• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

[MBTI] Personality Junkie "The 16 Personality Types" and "INTP"

How do you rate this book?

  • * (worst)

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • **

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • ***

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • ***** (best)

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    1

Eric B

ⒺⓉⒷ
Joined
Mar 29, 2008
Messages
3,618
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
548
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
http://personalityjunkie.com/16-personality-types-book
http://personalityjunkie.com/intp-book-personality-careers-relationships-truth-meaning
(Author, A.J. Drenth)

Just finished these two not too long ago, and they are pretty good. Haven't had much time to compile points for a more full review, but the INTP book, for example, showed me some things I could identify with, but hadn't really thought of before. Like how in relationships, "If we think a bit outside the box, we might view INTP relationships as having little, if anything, to do with love (at least in the traditional sense), and more to do with mutual exploration, sharing, struggling, and learning."
I now realize this is part of why I craved a serious relationship, but then once I got one, I wasn't into the more "lovey dovey" aspects of it.

Then, other descriptions such as "Generally speaking, Ti (along with Ne) finds it easier to identify
inconsistencies or logical shortcomings—to assert what is not true—than to identify and confidently assert what is true."

Each type's "function stack" consists of "the first four" only. (I once asked him about "the other four", and he acknowledged they were "shadows", but he doesn't go into them).

He assigns his own "roles" for them:

Dominant Function: “The Captain.” The signature strength of the personality type.
Auxiliary Function: “The Helpful Sidekick.” The chief assistant to the dominant function.
Tertiary Function: “The Adolescent.” Relatively unconscious and undifferentiated.
Inferior Function: “The Child.” The least differentiated and conscious of the four functions.

In his descriptions of each type's "development", he'll describe the first stage as dealing with the dominant, of course, but then the second stage will go into the inferior, which begins a "tug of war" with the dominant. Then, he'll mention the auxiliary, which "is more like a natural sidekick to the dominant than a rival or opponent", and then that the type may open up and further refine their auxiliary judgment or perception through the tertiary.

Phase III is "Integration", where we "are more aware of the tricks and temptations of the inferior function and the foolishness of indulging it". We learn that "integrating the inferior function must somehow occur through the dominant (as well as through the other functions in the functional stack). What this means, in essence, is that integrating the less conscious functions occurs in a more indirect and passive fashion, rather than by directly indulging or attempting to develop them".

So,
N types: Integrate S through consistent & healthy use of N
S types: Integrate N through consistent & healthy use of S
T types: Integrate F through consistent & healthy use of T
F types: Integrate T through consistent & healthy use of F

He also goes into J/P and the EJ, IJ, EP, IP groups in the intro. He puts a big focus on the fact that IP's are actually dominant "judgers", and IJ's are dominant "perceivers", so he tends to treat them in a reverse J/P fashion (like Socionics), and thus having a lot in common with the E types with the opposite J/P (dominant function with opposite attitude).

Each type profile will describe the three stages of development, and then describe each of the four functions.

One question mark is sometimes treating e functions in terms of behaviors (which we all do, as it's hard to describe them otherwise). Like Se is associated with "novel physical pleasures, lavish surroundings, or material comforts". So SJ's and NP's will be described as not being into those things, which I find not always accurate.

He does say:
"Extraverted Intuition (Ne) is a novelty-seeking function. At first glance, Se and Ne types may seem fairly similar (such conflation can be seen, for instance, in the Enneagram Seven), since both ESPs and ENPs can be outwardly active, energetic, and playful. Ne differs from Se, however, in that it is more concerned with ideas, connections, and possibilities than it is with novel sensations or material goods."

Still, non-Se types can enjoy material comforts. I think that's just natural for everyone. I guess I know I'm not particularly into "novel physical pleasures" and "lavish surroundings", though, but I know SJ's who would like lavishness.

So it seemed like a very good introduction to typology. Sort of like the way many would recommend Lenore's Personality Type: An Owner's Manual. His presentation reminded me a little of that; only much shorter and more concise. Especially the way it goes back to the Jungian roots of focusing on the dominant for each function, and the new points, such as this "integration" concept.
 

Alea_iacta_est

New member
Joined
Dec 3, 2013
Messages
1,834
Interesting stuff, and I agree with the assertion that through healthy usage of the more conscious functions, integration occurs with the less conscious functions.
 

yeghor

Tempbanned
Joined
Dec 21, 2013
Messages
3,003
My Fe in Ni-Fe works towards anticipating how people will react if I do a certain thing... so that I can sidestep and adjust my stance to theirs...

