Ask an INTJ

[EJCC]

A similar question to this may have been asked already, but nonetheless, here it is. And in advance, don't take this poorly, because I say it with love in my heart -- love for my many INTJ friends (and my INTJ roommate).

Almost all of the INTJs I know have a tendency to laugh at people's stupidity instead of trying to fix their stupidity. I mean, they'll still comment on it, but they may not suggest alternatives, because they're too busy joking around about the problem. I've seen this in real life as well as on the forum (and I've seen it with a few ENTJs, too). It always surprises me (even though it shouldn't), because with Te secondary, shouldn't INTJs be more likely to try to fix perceived imperfections?

The closest I can come to an answer is that maybe it comes from a sense of futility; people are going to be stupid no matter what, so you might as well find the humor in it. Is that close to the answer to my question, or am I totally off base?

Note: I have an INTJ aunt who is a very strong exception to this rule; she is without a doubt the most obsessive, meddling, worrying, and EXTREMELY type 1w2 person I have ever met.

Another note: My question is coming from a pretty biased position, since I am also a type 1 and therefore I have a tendency to feel like I'm morally obligated to interfere if something is being done incorrectly; i.e. I have a hard time finding the humor in watching stupid people be stupid. It's like fingernails on a chalkboard.

[ThatGirl]

INTJs are very open minded about your right to be an idiot.

They laugh at situations, but only if it doesn't effect them. Then they will bust in to correct it.


Edit: According to the ones I have known.

[ultimawepun]

Almost all of the INTJs I know have a tendency to laugh at people's stupidity instead of trying to fix their stupidity. I mean, they'll still comment on it, but they may not suggest alternatives, because they're too busy joking around about the problem. I've seen this in real life as well as on the forum (and I've seen it with a few ENTJs, too). It always surprises me (even though it shouldn't), because with Te secondary, shouldn't INTJs be more likely to try to fix perceived imperfections?

From what I picked up at INTJf, INTJs tend to be more critical of themselves than to others.

INTJs are very open minded about your right to be an idiot.

They laugh at situations, but only if it doesn't effect them. Then they will bust in to correct it.


Edit: According to the ones I have known.

I can relate to this.

[ceecee]

A similar question to this may have been asked already, but nonetheless, here it is. And in advance, don't take this poorly, because I say it with love in my heart -- love for my many INTJ friends (and my INTJ roommate).

Almost all of the INTJs I know have a tendency to laugh at people's stupidity instead of trying to fix their stupidity. I mean, they'll still comment on it, but they may not suggest alternatives, because they're too busy joking around about the problem. I've seen this in real life as well as on the forum (and I've seen it with a few ENTJs, too). It always surprises me (even though it shouldn't), because with Te secondary, shouldn't INTJs be more likely to try to fix perceived imperfections?

The closest I can come to an answer is that maybe it comes from a sense of futility; people are going to be stupid no matter what, so you might as well find the humor in it. Is that close to the answer to my question, or am I totally off base?

Note: I have an INTJ aunt who is a very strong exception to this rule; she is without a doubt the most obsessive, meddling, worrying, and EXTREMELY type 1w2 person I have ever met.

Another note: My question is coming from a pretty biased position, since I am also a type 1 and therefore I have a tendency to feel like I'm morally obligated to interfere if something is being done incorrectly; i.e. I have a hard time finding the humor in watching stupid people be stupid. It's like fingernails on a chalkboard.

It takes WAY too much energy to correct someone, especially when they think they are absolutely right, than to let them believe something stupid or be stupid. Morally obligated to interfere? Perhaps the idea of interfering is what bothers me most because I don't want to be interfered with. I would go out of my way to make sure that doesn't happen, if necessary. I think every idiot on TV, in politics, in religion is stupid but I'm not telling them that and they wouldn't consider anyone's obligation to interfere worth their time or effort either.

[Coriolis]

Yes. Interference takes time/effort, and crosses the line of self-determination that I tend to value strongly. I will do this if the stupidity affects me directly, or a project I am involved in (as at work). I will also do it if the stupid person is a close friend or relative, to save them from the effects of their actions. Otherwise, I usually let them be. After all, what looks "stupid" to me occasionally might actually make sense in the other person's situation.

As for the humor, well - that can't be helped. Even if you are my best friend, I may still laugh, but I will certainly intervene.

[Nicodemus]

I concur with Coriolis' words but would add that the pattern extends to other deep-rooted 'problems' people may have as well.

[EJCC]

It takes WAY too much energy to correct someone, especially when they think they are absolutely right, than to let them believe something stupid or be stupid. Morally obligated to interfere? Perhaps the idea of interfering is what bothers me most because I don't want to be interfered with. I would go out of my way to make sure that doesn't happen, if necessary. I think every idiot on TV, in politics, in religion is stupid but I'm not telling them that and they wouldn't consider anyone's obligation to interfere worth their time or effort either.

