[INTJ] Common INTJ Issues

[Coriolis]

I thought all INTP's have Fe.
Hmm...I didn't think inferiors were watered down. I thought that they were kinda the negative side of people...and I also thought that they were the exact opposite of watered down.

INTPs have/use Fe; some better than others. Inferior functions are not so much watered down as outside conscious control. It will affect us whether we like it or not. We can crowd it out through reliance on our dom/aux, but sometimes that just causes it to erupt in inopportune ways. As Zarathustra mentioned, we can learn to become more aware of it, which is at least half the battle in bringing it under our conscious control. For example, as an INTJ my inferior is Se, but as a scientist I would be fairly useless if I could not make consistent and reliable measurements of concrete observables in the real world. We will always be better at our dominant and aux, but can learn to use the others, much as we use our non-preferred hand to good effect.

That it wasnt the traditional kind but the INTP kind was in fact was implied. My (Te?)bad, I guess. While INTP protocol is the very watered down version of an Fe-doms protocol, to an INTJ (and guys, correct me if Im wrong here) and for that matter to me (and I wager other Fi-users) it is still a social protocol. And feels rather alien to us. Considering that INTJs supposedly have an Fe-blindspot, that protocol held up by SiFe which not only is the watered down version, but also shows none of the skill level of an Fe-dom, lets be honest here (meaning less patience and more visceral reactions on the few things they do want their crude protocol on, ime), that thing is going to cause a never ending streak of misunderstandings and irritation, unless both parties give each other a little leeway and the benefit of the doubt, from what Ive seen.

There is a great example of this, which I didn't identify as such until someone pointed it out (Uumlau? Z??). This is professional courtesies. There is a whole host of unwritten protocols on who should be listed as an author on a paper, who can be simply acknowledged in the text, what order the author names go in, whether someone merits an invited talk or not, etc. These protocols are based as much on custom as on any objective criteria. The INTP researchers I know apply them automatically, and are taken aback when someone "breaks the rules". The INTJ colleagues are more likely not to bother with it, to leave someone out, or to object outright when someone is included by protocol when their contribution was minimal.

Conversations can go like this:

INTJ: (Shares paper draft with colleagues, listing no authors; after all, it's only a draft, circulated to get comments on the content.)

INTP: Who are you listing as authors?

INTJ: The two of us and Jackson.

INTP: You need to include Dalton as well - he did the modelling.

INTJ: He published that already, and I've included a reference to his paper.

INTP: But we discussed it with him as it applies to our experiment. That went beyond his paper.

INTJ: OK, we can list him in an acknowledgment.

INTP: (is left thinking INTJ is stubborn and greedy with credit)

INTJ: (is left thinking INTP wants to list everyone including the janitor on the paper)

 

[Zarathustra]

Just because I can recognise it when I see it doesn't mean I use it.
If I did, I wouldn't still be derailing, now would I?

*chortle*

But since I'm apparently your favourite topic of discussion, I'll humour you.

Your delusions are sexy.

Regardless (and this is where you were wrong above), it's still a manifestation of Fe, it's just a perverted manifestation.

How can I be wrong if that's EXACTLY what I wrote?

Because that's not EXACTLY what you wrote.

What you wrote was:

This is a perversion of extroverted feeling, not a manifestation of it. [emphasis added]

The point of my statement was to redress your counterfactual claim that a perversion of extroverted feeling is not a manifestation of it.

Amargith's understanding was wrong, in a critical way, in a way most people on this board get the inferior function wrong. I simply corrected it.

Not really.

She was pointing to the right thing; you're just being a nitpicky Ti user with shitty Fe.

I don't remember your PM. I expect it was a case of tl;dr.

Yes, your response was unimpressive.

Now, we can go back to analysing what's wrong with you guys.

Proceed.

Oh, but one piece of advice: you might want to try addressing what's actually wrong with us, not just how you prefer things a certain way, and how you don't like how INTJs prefer them another way (not that everything you said fell in this box, but most of it did).

....actually my analysis was right, but not worded in a way which sounds 'right' to Ti-users, I suspect.

