• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

[INTJ] Why do people seem to dislike INTJs?

Splittet

Wannabe genius
Joined
Jun 12, 2007
Messages
632
MBTI Type
INTJ
INTJ's don't necessarily "dislike" most people, simply don't view them as useful. Having little in common with other people, that makes sense. Egocentric? No. That is an individual type of characteristic- but introversion does lead to knowing oneself better than others.

I am talking about average tendencies, and based on that, one cannot say every INTJ is such and such. If you interpret me that way, you interpret me wrong. On average, INTJs like other people less than the the average person. As far as egocentricity goes, in comes from the T. F is more or less the same as Big Five agreeableness, and the opposite of agreeableness is egocentricity.

Sample Agreeableness items

* I am interested in people.
* I feel others’ emotions.
* I have a soft heart.
* I make people feel at ease.
* I sympathize with others’ feelings.
* I take time out for others.
* I am not interested in other people’s problems. (reversed)
* I am not really interested in others. (reversed)
* I feel little concern for others. (reversed)
* I insult people. (reversed)[7]

Agreeableness leads to being likable, and being low on it, means liking and caring less for others, and it makes you less likable.
 

ThinkingAboutIt

New member
Joined
Apr 8, 2009
Messages
264
MBTI Type
INTP
Logically, I don't see much of a reason for it, except that perhaps people get too emotionally distraught over our cold humor? Maybe we're a bit biting in our wit, but I don't think we deserve the reputation of being cold, hostile, completely emotionless, analytical, and evil. :(

Slightly cold, a bit maniacal, repressive, controlling, logical, maybe.

Thoughts?

I don't have a problem with INTJ's as a personality at all. I think I get along with XNTJ's as a whole, probably because I have several of the same traits. However, I have been pondering whether it is a choice (of a few here) to think their lack of extroverted feeling is freedom to not have a heart at all, or if they truly lack both introverted and extroverted feeling which results in your latter description.
 

Litvyak

No Cigar
Joined
Oct 5, 2008
Messages
1,822
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
I always have to laugh at this "I-don't-have-a-heart" stuff (I saw this mentioned in INTJ posts, at least two or three occasions). It's so lame - and totally illogical, which doesn't really fit the NT temperament.

"Oh look at me, I'm the misunderstood robot, I'm so damn special, somebody help me *whinewhinewhine*". Oh please :coffee:
 

RenaiReborn

New member
Joined
May 29, 2009
Messages
495
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
1w2
I always have to laugh at this "I-don't-have-a-heart" stuff (I saw this mentioned in INTJ posts, at least two or three occasions). It's so lame - and totally illogical, which doesn't really fit the NT temperament.

"Oh look at me, I'm the misunderstood robot, I'm so damn special, somebody help me *whinewhinewhine*". Oh please :coffee:

I think some people take it too far, indeed. Sarcastically, I may say that I don't have a heart. If they choose to believe that I really believe that, let them fester in their ignorance.

I view emotions as a tool, which I find easier than most to set aside until I deem them necessary. Relating my emotions to others, or being able to comprehend how their emotions control them to the extent which they do is my main problem.
 

thisGuy

New member
Joined
Mar 14, 2009
Messages
1,187
MBTI Type
entp
i think those are just excuses for being emotional immature and not dealing with them in a healthy way
 

cheerful-pessimist

New member
Joined
May 31, 2009
Messages
46
MBTI Type
ENtJ
Enneagram
8w4
The only INTJ I know is almost a robot. :/ He literally believes that the human mind could be recreated by an algorithm, and he doesn't believe in psychology or the concept of the human soul at all. I think he's hilarious, but a lot of people don't like him. I guess they get upset when he refuses to validate the complexity of their natures. :B
 

Splittet

Wannabe genius
Joined
Jun 12, 2007
Messages
632
MBTI Type
INTJ
The only INTJ I know is almost a robot. :/ He literally believes that the human mind could be recreated by an algorithm, and he doesn't believe in psychology or the concept of the human soul at all. I think he's hilarious, but a lot of people don't like him. I guess they get upset when he refuses to validate the complexity of their natures. :B

I guess that would be an example of greedy reductionism. I believe as well that the human mind could be and will be recreated by an algorithm, and I believe the algorithm it is based on, is in our genes. I don't believe in a soul (outdated concept), but I believe in psychology and consciousness. Mentalistic and reductionist biological perspectives are complimentary, they are just different levels of analysis. I believe human beings are incredibly complex, chaotic-deterministic and dynamical systems.
 

cheerful-pessimist

New member
Joined
May 31, 2009
Messages
46
MBTI Type
ENtJ
Enneagram
8w4
I guess that would be an example of greedy reductionism.

