[INTJ] Why do people hate INTJs?

[rav3n]

Are you talking about INTJs, or do you actually have a few real life people in mind? Also don't discount the possibility that such INTJs you might be dealing with are simply bored and saying things just to annoy you. Particularly on forums, there are those INTJs that are fairly laid back, and others which like to say things in such a way as to start fights and see what happens.


Of course, if there is a fire, you put it out. The INTJ gets upset when he points out the faulty electrical wiring that isn't up to code, and everyone else is like, "So? That's the way it has always been."

If you're running into INTJs that are standing around saying, "I told you so," and not helping with putting out the fire, might I respectfully submit that maybe they aren't INTJs, but perhaps INTPs?

You're doing the ego-protection/spin thing again. Yes, I'm talking about INTJs as a generality, whether meat or cyberspace.

 

[uumlau]

You're doing the ego-protection/spin thing again. Yes, I'm talking about INTJs as a generality, whether meat or cyberspace.

If it's spin and ego-protection, then you already know the truth, and don't need to hear it from me.

 

[highlander]

And back we go to where INTJs are 'right' which includes no attachment to reality, sets up the premise that there's only one way to handle situations which sources from the need for INTJs to ego-protect at any cost.
Spin, spin, spin.

To use Freud's psychoanalytical triangle, INTJs have overdeveloped superegos and subsequently have underdeveloped IDs and balancing egos.

The more INTJs mature, the more they realise that they have to live life, rather than allow fear of everything to stop them from doing so. Once again, risk/return calculation.

Don't get me wrong. On average, I find INTJs to be an intelligent and interesting bunch. But what grates like dental planing is their need to always spin things in favour of ego protection and inflation.

I don't disagree with any of this but will pose another consideration. When reality intrudes on ultimate solutions, can INTJs perceive the need to act? In your example, it would only be logical to put out the fires first, then work on prevention so that the home built isn't razed to the ground. INTJs tend to disregard fires and present future phoenix rising, idealistic solutions. There's no balance and no alignment with reality.

Refer to my above context shift which includes key data to action model that INTJs tend to disregard.

I'm actually really good when the shit hits the fan, so what you're describing about getting locked into theory or idealism isn't right. We are above all, practical. It's all about the results and not process. There is a bias towards achieving long term results than short term results but that doesn't mean we ignore them because poor short term results can unwind the long term results that we crave.

As far as the superego thing, the ego protection and inflation - I am not understanding what you mean. Here are some definitions I found on Wikipedia. What is it specifically about INTJs that relate to these things?

Ego: Originally, Freud used the word ego to mean a sense of self, but later revised it to mean a set of psychic functions such as judgment, tolerance, reality testing, control, planning, defense, synthesis of information, intellectual functioning, and memory. The ego separates out what is real. It helps us to organize our thoughts and make sense of them and the world around us.

Superego: The superego reflects the internalization of cultural rules, mainly taught by parents applying their guidance and influence. Freud's theory implies that the super-ego is a symbolic internalisation of the father figure and cultural regulations. The super-ego tends to stand in opposition to the desires of the id because of their conflicting objectives, and its aggressiveness towards the ego. The super-ego acts as the conscience, maintaining our sense of morality and proscription from taboos.

Id: The id is the disorganized part of the personality structure that contains a human's basic, instinctual drives. Id is the only component of personality that is present from birth. The id is the part of the mind containing the drives present at birth; it is the source of our bodily needs, wants, desires, and impulses, particularly our sexual and aggressive drives. The id operates according to the pleasure principle, the psychic force that motivates the tendency to seek immediate gratification of any impulse. The id contains the libido, which is the primary source of instinctual force that is unresponsive to the demands of reality. The id acts according to the "pleasure principle", seeking to avoid pain or unpleasure (not 'displeasure') aroused by increases in instinctual tension.

 

[Tiltyred]

I love INTJs.
That is all.

 

[rav3n]

If it's spin and ego-protection, then you already know the truth, and don't need to hear it from me.

And out comes the dreaded Fi attack.