This of course results in codependent and passive behaviour... an (risk) avoidance mechanism of sorts... It's like "I have to understand people and anticipate their behaviour so as not to get hurt (physically or emotionally)...

So my Fe-aux gathers people's behaviour and attitude data from the external world to be synthesized by my Ni-dom function...

So how does Ne work for INTPs? What does it gather from the external world for Ti's use?
 

yeghor

Tempbanned
Joined
Dec 21, 2013
Messages
3,003
Interesting stuff, and I agree with the assertion that through healthy usage of the more conscious functions, integration occurs with the less conscious functions.

 

Alea_iacta_est

New member
Joined
Dec 3, 2013
Messages
1,834
Oh one of the cats is me... :)

I figured that out easily, but the relevance of that in this thread was a mystery, as it seemed entirely inane and futile. It's a false analogy anyhow, I would have chosen a leopard and a mouse.

I would ask that one of the mods ([MENTION=8936]highlander[/MENTION]?) please remove this conversation and the next reply to this post to the off-topic thread so that this thread can keep on track and not delineate to useless tangents.
 

Robopop

New member
Joined
Mar 28, 2010
Messages
692
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
He also goes into J/P and the EJ, IJ, EP, IP groups in the intro. He puts a big focus on the fact that IP's are actually dominant "judgers", and IJ's are dominant "perceivers", so he tends to treat them in a reverse J/P fashion (like Socionics), and thus having a lot in common with the E types with the opposite J/P (dominant function with opposite attitude).

This is where he really messes up, IPs are pretty much the opposites of the EJs, it makes no sense typologically speaking to group them together, IPs still have the Ji/Pe preference that EPs have.

He describes IPs as being very goal oriented and initiative(over the IJs:doh:) but this is strange considering they have Fe/Te as their inferior, INTPs for instance are usually only motivated by a kind of aimless curiosity, beyond that point(when it comes to application) most lose interest, he seems to actually think IPs have a task orientation similar to EJs but couldn't be further from the truth. Even EPs are more "goal oriented" than IPs.

This dude has some stuff right but he is misguided because he thinks Ji dominance is similar to Je dominance with the only difference being internal/external orientation.
 

Eric B

ⒺⓉⒷ
Joined
Mar 29, 2008
Messages
3,618
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
548
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Well, the internal/external orientation makes a big difference. Because IP's are internally oriented with their J, you generally don't see it, and you only see the "openness" of the external perception. That's what then characterizes the "J/P" preference.
I know it sounds farfetched, and he probably could have worded it differently or something, but there really is something to that. When thinking about this more, recently, I'm realizing, that yeah, I'm just as closed as I see the J's as; only it's internally based. The J's do in fact often think we're ridiculously "rigid" or closeminded, because to them, the course of action is decided by the object. So to them, we look like we're just "being that way" for no reason at all, because our standard is not the external object right before us.
 

Robopop

New member
Joined
Mar 28, 2010
Messages
692
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Well, the internal/external orientation makes a big difference. Because IP's are internally oriented with their J, you generally don't see it, and you only see the "openness" of the external perception. That's what then characterizes the "J/P" preference.
I know it sounds farfetched, and he probably could have worded it differently or something, but there really is something to that. When thinking about this more, recently, I'm realizing, that yeah, I'm just as closed as I see the J's as; only it's internally based. The J's do in fact often think we're ridiculously "rigid" or closeminded, because to them, the course of action is decided by the object. So to them, we look like we're just "being that way" for no reason at all, because our standard is not the external object right before us.

Yeah IPs can be very stubborn and defensive of personal beliefs but they are still not goal oriented(not even close) in the way EJs and IJs are, compared to INTPs even most ENTPs need to see some kind of external result/application from their ideas but they just tend to lose interest quicker(off to the next shiny new thing) while INTPs can hold their interests longer(but still shorter than Js) but usually seek understanding for it's own sake(subject orientation). The way goal oriented is used is to imply a set external completion and application that most IPs(especially INPs) could care less about, IPs have the most difficulty with external organization and fitting into heavily structured roles.

But in some ways I'd consider the NJs to potentially be the most open minded types because Ni appreciates interpretive ambiguity so much, Ni just "settles" for externally predictable methodology(even if it ultimately considers it arbitrary) to set limitations.
 

Eric B

ⒺⓉⒷ
Joined
Mar 29, 2008
Messages
3,618
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
548
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Again, I think he would mean internal goals (which I could certainly testify to), which won't look as obvious as external goals, which is what most would associate the term with.
 