I'm sure some would have been more willing to accept it/let it slide than others.

As Z is a Te-user, he might be a) having the same issue and b) getting what I was getting at, I think.

Oh, I understand just what's going on, both on your side, and on hers.

Fortunately, I don't possess the Ti-reet gene, so it's not a problem from my side.

(Note: not all Ti users possess the Ti-reet gene; it's just unfortunate having to deal with those that do.)

 

[Salomé]

....actually my analysis was right, but not worded in a way which sounds 'right' to Ti-users, I suspect. As Z is a Te-user, he might be a) having the same issue and b) getting what I was getting at, I think.

No, it wasn't. Although you are starting to sound like Z.
Excuse me if I continue to delude myself that I know my own type better than either of you.
Most INTPs have better developed Fi than Fe, because Fi is not their inferior function. This is where you guys get your orders all mixed up.

The INTP researchers I know apply them automatically, and are taken aback when someone "breaks the rules". The INTJ colleagues are more likely not to bother with it, to leave someone out, or to object outright when someone is included by protocol when their contribution was minimal.

This just sounds like classic INTJ arrogance / INTP humility, to moi. *eats apple*

INTP: (is left thinking INTJ is stubborn and greedy with credit)

S/he's probably right.

Oh, and one piece of advice: you might want to try addressing what's actually wrong with us

I'll leave that for others to figure out...

 

[Zarathustra]

Well, at least your motives are clear.

 

[Amargith]

No, it wasn't. Although you are starting to sound like Z.
Excuse me if I continue to delude myself that I know my own type better than either of you.
Most INTPs have better developed Fi than Fe, because Fi is not their inferior function. This is where you guys get your orders all mixed up.

This just sounds like classic INTJ arrogance / INTP humility, to moi. *eats apple*

S/he's probably right.

Why, coz I won't budge on this? You may know INTPs more..intimately, being one, but surely you too know that when you are that close to something, there are sides you will be blind to? Things that feel so natural and so...obvious to you that it is hard to imagine that someone else wouldnt experience them as such? The humility thing is a good example of that. It isn't something an INTJ even contemplates..not coz he is purposefully negligent but coz it just doesn't...occur to him to actually pay attention to something like that as it is the paper itself that matters to them. Te vs Fe. Credit is a form of currency that INTJs have to *learn* to appreciate.

The fact that you automatically assume that that arrogance makes them refuse to give (social) credit instead of just not recognising the value of it and attach humility to INTPs (even if in jest) is, believe it or not, a display of Fe, as credit, humility, and for that matter things like blame are group concepts. Those words are to be viewed in relation to other people. Since INTJs tend to be really self-reliant and not exactly focused on relationships with others, they tend to not care about those concepts. The whole group dynamic is often a mystery to them, until it gets in their way and they sit down to actually work out why it is getting in their way. (social) Credit tends to be based on actual size and relevance of the contribution, not the social value that since someone worked on something they should be mentioned as a professional courtesy. INTPs tend to know this, even if they do not necessarily agree with or work within that dynamic.


NTPs for that matter tend to be quite good at gauging who is gaining what from the social system and often deduct other peoples motivations from how they move within that social system, which perks they gain, which draw backs certain social behaviours within a group will have. And what power can be gained through it. And one of the major problems is that their conclusions as to the motives of Fe-users may be quite good as they too use that social system, but are often way off with Fi-users who do not pay attention to group dynamics usually, to get their way (though with time, we can sort of see the pattern and game the system, it still feels artificial in a way).

And yes, you yourself occasionally do observe these things about others. Who gains power through playing the social system. It is rare to hear INTJs comment on such things though.

 

[Coriolis]

This just sounds like classic INTJ arrogance / INTP humility, to moi. *eats apple*

S/he's probably right.

I won't claim never to come across as arrogant, but I and most of my INTJ colleagues are very good about giving credit where it is due. The highlighted is critical. Someone must meet a certain threshold of contribution to be an author on a paper. We will similarly refuse to allow others to list us as authors if we have not reached that threshold. This is just quality control, or even professional integrity. (A recent physics journal described the phenomenon of author creep, in terms of average number of authors per publication, a value that has increased significantly over the past century.)