 

[rav3n]

I'm actually really good when the shit hits the fan, so what you're describing about getting locked into theory or idealism isn't right. We are above all, practical. It's all about the results and not process. There is a bias towards achieving long term results than short term results but that doesn't mean we ignore them because poor short term results can unwind the long term results that we crave.

You're not a good example of the average INTJ. You've got well developed Fi and are developing Se.

As far as the superego thing, the ego protection and inflation - I am not understanding what you mean. Here are some definitions I found on Wikipedia. What is it specifically about INTJs that relate to these things?

Ego: Originally, Freud used the word ego to mean a sense of self, but later revised it to mean a set of psychic functions such as judgment, tolerance, reality testing, control, planning, defense, synthesis of information, intellectual functioning, and memory. The ego separates out what is real. It helps us to organize our thoughts and make sense of them and the world around us.

Superego: The superego reflects the internalization of cultural rules, mainly taught by parents applying their guidance and influence. Freud's theory implies that the super-ego is a symbolic internalisation of the father figure and cultural regulations. The super-ego tends to stand in opposition to the desires of the id because of their conflicting objectives, and its aggressiveness towards the ego. The super-ego acts as the conscience, maintaining our sense of morality and proscription from taboos.

Id: The id is the disorganized part of the personality structure that contains a human's basic, instinctual drives. Id is the only component of personality that is present from birth. The id is the part of the mind containing the drives present at birth; it is the source of our bodily needs, wants, desires, and impulses, particularly our sexual and aggressive drives. The id operates according to the pleasure principle, the psychic force that motivates the tendency to seek immediate gratification of any impulse. The id contains the libido, which is the primary source of instinctual force that is unresponsive to the demands of reality. The id acts according to the "pleasure principle", seeking to avoid pain or unpleasure (not 'displeasure') aroused by increases in instinctual tension.

In the first and third quotes, ego was used in vernacular terms. In the second quote, I used Freudian terms.

 

[SensEye]

If you're running into INTJs that are standing around saying, "I told you so," and not helping with putting out the fire, might I respectfully submit that maybe they aren't INTJs, but perhaps INTPs?

Amen. INTP's are more "big picture" oriented, and a healthy round of "I told you so" is more of a long term strategic move (in addition to being emotionally satisfying). Getting busy with fixing the problem is a tactical approach and as such more likely to be favored by an INTJ.

 

[RaptorWizard]

Are you talking about INTJs, or do you actually have a few real life people in mind? Also don't discount the possibility that such INTJs you might be dealing with are simply bored and saying things just to annoy you. Particularly on forums, there are those INTJs that are fairly laid back, and others which like to say things in such a way as to start fights and see what happens.


Of course, if there is a fire, you put it out. The INTJ gets upset when he points out the faulty electrical wiring that isn't up to code, and everyone else is like, "So? That's the way it has always been."

If you're running into INTJs that are standing around saying, "I told you so," and not helping with putting out the fire, might I respectfully submit that maybe they aren't INTJs, but perhaps INTPs?

Your fire prevention example was very interesting. Hey, if you can solve the problem before it exists, then its negative effects don't happen, or at least with less force and frequency.

Perhaps the same phenomenon can be observed in the news. When alarming disasters happen, everyone loses their minds, and they focus way too much on the event rather than on countering what causes them. If the problem is largely psychological for instance, then maybe we should direct more concentration towards helping the mentally deranged to refine their worldviews, and not just ignore them until they blow something up.

But I'm not sure why INTJs would be the only people in all of the 16 types that think about these things. Maybe more of them do so, and with better ability, but that doesn't mean there aren't other types that could achieve the same with greater effort, INTPs or anyone else!

 

[Concur_Withall]

INTJs are very independent people, they don't really look for the approval of others.

If you're not out to get something, you may not get it, but nor will you care.

 

[uumlau]

But I'm not sure why INTJs would be the only people in all of the 16 types that think about these things. Maybe more of them do so, and with better ability, but that doesn't mean there aren't other types that could achieve the same with greater effort, INTPs or anyone else!

