[ISTJ] Could the ISTJ be considered a Rational personality?

[Ingenue]

I'm new to this game but I feel it should almost be impossible to tell an intelligent ISTJ and well rounded INTJ apart from each other, at least on the outside.

Possibly, except when they are under stress. I find that ISTJs fall into a kind of "doom and gloom" panicked attitude when things go wrong, to the point where one cannot even attempt to help them because they shut out all possible solutions. INTJs, on the other hand, seem to become excessively sensitive but still remain calm.

 

[freeeekyyy]

I understand that ISTJ's value typical customs and traditions like most guardians. But despite this, they still seem like a highly rational personality to me.

Or is this not true? Do ISTJs place guardian values above rational thought patterns?

Absolutely. I think the problem is people accept way too much of David Kiersey's statements. The four "rational" types are very different from each other, as are the four "guardian" types. I wouldn't call an ESFJ rational, but ISTJ, absolutely.

 

[Nicodemus]

My opinion is that with SJs there seems to be a pretty large variance due to the large amount of people under this one umbrella, how could there not be with 50% or so of the population falling into 4 types? I don't mean to offend anyone but I feel that the more intelligent an SJ the less they will fit the typical stereotype that everyone seems to have of us, either that or the whole idea of being unquestioning drones is just false to begin with. I'm new to this game but I feel it should almost be impossible to tell an intelligent ISTJ and well rounded INTJ apart from each other, at least on the outside.

INTJs are much funnier, though.

 

[Habba]

Yes, ISTJs are very much rational beings. I think that any TJ is.

 

[rav3n]

I feel it should almost be impossible to tell an intelligent ISTJ and well rounded INTJ apart from each other, at least on the outside.

They have a different vibe, once you get to know them better. ISTJs are more concrete and pragmatic. Here, now, show me the money. Nothing concrete? Fo'get about it. They don't get so lost in thought, in the obsessive search for focused knowledge that INTJs can revert to. This doesn't mean ISTJs are any less intelligent than other types.

As far as ISTJs being rational, from my experience with them, they're very rational.

 

[uberrogo]

What do you mean by rational personality, and why can't ISTJ be both rational and tradition loving?

 

[Eric B]

This is what I figured as well.

Would you guys go as far as to say that ISTJ's fit better under the Rationale archetype than Guardian? They certainly seem that way to me.

From my experience, the people who care more about customs are SFJs. Or, for that matter, xNFJs, or anyone with strong-ish Fe (b/c they're the ones hosting the events a lot of the time). I'd say that my NFJ friends care a lot more about tradition than any STJ I know of.

And it's interesting that you alternate using "Rational" as a title and as an adjective. Because, in terms of their title, I'd say yes, they do belong with the other SJs - but in terms of the adjective, yeah, they're rational. But so are ESTJs, and come to think of it, many F types are rational too! In short... It'd probably make more sense to think of those titles in a broader sense. That is, not thinking of one set of types as "the rational ones" or another as "the traditional ones", because that's never how it works. And come to think of it, since when are customs and rationality mutually exclusive?

/rambling

Using the term "rational" outside of the MBTI context (ie. Si is not "rational", blah blah blah), I'd say yes, ISTJs usually come across as very rational people. I think many are mistyped as INTJ when they don't fit the guardian stereotype of being conformist drones. However, I find them a lot more "grounded" than INTJs, which can seem more sensible and rational in a way.

I think the problem is confusion between Jung's definition of the word "rational", with the everyday meaning, and then Keirsey's temperament name.

ISTJ is "irrational" in the Jungian sense, in being a perceiving dominant (Si). In Socionics, it would be ISTp.

In the common meaning of the words, which is generally associated with "thinking", they are a T, and it is extraverted (and thus quite visible), and "parental" (auxiliary complex used to lead others) at that even, so yes, they are very "rational" in that sense. Staunch logicians!

Keirsey's temperament name (him having rejected Jung's concepts), loosely draws from the common usage, but applies it to the abstract thinkers only. I guess they are seen as the ultimate epitome of thinking types because they combine it with conceptual data.
But I believe new temperament names like this do become confusing, and shifts something that might apply across the board, to only one particular type group.

 

[IZthe411]

In many circumstances customs are in direct opposition to rational mindedness.

- Special event and traditional gatherings
- Belief systems about life goals, values, purpose
- Approach to a problem situation


I'm reflecting some personal biases into this thread. I've scored as an ISTJ and INTJ depending on the test. I have a curious, floaty personality and mentally ask a lot of "what if" and "what about" questions. I have a strong need for efficiency and find it painful to do tasks that intuitively feel like an inefficient use of time (it's a real chore for me to make my bed or write long articles for my website, but I can spend hours of time planning a scenario to achieve the maximum result. I have a strong dislike of (in my mind) frivolous traditions like religious functions, weddings and other celebrations. I'm the least visible person in my extended family.