I think he does that a lot, and that may be way other people don't like him at first. He likes tangible things.
He's also far too logical about things that shouldn't always be defined logically. When we have discussions in our humanities class, he always manages to offend someone by explaining away something absurd, like how genocide is technically good for the economy and is therefore not necessarily a negative thing. :/
 

jenocyde

half mystic, half skeksis
Joined
Jan 2, 2009
Messages
6,387
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
7w8
I guess that would be an example of greedy reductionism. I believe as well that the human mind could be and will be recreated by an algorithm, and I believe the algorithm it is based on, is in our genes. I don't believe in a soul (outdated concept), but I believe in psychology and consciousness. Mentalistic and reductionist biological perspectives are complimentary, they are just different levels of analysis. I believe human beings are incredibly complex, chaotic-deterministic and dynamical systems.

yes yes yes.

The Icelandic Genome Project fascinates me to no end. Genetic algorithm, FTW!
 

jenocyde

half mystic, half skeksis
Joined
Jan 2, 2009
Messages
6,387
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
7w8
I think he does that a lot, and that may be way other people don't like him at first. He likes tangible things.
He's also far too logical about things that shouldn't always be defined logically. When we have discussions in our humanities class, he always manages to offend someone by explaining away something absurd, like how genocide is technically good for the economy and is therefore not necessarily a negative thing. :/

Just because it's an unpopular position, doesn't make it false.

The question is whether he believes economic growth is more valuable than human lives in practice, not in theory. Would he be willing to kill to own a few more dollars or some more land? I get testy when people assume that I hold a strong position like that just because I can see the logic in it from an objective standpoint.
 
Joined
Sep 18, 2008
Messages
1,941
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
512
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
I don't believe that the human mind could ever be recreated by an algorithm. Just studying the interplay of cell signaling would give a clue about how complex EVERYTHING is. To believe that a "soul" or a "mind" could be distilled down to algorithms (because cellular processes are based on genes) is naiive sci-fi. Only people who didn't understand basic cellular biology and biochemistry could ever believe that.

(this is why INTJs are disliked)
 

Splittet

Wannabe genius
Joined
Jun 12, 2007
Messages
632
MBTI Type
INTJ
yes yes yes.

The Icelandic Genome Project fascinates me to no end. Genetic algorithm, FTW!

I basically believe in the predictions of Ray Kurzweil. The human brain is incredibly complex, but the program that runs it, I think we will be able to recreate. It's approximatively 20 MB, and based on it you will be able to simulate the human mind. Kurzweil predicts that in the 2020s:

# Highly advanced medical nanobots will perform detailed brainscans on live patients.
# Accurate computer simulations of the entire human brain will exist due to these hyperaccurate brainscans, and the workings of the brain will be understood.
# A computer passes the Turing test by the last year of the decade (2029), meaning that it is a Strong AI and can think like a human (though the first A.I. is likely to be the equivalent of a very stupid human). This first A.I. is built around a computer simulation of a human brain, which was made possible by previous, nanotech-guided brainscanning.

I don't believe that the human mind could ever be recreated by an algorithm. Just studying the interplay of cell signaling would give a clue about how complex EVERYTHING is. To believe that a "soul" or a "mind" could be distilled down to algorithms (because cellular processes are based on genes) is naiive sci-fi. Only people who didn't understand basic cellular biology and biochemistry could ever believe that.

I think I have the basics down, since I got an A on my exam in biological psychology. Just because the brain is an incredibly complex system, doesn't mean it's impossible to emulate. Future computers will have enough calculation power to emulate even the human brain.

Recommended YouTube video: YouTube - Ray Kurzweil (pt1of3) The Singularity Summit at Stanford
 

jenocyde

half mystic, half skeksis
Joined
Jan 2, 2009
Messages
6,387
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
7w8
I don't believe that the human mind could ever be recreated by an algorithm. Just studying the interplay of cell signaling would give a clue about how complex EVERYTHING is. To believe that a "soul" or a "mind" could be distilled down to algorithms (because cellular processes are based on genes) is naiive sci-fi. Only people who didn't understand basic cellular biology and biochemistry could ever believe that.