Yes. Interference takes time/effort, and crosses the line of self-determination that I tend to value strongly. I will do this if the stupidity affects me directly, or a project I am involved in (as at work). I will also do it if the stupid person is a close friend or relative, to save them from the effects of their actions. Otherwise, I usually let them be. After all, what looks "stupid" to me occasionally might actually make sense in the other person's situation.

As for the humor, well - that can't be helped. Even if you are my best friend, I may still laugh, but I will certainly intervene.

I concur with Coriolis' words but would add that the pattern extends to other deep-rooted 'problems' people may have as well.

Thanks, all! This makes a lot of sense. I guess it isn't so different from how I operate, after all. ceecee, your point about energy really resonates with me, especially combined with what Nicodemus said; if I feel like someone's issues are too deep-rooted to change, I won't want to waste my energy on them. I suppose the key difference is the bolded, which is one of the only things I quoted that I don't relate to. Although I dislike being controlled, I tend to care more about being correct, in the long run, so if someone meddles in my affairs, I might not mind, after the initial irritation.

Where do you think that self-determination value comes from, functionally?

p.s. I can't get over the difference between this and the Ask an ESTJ thread. I can only imagine what would happen if there were as many ESTJs to answer questions!

[Coriolis]

I suppose the key difference is the bolded, which is one of the only things I quoted that I don't relate to. Although I dislike being controlled, I tend to care more about being correct, in the long run, so if someone meddles in my affairs, I might not mind, after the initial irritation.

Where do you think that self-determination value comes from, functionally?

Do you mean in terms of MBTI functions? I can explain it only as a combination of several functions, which is how I see the functions working in any case.

I agree that it is better to be correct, even if I didn't come up with the correct answer myself. I prefer, however, that others provide me the information I need to correct my decision, rather than making the decision for me themselves. There may be more than one way to act upon the correction, and there may be factors involved that they do not realize.

This is probably part of my hesitation to interfere with others as well. If I do so, I am assuming that I really do know what is best for the other person in the circumstances. This in turn implies a degree of familiarity with their situation that I might have with a friend or relative, but not for a coworker or casual acquaintance. My likelihood of acting is proportional to how confident I am that I am right, as well as my stake in the situation. If especially the second is low, I will usually confine my interference to a few questions: "have you considered that doing X might lead to problem Y?" Again, I am providing the other person with information, that they can act upon as they choose.

[entropie]

Every test I am doing recently says I am an intj:

________________________________________________
Jung Explorer Test

Actualized type: INTJ
(who you are)
Extroverted (E) 50% Introverted (I) 50%
Intuitive (N) 51.28% Sensing (S) 48.72%
Thinking (T) 52.94% Feeling (F) 47.06%
Judging (J) 55.26% Perceiving (P) 44.74%

INTJ - "Mastermind". Introverted intellectual with a preference for finding certainty. A builder of systems and the applier of theoretical models. 2.1% of total population.
*The current algorithm breaks the tie randomly so refresh the page to see alternate results

Preferred type: ESTJ
(who you prefer to be)
Extroverted (E) 50% Introverted (I) 50%
Sensing (S) 55.26% Intuitive (N) 44.74%
Thinking (T) 52.5% Feeling (F) 47.5%
Judging (J) 55.26% Perceiving (P) 44.74%

ESTJ - "Administrator". Much in touch with the external environment. Very responsible. Pillar of strength. 8.7% of total population.
*The current algorithm breaks the tie randomly so refresh the page to see alternate results

Attraction type: ISFP
(who you are attracted to)
Introverted (I) 52.78% Extroverted (E) 47.22%
Sensing (S) 52.5% Intuitive (N) 47.5%
Feeling (F) 55.26% Thinking (T) 44.74%
Perceiving (P) 54.29% Judging (J) 45.71%

ISFP - "Artist". Interested in the fine arts. Expression primarily through action or art form. The senses are keener than in other types. 8.8% of total population.
*The current algorithm breaks the tie randomly so refresh the page to see alternate results
__________________________________________________ _________________________________

Dear intjs, why did you break all these tests ?

[Nicodemus]

Dear intjs, why did you break all these tests ?

Why are you taking these tests? I assume it is to do something different than you did before, because otherwise it would be quite pointless to take them at all. So, considering the perhaps unconscious urge to try something new in answering the questions, one can very well conclude that you are an ENTP-Spielkind receiving funny results to funny answers. Why INTJ and not ESFP? Well, maybe there is calling for greatness in you after all.