 

[Salomé]

I won't claim never to come across as arrogant, but I and most of my INTJ colleagues are very good about giving credit where it is due. The highlighted is critical. Someone must meet a certain threshold of contribution to be an author on a paper. We will similarly refuse to allow others to list us as authors if we have not reached that threshold. This is just quality control, or even professional integrity. (A recent physics journal described the phenomenon of author creep, in terms of average number of authors per publication, a value that has increased significantly over the past century.)

My, my. Anyone would think you were obsessed with protocol.

 

[RaptorWizard]

I don't get what this means though I will guess it means the only thing INTJs have to be afraid of is losing their power.

 

[Coriolis]

Why, coz I won't budge on this? You may know INTPs more..intimately, being one, but surely you too know that when you are that close to something, there are sides you will be blind to? Things that feel so natural and so...obvious to you that it is hard to imagine that someone else wouldnt experience them as such? The humility thing is a good example of that. It isn't something an INTJ even contemplates..not coz he is purposefully negligent but coz it just doesn't...occur to him to actually pay attention to something like that as it is the paper itself that matters to them. Te vs Fe. Credit is a form of currency that INTJs have to *learn* to appreciate.

The fact that you automatically assume that that arrogance makes them refuse to give (social) credit instead of just not recognising the value of it and attach humility to INTPs (even if in jest) is, believe it or not, a display of Fe, as credit, humility, and for that matter things like blame are group concepts. Those words are to be viewed in relation to other people. Since INTJs tend to be really self-reliant and not exactly focused on relationships with others, they tend to not care about those concepts. The whole group dynamic is often a mystery to them, until it gets in their way and they sit down to actually work out why it is getting in their way. (social) Credit tends to be based on actual size and relevance of the contribution, not the social value that since someone worked on something they should be mentioned as a professional courtesy. INTPs tend to know this, even if they do not necessarily agree with or work within that dynamic

As usual, Amargith gets it. Our focus is elsewhere, on the objective content of the work. I've had arguments about credit and "naming rights" with people when a project is barely off the ground. I've had to shut them down by saying: let's just get the work done. I don't really care who gets credit. We'll sort it out later when we have actual results. Humility seems a pointless concept. I prefer accuracy and necessity. Either you can do what you claim, or you cannot. Either there is a need for you to mention what you can do, or there isn't.

As for blind spots, I was thinking the same thing myself. I understand that others might see some things about me more clearly than I do, and try to use whatever feedback I get to peer into these areas. Threads like this can be helpful if the comments are honest and accurate. (Sorry if that falls short of the standard for INTJ arrogance, but ignorance will not help us on our path to perfection.)

My, my. Anyone would think you were obsessed with protocol.

Quite. When it is necessary. E.g. there are protocols for starting up and shutting down equipment which, if not closely followed, can result in equipment breakage or personal injury.

 

[Evo]

INTPs have/use Fe; some better than others. Inferior functions are not so much watered down as outside conscious control. It will affect us whether we like it or not. We can crowd it out through reliance on our dom/aux, but sometimes that just causes it to erupt in inopportune ways. As Zarathustra mentioned, we can learn to become more aware of it, which is at least half the battle in bringing it under our conscious control. For example, as an INTJ my inferior is Se, but as a scientist I would be fairly useless if I could not make consistent and reliable measurements of concrete observables in the real world. We will always be better at our dominant and aux, but can learn to use the others, much as we use our non-preferred hand to good effect.


There is a great example of this, which I didn't identify as such until someone pointed it out (Uumlau? Z??). This is professional courtesies. There is a whole host of unwritten protocols on who should be listed as an author on a paper, who can be simply acknowledged in the text, what order the author names go in, whether someone merits an invited talk or not, etc. These protocols are based as much on custom as on any objective criteria. The INTP researchers I know apply them automatically, and are taken aback when someone "breaks the rules". The INTJ colleagues are more likely not to bother with it, to leave someone out, or to object outright when someone is included by protocol when their contribution was minimal.