(this is why INTJs are disliked)

Yes, that is exactly the point I made in my 2nd post. INTJs think they know everything and try to demean their opponent, instead of arguing the topic at hand or asking follow up questions to gain a better perspective. And this is the reason why they can be fundamentally disliked. I'm only referring to the "unhealthy" ones, of course.
 

jenocyde

half mystic, half skeksis
Joined
Jan 2, 2009
Messages
6,387
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
7w8
I basically believe in the predictions of Ray Kurzweil. The human brain is incredibly complex, but the program that runs it, I think we will be able to recreate. It's approximatively 20 MB, and based on it you will be able to simulate the human mind. Kurzweil predicts that in the 2020s:

I don't know about the timeline, but he is a brilliant brilliant man.
 

Haphazard

Don't Judge Me!
Joined
Apr 14, 2008
Messages
6,704
MBTI Type
ENFJ
Man, I love the difference between the "Everyone hates INTJs thread" and "Everyone hates INTPs thread".
 
Joined
Sep 18, 2008
Messages
1,941
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
512
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
Yes, that is exactly the point I made in my 2nd post. INTJs think they know everything and try to demean their opponent, instead of arguing the topic at hand or asking follow up questions to gain a better perspective. And this is the reason why they can be fundamentally disliked. I'm only referring to the "unhealthy" ones, of course.

No, I don't think that I know everything. But I do know what I know, what I don't know, and what I've spent years of my life studying/working on.

The criticism that I made wasn't meant to demean. It would be similar to me making general, wild speculations on 17th century literature without having any background, or having done any reading on it.

The reason why I didn't even bother to argue why I thought it was naiive sci-fi... That's because I don't know where to begin (though I did list simply studying cell signaling as an example of the degree of complexity involved). There are so many reasons why it is a huge over-simplification, and why genes are not everything.

What you see as a demeaning put-down... I see as a reminder. When someone tells me that I don't know anything about - say, particle physics, and that I'm talking out of my ass I don't think it's demeaning. I take it as a sign that I should a) read more and substantiate my view or b) stop talking out of my ass about something that I know nothing about. I have, however, noticed that with NPs, they tend to take it more personally.

I could say all of this more tactfully, but I'm exhausted from a 12 hour day in the lab.
 

jenocyde

half mystic, half skeksis
Joined
Jan 2, 2009
Messages
6,387
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
7w8
What you see as a demeaning put-down... I see as a reminder. When someone tells me that I don't know anything about - say, particle physics, and that I'm talking out of my ass I don't think it's demeaning. I take it as a sign that I should a) read more and substantiate my view or b) stop talking out of my ass about something that I know nothing about. I have, however, noticed that with NPs, they tend to take it more personally.

I could say all of this more tactfully, but I'm exhausted from a 12 hour day in the lab.

It was, in fact, meant to demean. It was meant to show your knowledge over mine and to imply that my thought process was childlike. You of course are under the assumption that I have no point of reference and that I would dare make a claim that I myself had not put a lot of research and thought into. And again, you are trying to drive the point home by implying that I need to read more and stop talking out of my ass. It's fine that you do that - I don't care. But don't pretend as if you're not doing it.

I don't see it as a put down, because I wasn't put down. I have no reason to be. Believe me, I don't take things personally - especially not from strangers on the internet.

I've already explained that I like INTJs, but to others who may not be as strong minded as I am, you guys can come off as bullies. And you do that by making statements like the one you used in response to me.

No one would think you to be an unpleasant person if you simply said something like: "I've done a lot of research in this field and came to the conclusion that this is impossible. What are your reasons for thinking the contrary?"
 

Athenian200

Protocol Droid
Joined
Jul 1, 2007
Messages
8,828
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
4w5
The only INTJ I know is almost a robot. :/ He literally believes that the human mind could be recreated by an algorithm, and he doesn't believe in psychology or the concept of the human soul at all. I think he's hilarious, but a lot of people don't like him. I guess they get upset when he refuses to validate the complexity of their natures. :B

Actually... I agree that it could be. I'm not sure that we should, since it might depress us to realize how simple we really are, but I'm so curious I'd be interesting in seeing it if it happened anyway.

I believe in psychology to some extent, at least as a diagnostic tool for helping uncover and deal with emotional issues. Don't know how accurate it is, though. As for the soul... well, I'm agnostic about that. There's no way to detect a soul, but it might or might not exist.

I always try to validate the complexity of people's natures, but it's tough. Because most people I encounter (in real life, not on here) seem so simplistic and predictable in their responses that I struggle to think of them as real people compared to myself. It's really depressing. :(
 
Top