But I also value facts and empirical explanations for their credibility and put a lot of study into my field. I'm loyal to a cause I believe in. I use organizational tools extensively, though my home environment is very messy.

I don't see a clear division between ISTJ and INTJ. Using myself as an example, they seem one and the same.

I'm in the same boat as your are. But I don't see myself as a Ni dom. I have a balance in there somewhere. Where is what I would like to know LOL.

I am not about tradition for the sake of tradition.
I'd rather discuss and problem solve/improve over do a lot of busy, detailed work ( I hate documenting things to the level of detail required for my job)
It's hard for me to do a process when there is, like you said, a more efficient way to do it. If the person above me insists that it's done that way, I'd rather him acknowledge that over giving me some BS or assert his 'authority' as a basis. The more I respect you, the more I'll respect your dimwitted plan.

I'm loyal to things that are consistent with my outlook and personal values. I was never a proponent of doing something because everyone else does.

 

[IZthe411]

The balanced ISTJ might be the most rational type, in the common definition of the word "rational."

Dominant Si means their self experience and self perception is derived from observable fact, data, details, and remembered concrete experiences. Aux Te compels them to order their environment along this concrete self experience in a logical, organized manner. It's a mistake to think ISTJs and ISJs in general are drones of the prevailing social custom. Their foremost arbiter of Truth is their self experience according to Si. This varies person to person. If their experience of social custom was negative or they disagreed with it, they'll rebel.
The best [or maybe not] example of ISTJs in their extreme is Temperance Brennan [Bones] from the show Bones.

Great point, Jock

I don't see how I missed this thread!

It has to make sense to me first. If it doesn't make sense I'll go along if there's other compelling reasons to do so (read: she's hot).

Seriously though, I think of this in terms of trying new things. I'm not sure if this is my well tested Si or a well developed Ne, but i'm not intimidated by different things. I'll have some worries/reservations because it is unchartered waters, (evidence of reliance on Si) but I'll approach it with a good attitude. And NO, I don't go out and do lots of research or ask lots of questions, either. In my mind I'm convinced that things will be okay based on my conviction that there's not much out there that I can't handle sensibly.

 

[IZthe411]

My opinion is that with SJs there seems to be a pretty large variance due to the large amount of people under this one umbrella, how could there not be with 50% or so of the population falling into 4 types? I don't mean to offend anyone but I feel that the more intelligent an SJ the less they will fit the typical stereotype that everyone seems to have of us, either that or the whole idea of being unquestioning drones is just false to begin with. I'm new to this game but I feel it should almost be impossible to tell an intelligent ISTJ and well rounded INTJ apart from each other, at least on the outside.

Agreed, that's why there's a lot of mistyping among them.

 

[NotOfTwo]

I do not find SJs to be objective in their reasoning and so do not consider them rationals.

 

[Within]

The tradition-loving, conservative, stereotypical shitbag ISTJ's are being described as is equally unseemly as it is incorrect. It should have been put up in front of the firing squad a eons ago.

 

[bcubchgo]

I don't think so. pragmatic, analytical, and logical? yes. But the difference (on the whole) for a rational would be to focus on improvement, to remain even tempered, and to focus on abstractions being applied in a useful manner, none of which are specific to an ISTJ. It's been my experience that the average ISTJ does not always take into account optimization, other people's concerns or emotions, or patterns of thought that require non-linear approaches. Don't get me wrong there certainly is a value in both approaches, I just think that many ISTJ's do what could be construed as "irrational" things because they are unwilling to find value in experiences beyond their knowledge, sometimes are quite rough around the edges with others who disagree with them, and at times, unnecessarily obstinate. Being logically oriented can be valuable, of course, but experimentation and inquisitiveness that comes naturally to an "N" is something that needs to be interjected into the process to observe the world from a perspective that does not necessarily come with a bias. Still, I enjoy listening to an ISTJ (as long as their opinion is not being forced on me) because I think their particular brand of detailed insight can be helpful to isolate important ideas.

 

[Craft]

Depends on what "rational" means. Shit, even science isn't rational in its most absolute meaning.

This NT="rational" thing made by Keirsey(I think) is inaccurate. Nevertheless, it should at least be taken as "NT's are more into abstract logic". ISTJ's are more "sensible".

If we're talking rational=smart, I don't know.

If we're talking rational=into abstract theories, no.

Argh, it's too relative...