Conversations can go like this:

INTJ: (Shares paper draft with colleagues, listing no authors; after all, it's only a draft, circulated to get comments on the content.)

INTP: Who are you listing as authors?

INTJ: The two of us and Jackson.

INTP: You need to include Dalton as well - he did the modelling.

INTJ: He published that already, and I've included a reference to his paper.

INTP: But we discussed it with him as it applies to our experiment. That went beyond his paper.

INTJ: OK, we can list him in an acknowledgment.

INTP: (is left thinking INTJ is stubborn and greedy with credit)

INTJ: (is left thinking INTP wants to list everyone including the janitor on the paper)

Yea I pretty much know what the inferiors do I was just giving the bottom line of: we have unconcious behaviors, even thoughts, some are good, some are bad, and I was just saying people know them best as negatives about others or themselves because that's how they usully manifest. But you defined it nicely thanks!

I understand what [MENTION=5494]Amargith[/MENTION] meant now, I just didn't know that's what she meant watered down was. I thought watered down translated to: like a drink, you get a glass of cola watered down and you only taste a hint of the cola...meaning peoples' inferior would not be the extreme of the unconcious and uncontrolled coming out. But I agree with her now that I know what she meant .


In regards to this convo. All details, and crap that is nit picked, stops when you know what the INTJ's intentions are (which is in the first damn sentence) IT'S A DRAFT...it's not perfect. At this stage in the game there is no need for details that are OBVIOUS. Of course you have to give credit. Why is the INTP automatically thinking that the INTJ has bad intentions. Just like some people on here don't even give others a chance, they start out with thinking "this person's probably stupid, I'm going to skim over what they say and take it literally and they now have to prove thier intellegence" That to me is crazy. The INTJ obviously knows they have to give credit...Unless you(said INTP) know that they never went to school and you had the very same interaction before with that same INTJ and they forgot to credit people, Only then can you start assuming they either have bad intentions(defined as: taking all the credit, <---I can't assume people know that's what I mean) or they just don't know enough about writing to know they have to list references and credit.

Does this happen irl? I would be really annoyed at that person for that. Do you have a bad history or something? I see that as a huge problem.

 

[Kalach]

The impulse is much stronger in (unbalanced/young) male INTJs, anyway, as I have already said. Sexuality is a recurring problem for them. They like to think they are 'above' the baser instincts that drive the seething masses, (how many INTJs males claim to be asexual?) but find that they are not, and this is a source of great frustration, because it's the one area where their drive for self-sufficiency and mastery is completely thwarted. They can't command their environment to meet their needs and tend to lack the charm or humility to seduce, so they do the sour- grapes thing ("didn't want it anyway"/"I'm a pervert"), and the repressed drive is distorted into something darkly hostile and profane. It's the flip side of sublimation. Or the slightly better adjusted ones resort to something like PUA - they are seduced by the idea that they can gain mastery of this unfathomable realm through "knowledge" and strategy - which is simply slipping back into their comfort zone. Which of course, leads to failure and more frustration.

PROTOCOL!

All the above is true, allowing a little for values embellishment, but that there is some embellishment via value judgment indicates there's a protocol. In particular as summed up in darkly hostile and profane. The hostility is there, definitely. But I believe it to be pricked quite easily. I don't know for sure, but the negativity that goes with sexuality is about as stubborn as a a balloon. It pops the same way all anger does when confronted with opportunity to be expressed. The live situation changes it. There may be some persistent negativity that stays around warping expression, but I'll go ahead and imagine it is less common than simple urgency.

Compare and contrast the protocols of a place like INTJforum, with INTPCentral...

One uses exaggerated authority the other uses perverted feeling?

 

[Evo]

For example, as an INTJ my inferior is Se, but as a scientist I would be fairly useless if I could not make consistent and reliable measurements of concrete observables in the real world. We will always be better at our dominant and aux, but can learn to use the others, much as we use our non-preferred hand to good effect.

Can you give an example of INTJ's inferior manifesting? I can't even remember seeing this in INFJ's actually. What happens?