Actually, Z Buck (INFJ) quoted one of my statements in this thread over in her blog, pointing out several similarities with how she perceived the world, so it is perhaps more of an "Ni" thing than an "INTJ" thing. The main difference is that INFJs tend to be much better than INTJs at fitting in socially in spite of sharing that worldview.

INTPs are also quite good at spotting things that others don't see, but 1) it's a different set of things, and 2) if Ti sees it, then it can (eventually) be stated in a concrete, logical way. What Ni sees is neither concrete, nor logical, but might be regarded as "connections" or perhaps "cause and effect".

When others demand that Ni "prove it", the Ni dom points at the world, makes a prediction, and it happens, and then those others say, "Well, you were right, but that was just luck. You didn't prove anything." After enough interactions like that, we just shut up and do things our own way, and limit what we say to what other people will believe, as it is pointless to explain "why" to people who simply don't SEE the things that you're watching. It's how oracles and prophets get their reputations. There's no magic, here, though - just a different and rare way of looking at the world.

One of the things I like about physics and the hard sciences is that the laws of physics are very much like the principles that Ni sees in other areas of life. We can never actually "prove" that the laws of physics are true, and we can't know why they work the way they do, BUT we can systematically demonstrate that the laws of physics are accurate, and it isn't simply a matter of "luck" that they make correct predictions within whatever margin of error. Now, imagine being able to see these kinds of laws in operation in other areas of human interest, whether in the workplace, between people, or perhaps on the larger scale, in politics, in economics. These things are often too intangible to even begin to write formulas to prove, and even when they are that tangible, they're often too complex to include all of the variables and factors needed to analyze in a systematic way.

An example of such a law? Consider the law of supply and demand in economics. It's a really basic law, even obvious if you think about it. Yet many politicians and rulers continue to make decisions as if the law of supply and demand did not exist. Why? Because it really cannot be proven. Even if you do an experiment that shows that it is true, not all supply and demand curves are the same, and thus we can never rule out the possibility that in some cases, the curve is flat, with supply and demand having no effect on price at all. The ruler believes that one can simply rule that the price will be constant, regardless of supply or demand, the side effect being that with the price constant, it is supply and demand that change instead of price.

 

[Jaguar]

Your fire prevention example was very interesting.
But I'm not sure why INTJs would be the only people in all of the 16 types that think about these things.

They're not.

Next thing you know, someone will tell you only INTJs go to Star Trek conventions.

 

[RaptorWizard]

Actually, Z Buck (INFJ) quoted one of my statements in this thread over in her blog, pointing out several similarities with how she perceived the world, so it is perhaps more of an "Ni" thing than an "INTJ" thing. The main difference is that INFJs tend to be much better than INTJs at fitting in socially in spite of sharing that worldview.

Ha, I didn't know that person's a girl. Some intuition I have! NFs by the way are tough for me to relate with, putting everything at the personal level rather than the rational. But now onto your points below...

INTPs are also quite good at spotting things that others don't see, but 1) it's a different set of things, and 2) if Ti sees it, then it can (eventually) be stated in a concrete, logical way. What Ni sees is neither concrete, nor logical, but might be regarded as "connections" or perhaps "cause and effect".

Okay, so Ti is perhaps more about making sense of things, and Ni more about having a sense of things?

When others demand that Ni "prove it", the Ni dom points at the world, makes a prediction, and it happens, and then those others say, "Well, you were right, but that was just luck. You didn't prove anything." After enough interactions like that, we just shut up and do things our own way, and limit what we say to what other people will believe, as it is pointless to explain "why" to people who simply don't SEE the things that you're watching. It's how oracles and prophets get their reputations. There's no magic, here, though - just a different and rare way of looking at the world.

Yes, the incredible insights into things like the future and the world at large a few people in the Ni-dom category seem to have is just like way too ahead of the time or crazy for many with closed-minds to consider. I'm not saying I can do that stuff well, but I like to consider all of the various possibilities, including the predictions of alien Ni-doms. It's not logical in my opinion to discount something just because I don't understand what it's about. Other people though who believe that the entire world revolves around their own heads may think differently.

