and never takes them out*

[InvisibleJim]

SolitaryWalker provided a thread title which did not match his OP. This did not sit well with my analytical nature.