 

[Poki]

The INTJ colleagues are more likely not to bother with it, to leave someone out, or to object outright when someone is included by protocol when their contribution was minimal.

LMAO at the bolded. I dont know nor do I care....BUT..."he" sure the hell is not getting credit.

The only time I personally care whether credit is given or not is if someone directly gives me credit for someone elses work. I dont like that and will make sure the person who deserves the credit gets it. The only time an INTJ cares about credit is when its given to someone else and he doesnt think its deserved. The only time an INTP cares about credit is when its just one of those rules that people follow(I really have no clue about this one, I am sure INTJs will agree as I have done nothing but restate what has been stated by them.)


Also, its funny when other people think they know what another is thinking, thats "projection" to the extreme and usually involves the "inverse" as if everything is black and white.

 

[Poki]

Since INTJs tend to be really self-reliant and not exactly focused on relationships with others, they tend to not care about those concepts. The whole group dynamic is often a mystery to them, until it gets in their way and they sit down to actually work out why it is getting in their way.

I always get a kick out of people saying that INTJs dont understand group dynamics. What you said puts an INTJ a step ahead of an inferior Fe when it comes to actually interacting with group dynamics INTJs understand group dynamics as long as the group is similiar to themselves. Everything else is just stupid...though the will learn to deal with stupidity...LMAO (this is part of dealing with group dynamics outside of there own)

 

[Salomé]

Why, coz I won't budge on this? You may know INTPs more..intimately, being one, but surely you too know that when you are that close to something, there are sides you will be blind to?

I'm not blind to them. I went ahead and pointed them all out for you. You even agreed. You're just being foolishly stubborn. And what I'm doing isn't nit-picking. It's highlighting a fundamental misunderstanding. Inferior Fe is not Fe. That's like saying a thing and its opposite are the same. They are not. 1 and -1 are not equivalent. Conscious is not Unconscious. Light is not shadow. Cold is not Hot. Love is not Hate. These things are related in complex ways. But they are not the same. Right is not wrong. Either I'm right or you're right. We can't both be right, we are saying fundamentally different things. If you still can't see that I don't know what to tell you. I only know that my understanding is closer to Jung's meaning of "inferior".

That said, I've already mentioned that I think the whole thing is speculative bullshit. But if you're going to spout bullshit, do please try to get it right. Do please try to make some kind of sense.

The humility thing is a good example of that. It isn't something an INTJ even contemplates..not coz he is purposefully negligent but coz it just doesn't...occur to him to actually pay attention to something like that as it is the paper itself that matters to them. Te vs Fe. Credit is a form of currency that INTJs have to *learn* to appreciate.

FFS, I wasn't being serious! I suck at professional courtesies and protocols. I never do anything the same way twice. I never, ever follow templates, I get into trouble for this stuff often. If it's something Coriolis' "INTPs" obsess over, it's probably BECAUSE they lack confidence in understanding the "unwritten rules" and so they try to make them explicit, to figure out their internal logic (assuming there is one, which is the assumption Ti always makes) and if you violate that logic, Ti will notice and will get disturbed, because it thinks it understood the game and you just went ahead and changed the rules. To think the INTP cares about protocol, for protocol's sake is to superficially misread the situation.
Probably. I don't really care. We're all different.

However, it's clear that Coriolis perceives some kind of value in being listed on a paper. Some kind of political capital. INTJs are much more interested in power play. INTPs generally don't care about that kind of maneuvering and pettiness. We're not gonna get our panties bunched up because "x's contribution was minimal". It's more binary to us, because we actually CARE LESS. This should be blindingly obvious to anyone reading the anecdote. I let people steal credit for my ideas sometimes, just because I only really care about the idea. I don't care for accolades.

NTPs for that matter tend to be quite good at gauging who is gaining what from the social system and often deduct other peoples motivations from how they move within that social system, which perks they gain, which draw backs certain social behaviours within a group will have. And what power can be gained through it. And one of the major problems is that their conclusions as to the motives of Fe-users may be quite good as they too use that social system, but are often way off with Fi-users who do not pay attention to group dynamics usually, to get their way (though with time, we can sort of see the pattern and game the system, it still feels artificial in a way).

