Agreed. Bit of Forer effect thrown in for good measure.
Maybe no one else read it all the way through?I noticed.
You're wrong. Reductio ad absurdum, in its original (non-pejorative) sense, is something Ti excels at.
As is recursively reducing something to its essence
E.g. E=mc2
Unless you're suggesting that INTPs don't make good mathematicians/theoretical physicists?
I assumed you didn't know what "redundancy" means. INTPs (or any Ti-Dom)
*hate* to be redundant.
A lot of your post is gobbledygook to me. I assume because you are ESL.
*rollseyes*
More certain than that you are.
Constructing this kind of OP (and cross posting across multiple sites) is a kinda INTJ thing to do.
You are suggesting I am an INTJ or something else entirely? I find that a little funny considering that you don't know me or how I think. Ask @FacelessBeauty or @Brainfreeze_237 what they think of me. People that know me, that is, and are both as knowledgeable as I about the MBTI. Your attitude and anal refusal to even consider possibilities doesn't speak very much for you being Ti dom though (mostly because of your lack of Ne), that I can tell right away. You are not deconstructing anything, you are going back to support your point. Speaks towards introverted perception being your dominant function. You want to prove why you and your position is right and also refer to external references when doing so (Te). If anything, the one who is probably mistyped it's you. It's funny you're the second person to think I must be a sensor type though, considering how poorly developed my Se is and I am seriously supressing Si, even as a tertiary user. Well, I guess I should take it as a positive thing that people think my Si is through the roof? Well, I can assure you it's not.
The one who is falling for typism is definitely not me, that's for sure. I am merely informing others of what I have already gathered knowledge-wise. No one said you have to agree or completely fit into such a mold. Also, you do know that INTPs love sharing the knowledge they've gathered and the systems they've created, right? You don't seem to understand how Te works at all if you think cross-referencing to different sites has anything to do with Te. It does not, since I consider myself the authority on the subject in question.
And you clearly don't understand what Ti redundancy means if you think Ti hates being redundant. So much Fi butthurt in here it hurts me. This article struck your Fi nerve for sure, because it reveals that deep down you may not actually be the type you think you are. Well, deal with it. I have no interest in dealing with butthurt IxTJs. Ti redundancy is when the INTP says something and expects everyone else to understand all the Ne connections the INTP is seeing because expressing all of them is too much to verbalize. You feel overwhelmed because the structure is so complex you can't even begin to express where to actually begin to explain your model to others, so you say something extremely cryptic and hope others will catch up.
Also, I never said that INTPs dislike maths or physics. However, the nature of maths and physics is more of an NiTe thing than an NeTi thing. A well-developed person will however be able to utilize both NiTe and NeTi in whatever profession they choose. For an INTP mathematician, that would first be to use the structure of maths (NiTe) and then apply those structures in more of an NeTi way. Again, your typism isn't pretty.
No, you're the one who seems confused. I was merely referring to the fact that I cannot think like an extrovert does. I was not referring to Te in this case, but merely extroversion in general. All my preferred function combinations tend to point towards introversion: NeTi, NiTe, NeFi, SiTi, FiTi and so forth.
INFJ, please.
After all we're to INFP what INTJ is to INTP.
Often confused with one another, even by ourselves.
As an added bonus INFJ functions should also be familiar to you with Fe and Ti in our make up and because you're already thought of Ni's influence. If you find the time I'm sure people in
land (as many NTs like to think of it...
), also known as the NF idyllic, would really be exited to hear an analysis on this particular subject, with both types being so fond of literature, poetry and writing.
INFJ and INTP you mean? I guess I could try to do this, although I am largely oblivious how Fe works beyond inferior. I have a bit of an idea though, interacting with some INFJs.
No. It's not.
Here's what Keirsey actually wrote about INTPs:
INTJs have more of a focus on minimising task redundancy, than verbal redundancy. Some of the most loquacious posters on this site are INTJs. And they like to repeat their pet theories ad nauseum.
If you're using yourself as a model INTP, it explains why you've got it back to front.
Try reading Kiersey to understand the difference, he definitely is one.
Then you're not referring to what I am referring to. The INTJ that told me my theory is similar to Keirey's has to do with communication style and that's it. Also, you'd be surprised what Ni mouth diarrhea can lead to. Amount of text is not necessarily relevant to what the text contains. Furthermore, I already mentioned the effect of Se in INTJ writing. You should try to read a little closer what the article states before you jump to false conclusions.
Also, I want to add that Keirsey's bullshit in my opinion. The guy wants to group up four completely different type as a "temperament". But there's absolutely nothing the NTs got in common more than being NTs. The way they think are completely different. Anyone with some basic knowledge and understanding of the Jungian functions will realize this. You can't stereotype an entire group of people based on two letters they have in common but don't even work the same way. INTJs and INTPs got nothing in common thinking-wise. Their functions are inverted after all.
For both INTJs and INTPs every word is relevant to their writing. When I say structure I mean the organization of sentences and paragraphs. The formatting of the work itself is something an INTP is less likely to be anal about, but explaining as many aspects of their logical systems as best as they can seems to be more important.
Exactly. So much butthurt in this thread because "omg I don't fit the mold". No shit Sherlock. No one said you have to fit it 100%. It's after all,
generalizing type.
For example, give a class of students a personality test, and then give each of them the same personality profile and see who agrees with it and who thinks it's bs.
Of course the OP is stereotyping based on some a priorist notions about typology. This simply means that someone is starting with generalities (the general nature of types) and then declaring that all the particulars must conform to them. But I know a banned member here who says she writes like an INTJ although she is an ISFP.
A priori? No, this is definitely not based on a priori knowledge or based off type descriptions. This is based on my personal knowlegde of having typed people for the past few months. I can tell between a type person thinks they are and the type the person is, or for the matter, the type the person wants to be. I don't care if a person takes the official MBTI test and gets their type confirmed because the official MBTI test is crap and is no better than most online tests out there. Therefore, they cannot help to reveal the true type. This would rather confirm your suspicions already - you say that the person thought she was an INTJ but really was an ISFP. How do you know this? Oh yes, based on how she writes. You can tell this based on the information she lets on and the way she structures and formulates her thoughts.
This structuring will also affect the written language, because this is how we interact with the world externally. The way we think therefore affects the way we interact with the world. Since I have no true psychic mindpowers (Fe can do amazing things though) I cannot get into a person's head and say, she is this or that. I can only work with what they give me in this external world and lay out a map on what is the most likely type. If you disagree with this notion then you disagree with the entire notion of the MBTI, since the MBTI can ultimately only test how we work on the outside.
Yeah. I kinda think it has more to do with one's verbal abilities and empathic abilities, which aid in communication. Verbal abilities help give shape to thoughts by letting you describe, with varying accuracy, the contours of your ideas. Empathy helps you understand what your listener understands, so you can illustrate complex ideas systematically and sequentially without losing your audience. Honestly, the only time I really have a problem communicating is when I'm emotional--when they're something at stake, or when someone is attacking me or my ideas, or when I've been offended.
I agree. I do have a very high verbal intelligence though, but I feel it's just the notion of language itself being limiting. My ideal form of communication would be telepathy as no translation would be needed. You can convey the idea exactly as it is to someone else.
Yeah the formatting not so much, but they do explain everything relevant given the context, so they are more or less getting to the point.
Agreed. Formatting has always been my Achilles heel during my academic studies. I have forced myself to approach academic writing more with an NiTe approach.