Robopop

New member
Joined
Mar 28, 2010
Messages
692
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Again, I think he would mean internal goals (which I could certainly testify to), which won't look as obvious as external goals, which is what most would associate the term with.

I do recognize the "J" in myself but I would describe it as a distinct priority of exactitude in expression of meaning, it is always subject oriented , somebody would only notice this exatitude when engaging in a serious intellectual argument, this is when I can get to the very nuances of construction in a person's ideas. But my outward behaviors and the way I approach stuff/solve problems is very much perceptive, I really don't "know" what I'm doing but just go by trial and error until I get something right. It really is an irrational approach to the outward world, I have a mostly SJ family and they call me to fix all kinds of appliances and they've noticed I have a knack for fixing things.

But the thing is I know about as much about how to fix it as they do but I just go in there and get my hands on it until something works, I'm just really good at bumping into the solution by accident:laugh:. They approach things in a very rational, one step at a time way(Je) that works well in a structured environment where you know what to expect over and over again but this approach fails when dealing with too many unknown variables.

How would you describe your internal goals, are they fixed and applicable, are they general and kind of vague?
I would think Ti "goals" would be more removed from more worldly concerns and be more towards some unattainable ideal.
 

Eric B

ⒺⓉⒷ
Joined
Mar 29, 2008
Messages
3,618
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
548
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Part of it may be the same as what you describe. Unattainable ideals and such.
 

Robopop

New member
Joined
Mar 28, 2010
Messages
692
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Part of it may be the same as what you describe. Unattainable ideals and such.

Well the Personality Junkie guy is still dead wrong on grouping IPs and EJs together just because they are judging dominant, they have radically different approaches to their priorities, lifestyles, ect. IPs just have much much much more in common with EPs than EJs, here's a good quote from Lenore Thomson's Personality Type book that does an excellent job of explaining the difference between the Pe conception of freedom and Pi freedom:

P types, who are response-ready, naturally understand freedom as the absence of constraint. They want the ability to take immediate action, as a situation is occurring, without having to explain it to themselves or reckon with prior limits.

J types understand freedom from the opposite perspective. Without plans or expectations, one has no choice but to be response-ready, constantly alert to all the data available in a situation. This lack of choice makes J types feel trapped. It forces them to react, and only to react, without recourse.

From this point of view, the ability to establish priorities doesn't limit one's options. It creates options that don't exist in nature, thus freeing one from the mercy of chance and circumstance.

Pi still has a negative association of external possibilities and situations, what this means is that Pi dominants are still not spontaneous in the same way EPs or IPs are, they are still generally cautious and need their environment to be stable, saying IJs have more in common with EPs than EJs is just plain ridiculous(Personality Junkie seems to have little understanding about introverted perception to begin with). The cautious, serious IJs ends up looking like the complete opposites of the more free spirited, risk taking EPs, vice versa for the individualistic, easygoing IPs vs the managerial, task oriented EJs.
 

Eric B

ⒺⓉⒷ
Joined
Mar 29, 2008
Messages
3,618
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
548
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Funny, as he's just sent a mailing, in which he says "And of the four NT types, I identified least with ENTJ. This helped to confirm my status as an introvert in general, as well as an INTP in particular."

I still say his statements on IJ/EP and IP/EJ have to be understood in context, though I guess the emphasis he places on them in the book makes that difficult.
 

Eric B

ⒺⓉⒷ
Joined
Mar 29, 2008
Messages
3,618
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
548
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
He's just published a new book:
My True Type Book
(includes excerpts)

Sounds like it's going to be good.
It goes into the four dichotomies, and the eight function-attitudes. He even compares similar ones, which is a good way to understand what makes each one distinct.
There is a chapter on EP, EJ, IP and IJ, but mybe this will help clarify what he says about them.

They're outlined as:
EJs & IPs: “J-P-J” Types
EPs & IJs: “P-J-P” Types

Looks like he's going to go into the order of information gathering and decision making.
It also includes his own two-part assessment instrument (dichotomy preferences and then actual functions).
 

Fidelia

Iron Maiden
Staff member
Joined
May 31, 2009
Messages
14,465
MBTI Type
INFJ
I've got all his ebooks and have found them the most useful resources to me so far regarding mbti and functions. I especially like how he discusses the temptation to jump from our primary function to the Tert and how that negatively affects our choices of career and partner. I've observed those tendancies in myself but didn't have words to describe it.
 

Doctor Anaximander

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 27, 2013
Messages
19,173
Enneagram
5
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
He's a good writer, I like his style and usually enjoy his blog posts. He does tend to focus on the INxx types more than other types, but that doesn't bother me, although I could see others taking issue.
 
Top