Wrong. Doesn't apply to INTPs. We are socially oblivious and we really could care less about politics, unless we have a specific goal in mind - then we will treat it like a game, but we will get bored of it as soon as our ends are achieved.

 

[Kalach]

We are socially oblivious and we really could care less about politics, unless we have a specific goal in mind - then we will treat it like a game, but we will get bored of it as soon as our ends are achieved.

This kind of contradicts what you described earlier of the social fabric over at INTPc. If it is chock full of groupings and and social biases, however inadequate or game-like, then they're politicing. They have factions and cliques and, god bless em, protocols of behavior, however whacked out.

So if, as we do, INTJs have an overweening need to control the environment, INTPs have a need to assign value judgments to people and actions within it. Being uninspired by the inadequacy of this tendency is not a demonstration that it does not exist.

 

[Salomé]

This kind of contradicts what you described earlier of the social fabric over at INTPc. If it is chock full of groupings and and social biases, however inadequate or game-like, then they're politicing. They have factions and cliques and, god bless em, protocols of behavior, however whacked out.

Not really. It's mostly about disrupting the status quo. Then that becomes the new status quo, which must be further disrupted. 90% of the chat is meta - about changing the way shit is done, yet shit never changes. Not because of any attachment to tradition, but because of apathy and a general inability to cooperate towards common goals. Or even to agree what those goals might be.

It's not about gaining any kind of meaningful, exploitable social capital or status. There are those who do attempt this - almost always IxTJs or ENTPs.

So if, as we do, INTJs have an overweening need to control the environment, INTPs have a need to assign value judgments to people and actions within it. Being uninspired by the inadequacy of this tendency is not a demonstration that it does not exist.

Non sequitur.

 

[Poki]

This kind of contradicts what you described earlier of the social fabric over at INTPc. If it is chock full of groupings and and social biases, however inadequate or game-like, then they're politicing. They have factions and cliques and, god bless em, protocols of behavior, however whacked out.

So if, as we do, INTJs have an overweening need to control the environment, INTPs have a need to assign value judgments to people and actions within it. Being uninspired by the inadequacy of this tendency is not a demonstration that it does not exist.

Holy crap I couldnt handle that place. Had nothing to do with cliques, or factions, etc. as I see the same thing here. Its like they dig deeper into theory without connecting it to actual people. Its like a psychologist whos main interest is psychology and not actually helping someone. Of course I spent very little time there as I couldnt handle such a heavy NT presence(from what I hear it is just as much INTJ as INTP).

 

[Kalach]

Not really. It's mostly about disrupting the status quo. Then that becomes the new status quo, which must be further disrupted. 90% of the chat is meta - about changing the way shit is done, yet shit never changes. Not because of any attachment to tradition, but because of apathy and a general inability to cooperate towards common goals. Or even to agree what those goals might be.

Am I wrong in thinking you're sticking in the mud on what constitutes politics? That there's some kind of flow over there (presumably--I wouldn't know) and that allegiances change means there isn't some kind of social order? Or, to put it another way, because they don't stick their protocols sufficiently in the mud themselves, their attachment to social evaluation can't constitute a social order in its own right?

It's not about gaining any kind of meaningful, exploitable social capital or status.

See, now, this kind of suggest you'e being disingenuous. Or that you think "meaningful, exploitable social capital" means "good and worthy social capital". INTPs troll. They position themselves. The whole schtick of skewering social norms and mocking another person's personal ranking is INTP crack.

Fe harmony is not harmonious. It may be eventually if allowed full and adequate reign, but in the meantime a lot of leveling will take place. The FJs do it will aplomb (if they've practiced at all), and the TPs do it with mockery.

Non sequitur.

Only if Jung never said anything about inferior functions.

 

[Kalach]

omg, outcomes?

That INTPs don't do Fe is proven by how they're not interested in outcomes?

OMG

What is it with Fe and people skipping out on being blamed?