 

[Siúil a Rúin]

This is my understanding at this point: ISTJs are rationalistic, but are more likely to require concrete proof. Their process would be based more on deriving theory from evidence rather than starting with the hypothesis/theory and using experiment to prove it. This aligns well with the scientific method. For a fun example, Scully from the X-files is an example of STJ rationality played off against an iNtuitive Mulder. In that context she shows the assumption that there is a logical explanation for everything and this can be demonstrated concretely. The NT rationality has an interesting twist because of the combination of linear logic with the iNtuitive realm. You can get a wider range of outcomes from people who identify as such because that combination makes it more possible to create an internally logical and consistent system that simply doesn't map to reality. In such a case it is not rationality, but a logically consistent irrationality.

I've had family members, usually women of the previous generation, who were ISTJs. They were practical, consistent, and reasonable in most ways. What struck me in their specific cases was an incredible underlying imaginative power that remained mostly hidden to others, but if you knew them long enough, you could glimpse it. In these cases it would reveal itself in storytelling and literature. By MBTI measures and in day-to-day life they would be rather hard-core ISTJs.

 

[IZthe411]

The rational definition is very irrational and subject to interpretation, made to fit the argument at hand.

I operate rationally, I just like something to concrete to relate it to.

 

[Condor]

I don't think so. pragmatic, analytical, and logical? yes. But the difference (on the whole) for a rational would be to focus on improvement, to remain even tempered, and to focus on abstractions being applied in a useful manner, none of which are specific to an ISTJ. It's been my experience that the average ISTJ does not always take into account optimization, other people's concerns or emotions, or patterns of thought that require non-linear approaches. Don't get me wrong there certainly is a value in both approaches, I just think that many ISTJ's do what could be construed as "irrational" things because they are unwilling to find value in experiences beyond their knowledge, sometimes are quite rough around the edges with others who disagree with them, and at times, unnecessarily obstinate. Being logically oriented can be valuable, of course, but experimentation and inquisitiveness that comes naturally to an "N" is something that needs to be interjected into the process to observe the world from a perspective that does not necessarily come with a bias. Still, I enjoy listening to an ISTJ (as long as their opinion is not being forced on me) because I think their particular brand of detailed insight can be helpful to isolate important ideas.

I like this post a lot. Many times others have told me "That just doesn't make sense!" (e.g. not accepting invitations to a party, refusing a "free lunch" at work and buying my own, etc.) and in their view my actions or decisions were not rational. The unwillingness to try new things seems irrational to some, but the security derived from sticking with what works - is rational to others.

 

[RaptorWizard]

Yes, ISTJs are very much rational beings. I think that any TJ is.

It seems to me that preferences for introversion and thinking are a much better setup for logical thought processes than preferences just for thinking and judging. I would take INTJ and ISTJ over ENTJ and ESTJ in the rationality department any day. For that matter, I would also take INTP and ISTP over ENTJ and ESTJ as well, which leads me to my next point, that being, how has nobody mentioned ISTP?

ISTP, for all I have seen and reasoned, is in actuality a very logical type. Hell, they get termed titles such as "Problem Solvers" and "Analyzer Operaters" as well as "Mechanics". What do ESTJs get to be called? Oh ya, they get the grand titles of "Supervisors" or "Bosses". I'd wager half the public school principles in the nation could be ESTJ, and they appear to be some of the most closed-minded and illogical as well as just dang freaking retarded people I have ever encountered!

It is for these reasons, among others, that I would take preferences for "IT" over "TJ" when it comes to being considered a rational type. Of course people, including myself, can think whatever they want to. ENTPs can at least come before ESTPs, and ENTJs can at least come before ESTJs too, I'd wager, but I would also take "IT", like ISTP and ISTJ over "ET" like ENTJ and ENTP too and please, if anyone here disagrees with my judgments on who's smarter here, don't hesitate to challenge my claims. I love a good fight!

 

[EJCC]

^ So, just to be clear... your point is that Ti is more rational than Te, and Te-second is more rational than Te-first?

 

[RaptorWizard]

Ah yes, a challenge!

Some of that stuff I just said for the sake of being a dick, and it was good fun too.

Also, although I believe in the existence of functions, I have found that if we start obsessing over them too much, we begin to lose touch with the overall personality of a type.

Functions or not, it just seems to me a general pattern what I wrote in the other post.

Still, I'm sure there are plenty of very smart and high leveled Te doms, as well as some very stupid and low leveled Ti doms, and perhaps not all Te seconds are just in the middle.

To be frank though, I really don't know what I'm talking about. I just like to attack things for the thrill of it.

Feel free to provide counter-arguments in your defence.