[MBTI General] INTPs vs. ISTPs: What Makes You So Different?

[simulatedworld]

Hmmm, the ISTP I know LOVES physics, hates Philosophy, but loves to philosophize, if that makes sense, and he will dabble in hypothetical logic problems.

In fact, he is BIG on contingency thinking/planning, which, in a way, is hypothetical logic problem solving, right?

Sure. There are also INTPs interested in the ISTP stuff I listed. These are just general trends.

You are right, that he likes to tinker with "toys", but to be honest, he spends more time tinkering with software than he does with actually taking the computer apart. Whereas, his ESTP best friend is BIG into tinkering with electronics and works on building computers.

Yes, the Se doms are more into the physical experience of working with it than Se aux types, but there's still some kind of pattern there. Tinkering with software is probably related to Ti in this instance.

Also, regarding automechanics, this is IMPORTANT sim, and this is where I am confused the most, the ISTP I know cares and spends a lot more time understanding the mechanics than actually tinkering with them, hence my confusion!!!

That's cool. You're right that Ti is more interested in understanding the system than in applying it to something, but when Se gets involved it encourages us to use hands-on approach to improve that understanding when necessary.

The one ISTP you know doesn't have to fit every ISTP stereotype to be an ISTP. Maybe he places unusually low emphasis on Se. Some ISTPs focus on Ti+Ni and have trouble relating their ideas directly to anything real in the external world...working on Se is usually the cure for this.

I will frequently ask him how things work, from computers to engines, to planes, and I am floored by how knowledgeable he is in all of these fields/areas, he understands not only the parts, but the physics behind the systems that make these parts work.

^Is that Ti?

Probably. The way these mechanical systems work represents a real and tangible interaction between real and tangible objects. The ISTP can envision how these processes map to real experiences and so understanding the dynamics of how they work is interesting.

ISTPs tend to be less interested in understanding systems that can't be applied to some kind of "real" process that can be envisioned and understood directly. Like say...quantum physics. A lot of that stuff is pretty abstract and hard to relate to anything real. Much more the domain of NTPs (though I'm sure there do exist STPs who are interested in it.)

Hmm, the ISTPs I know are definitely all about strategy, but the one I am specifically talking about works and values physics, math, and statistical patterns/procedures like crazy. (He's a civil engineer)

Civil engineer--interested in the governing principles behind processes (Ti) that he can see applying to real systems in the world around him (Se.)

Now, here is where I have to disagree with you entirely.

The ISTPs I know don't care much about people, in general, and are pretty piss-poor at reading social cues.

Social cues =/= physical cues. Physical cues are things like, "I noticed he looked to the side and hesitated slightly before announcing his bet, and when he does that he's usually not confident", etc.

There's nothing social about it--consciously applied social cues are more related to Fe. This is about the dynamics of physical mannerisms that people unconsciously exhibit and that can be mapped out and exploited to build a more complete model of how that person operates.

As types with inferior Fe, they're not usually too interested in social niceties because that doesn't relate to mapping out any systems they find interesting.

I notice here, that you switched to STPs, instead of ISTPs, and I have definitely seen/observed/witnessed a VAST difference between these two types.

ESTPs are people-persons.

Much more privy to relating with/towards people, ISTPs, however...

Not so much.

Do you think the STPs you speak of are in fact ESTPs?

Some of them are, and the parts about involving direct hands-on experience and noticing physical cues are more applicable to ESTPs than to ISTPs, but definitely also apply to ISTPs in many situations.

 

[foolish heart]

I like mountain climbing because it's a challenge. I'm in tune with nature, and a mountain seems to say "I bet you cant reach the top", how can I say no to that? lol, silly mountains, who do they think they are?

NTPs play the cards; STPs play the person (this is an oversimplification but helps illustrate the idea.) It's funny when they get into arguments over the way hands were played, because sometimes the STP will make some play that the NTP sees as clearly mathematically incorrect--and sometimes it is--but other times it lets the STP take advantage of opportunities the NTP didn't even notice.