One of the things I like about physics and the hard sciences is that the laws of physics are very much like the principles that Ni sees in other areas of life. We can never actually "prove" that the laws of physics are true, and we can't know why they work the way they do, BUT we can systematically demonstrate that the laws of physics are accurate, and it isn't simply a matter of "luck" that they make correct predictions within whatever margin of error. Now, imagine being able to see these kinds of laws in operation in other areas of human interest, whether in the workplace, between people, or perhaps on the larger scale, in politics, in economics. These things are often too intangible to even begin to write formulas to prove, and even when they are that tangible, they're often too complex to include all of the variables and factors needed to analyze in a systematic way.

Laws I think operate around the idea that what happened in the past under a certain set of contextual conditions will also hold true in the future. But what if the context "changes"? Then the old laws aren't useful anymore. For something like physics, at the mundane levels at least, it's pretty certain that its laws are fixed. Under more esoteric systems however, or even in real-life "games", I think that the laws often aren't quite so certain, and even if they do remain stable, their effects may still come down to chance "dice-rolls".

An example of such a law? Consider the law of supply and demand in economics. It's a really basic law, even obvious if you think about it. Yet many politicians and rulers continue to make decisions as if the law of supply and demand did not exist. Why? Because it really cannot be proven. Even if you do an experiment that shows that it is true, not all supply and demand curves are the same, and thus we can never rule out the possibility that in some cases, the curve is flat, with supply and demand having no effect on price at all. The ruler believes that one can simply rule that the price will be constant, regardless of supply or demand, the side effect being that with the price constant, it is supply and demand that change instead of price.

I'm not familiar with economic systems, but it would make more sense it seems if the people in charge listen to people underneath them who may be more expert than they are in certain areas.

 

[rav3n]

INTJs are very independent people, they don't really look for the approval of others.

If you're not out to get something, you may not get it, but nor will you care.

That's not true. Many care a lot about approval and will even preemptively reject, if they sense any form of disapproval.

 

[highlander]

Next thing you know, someone will tell you only INTJs go to Star Trek conventions.

Those are INTPs

 

[Z Buck McFate]

I am finding this thread interesting enough to follow, and I think there are even some answers here about what makes INFJs unlikeable as well. For example (my own amendments are in blue):

Because of Te.

You state things in an objective, detached and unmovable way. And in the proccess you come off rigid. allknowing, arrogant and narrowminded. Just like Fe for that matter. You do not seem open to discussing alternatives though youre likely more up for it after having thought about it than a Ti Fi user would be. There is a certain 'this is the way things are ' which is amplified times ten by your succinctness and lack of focus on the social realm - in other words, your focus is on the situation youre discussing and not on the communication youre autopiloting, leaving the other person feeling like an ant encountering a boot you're not listening. More over, Ni isnt exactly something most people have access to AND it makes you guys SUCK at both realising youre not providing the other person with enough information to verifiy the conclusion understand the reasoning behind the conclusion as well as suck at elaborating being able to elaborate when specifically asked.

I was amused earlier to read uumlau’s fire prevention analogy because I’ve used that exact analogy before to describe how aggravating it can be to deal with my ISTP sister and INTP dad. It’s aggravating to be treated like Cassandra- so my default (around people who react that way) is basically the equivalent of covertly carrying a fire extinguisher around and putting out smaller fires without telling people. [uumlau's "invisible" description resonated a lot with me, for this reason- a lot of stuff I do is indeed 'invisible' to most people.]

So yeah, a lot of what's getting discussed in this thread is, I think, the Ni.

 

[Qre:us]

They can be cantankerous doofs. Who are hilariously odd. Dry wit ( sarcasm) = where they are exasperatingly laughing at you (but if they like you, they're secretly amused by you but will refuse to admit it to you). Have the most, off-the-wall, ideas and not even get why I am blinking at them owlishly when hearing the "plans". Can be a paranoid android. E.g., selling the house, suspicious that the agent is not up to par / doing a good job, just feeding him lines of why house not sold....so, obviously, the plan is to hide out in the crawl space inside of the house to eavesdrop the next time the agent brings a client to the house. Wanted my help in testing out the audio from the crawlspace. I remember one of my eyebrows froze in a lifted position for a good 5 mins, after hearing that. To this day, I don't know if he was half serious or completely so.

Have lists like, "5 things I hate about Humans" and asks you what you would add to the list. When you are stumped by it, and turn it around, to create a "5 things I love about humans" and ask him to contribute to the list, his eyebrows look like two caterpillars having hate sex on his forehead, in response.

Fun times. My favourite playmate. And my favourite phrase to hear, "you're annoying me now" LOL

Grumpy goofs.

 

[Jaguar]

his eyebrows look like two caterpillars having hate sex on his forehead

Great line.

 

[digesthisickness]

Holy god, I'd have been all over that crawlspace plan. LET'S HOOK IT UP NOW! Catch that bastard in the act of incompetency. "Hey, let's record it, so he can't deny it later!"

Sorry. I actually like INTJs.

 

[Qre:us]

Great line.

I think I said that out loud to him at the time, which made his eyebrows do more amusing things. hehehe

(picture [MENTION=8936]highlander[/MENTION] 's avatar's eyebrows being silly)

Holy god, I'd have been all over that crawlspace plan. LET'S HOOK IT UP NOW! Catch that bastard in the act of incompetency. "Hey, let's record it, so he can't deny it later!"

Sorry. I actually like INTJs.

Me too, but as with other types, really does depend on the individual.

I think I suggested a less weird option - like tape-recorders. I can write a book (which would be HIGHLY amusing) of all the plans he has come up with, to date. Some, I do indulge because they're hilarious and fun. There was another one, regarding a groundhog who was tearing up holes all over his garden, and he did a whole experiment, to find out which junk food the groundhog preferred (cheetos), and then, decided to lay out a trap for it, baiting it with cheetos. He's an engineer, so he drew up a whole design of how the trap would look/work. YAY, to putting that masters degree to good use! He has a "NO (animal) KILL" policy, so his plans also included taking the captured groundhog and freeing it in the woods. Transportation: in his car. Of course, I am always voluntold to be part of these plans. I don't even........

Between us two, life is seldom boring.

He also has OCD tendencies which I have fun fucking around with.

****

Okay, this is really not addressing the OP's question, so here goes (overlaps with other types too):

- can become very tunnel vision, and see things as black and white
- can seem decisive/immovable, which can appear rigid
- can be argumentative/agressive when challenging another if their reasoning basically boils down to "social convention"/"because this is socially acceptable"/it just is
(E.g., two friends of mine, both do not drink, one (ENTJ) said that it's because she doesn't like to feel out of control, or partake in anything that alters her mind/cognitive functions. He respected that, and understood the logic. Another, ISTJ, female, Indian, whose reasoning was that it's not looked upon, highly, that women engage in this behaviour, and that her parents wouldn't approve. Aw shit. He went for the jugular with that. No amount of kicking his foot under the table, squeezing his thigh, would make him stop. He kept challenging and questioning her, in a very condescending manner)
- can be tactless, condescending, arrogant
- can get unreasonably emotional in the most unexpected of ways, and maybe it's unexpected because the default is always a rational, cool, stoic front. So, when a value is compromised, or they feel they're unfairly treated, their "logic" takes a weird turn.

 

[digesthisickness]

Me too, but as with other types, really does depend on the individual.

Isn't that the truth.

I think I suggested a less weird option - like tape-recorders. I can write a book (which would be HIGHLY amusing) of all the plans he has come up with, to date. Some, I do indulge because they're hilarious and fun. There was another one, regarding a groundhog who was tearing up holes all over his garden, and he did a whole experiment, to find out which junk food the groundhog preferred (cheetos), and then, decided to lay out a trap for it, baiting it with cheetos. He's an engineer, so he drew up a whole design of how the trap would look/work. YAY, to putting that masters degree to good use! He has a "NO (animal) KILL" policy, so his plans also included taking the captured groundhog and freeing it in the woods. Transportation: in his car. Of course, I am always voluntold to be part of these plans. I don't even........

Between us two, life is seldom boring.

He also has OCD tendencies which I have fun fucking around with.

He sounds so fun! You both do. I can see why you enjoy yourself. Especially, the bolded.