Like, the STP will make some weirdo call in a situation where all the numbers would indicate that he should probably fold. Sometimes he's wrong and it just looks like an impulsive waste of money; other times he's right and he looks like a genius for picking up some subtle physical tell. Either way it drives the NTPs nuts.

Reminds me of when I taught my INTP friend to play poker... I don't rely on physical tells too often because at a certain level of play they are just as much a baited fishhook as an opprotunity for additinal revinue. he read all my books thoroughly and would argue afterwards whenever i played unstandard. he seemed to grasp the numbers game behind all the plays easily, but what he was missing was the application. so it is not so much physical tells as much as situational awareness... what happened, then what happened, then what happened, you recursively review any showdowns and deconstruct each players thinking, then expand on that empirical evidence with physical tells that fit with the evidence. i also like to make small plays to test and hopefully confirm any uncertainties. once you have a completed view of their thinking, you can Ni-emulate the entire table and your mathematics will be much more accurate since they take a larger degree of real world conditions into consideration. my INTP friend always understood the theories, but watching his play his mistakes was always not recognizing the constraints with rarely a problem following correct theoretical guidelines, while my mistakes were applying the general constraint-pattern against a new player before i had a chance to see enough of their showdowns, or simply hitting the losing side of a play which is highly in my favor but to everyone else looks like impulsive gambling



My best friend of 10 years is INTP and although we might overlap in certain ways and appear similar, we think very differently. the way I can describe the biggest difference is to say my ultimatum is real-world mastery while his imperitive was mastery of theoretical knowledgebase. the istp sometimes goes deep into theoretical or hands-off learning but never changes the ultimate objective. in fact, i think ISTP could seem like a lot of different types and roles in order to gather information for Ti. in the end, you recognize them when they spring into action and apply everything they know in real time, and that is also when most people are the most shocked as the real reasoning and intentions for previous action become clear.

 

[SillySapienne]

^ INCREDABOY, Thanks for that post!

 

[SillySapienne]

I like mountain climbing because it's a challenge. I'm in tune with nature, and a mountain seems to say "I bet you cant reach the top", how can I say no to that?

Hahahaha, cute!

Reminds me of when I taught my INTP friend to play poker... I don't rely on physical tells too often because at a certain level of play they are just as much a baited fishhook as an opprotunity for additinal revinue. he read all my books thoroughly and would argue afterwards whenever i played unstandard. he seemed to grasp the numbers game behind all the plays easily, but what he was missing was the application. so it is not so much physical tells as much as situational awareness... what happened, then what happened, then what happened, you recursively review any showdowns and deconstruct each players thinking, then expand on that empirical evidence with physical tells that actually fit. i also like to make small plays to test and hopefully confirm any uncertainties. once you have a completed view of their thinking, you can Ni-emulate the entire table and your mathematics will be much more accurate since they take a larger degree of real world conditions into consideration. my INTP friend always understood the theories, but watching his play his mistakes was always not recognizing the constraints with rarely a problem following correct theoretical guidelines, while my mistakes were applying the general constraint-pattern against a new player before i had a chance to see enough of their showdowns, or simply hitting the losing side of a play which is highly in my favor but to everyone else looks like impulsive gambling

Reading this makes me feel stewpid.

My best friend of 10 years is INTP and although we might overlap in certain ways and appear similar, we think very differently. the way I can describe the biggest difference is to say my ultimatum is real-world mastery while his imperitive was mastery of theoretical knowledgebase. the istp sometimes goes deep into theoretical or hands-off learning but never changes the ultimate objective.

Well put!

 

[A window to the soul]

`
I've been thinking about this for a while, and it puzzles me.

I've known three ISTPs, and quite a few INTPs and I am having trouble differentiating the two.
...
So, please, dear internet friends, share your thoughts/experiences/observations.

Many thanks.

S. Sapienne

It's Simple...

ISTP=Builds a Soapbox
INTP=Stands on it

 

[Unique]

I know an ISTP at work, easy to get along with but doesn't really understand me, he finds my lack of attention to detail disturbing and I find his willingness to let those details stand in the way of getting shit done disturbing

Besides being slightly disturbed, the double P makes for good times