Any INFJs that are good at maths?

I'd say no, math is too unflinching and un-fluid. INFJs naturally probably dont like math very much at all.
 
I found HS calc and calc1 and calc2 in college attainable, though calc3 was tougher not only because it was tougher, but because the teacher had an impossible accent AND financial aide was screwing me over and I couldn't afford the book... so yeah, that's roughly where it stopped for me.
 
leviathans said:
Why would you need a real-world application? We're all intuitive so abstract thinking shouldn't be too hard for most of the INFJ.

I guess that the problem is that high school math is pretty boring and does not show the real beauty hidden in mathematics formula/theorems. It's incredible how we can find mathematical/statistical laws that explain perfectly the laws of nature and some others who simulate real-world stuff really well. Also, there is a lot of creativity and imagination in mathematics, but that is something they don't show us in high school. Did you know that a mathemacian invented a full theory about multiple types of infinity? You can discover mathematical theories about everything, all you need is creativity.
Click to expand...

Being bored in math class, and bored with High School in general didn't help matters. I think many teachers were never able to put it in terms that clicked with me.
The schools and my parents never knew what to do with me.
I would always be in percentiles of 90's when tested. (except for the math portions)
But on my day to day work I scored poorly.
They always said I wasn't trying. But I was trying, and telling me I wasn't just demoralized me and made me more resentful of the whole experience.

The only classes I enjoyed and got straight A's in were shop classes. Which also required math. But since what I was doing was tangible, it made more sense.

Sorry, didn't intend on going into all that.
 
Last edited:
No no, I think application helps a lot... just as shop class is application.

For example (not that it is the most real of worlds, but) in trying to animate things like vehicles accelerating from a stop, or a ball bouncing off a floor (computer animation) the best and easiest way was to put these movements on what was effectively simple calculus (derivatives of certain equations.) In calc 3 I did also get a whiff of where I might have seen some applications in deriving complex shapes and surfaces using calc as well.

Point being, I did well in calc BUT I didn't appreciate or fully get it under I had a chance to USE it... then a mystical light bulb materialize over my head. This caused shock and dismay to those around me at the time. (okay, not really.)
 
I haven't read the whole thread but I saw in your OP that you are concerned about algebra.

Algebra is as simple as falling over

For example

x/13 + 11 = 28

You always start with the number that isn't next to the x which is the 11. It says plus 11 so you take away 11 from 28. If it was - 11 you would plus 11 to 28. everything is reversed.

that leaves you with 17.

You then deal with the number next to the x. remember everything is reversed. It says divide by 13 so you times by 13.

i.e. 13 x 17 = 221.

x = 221

Simples

Fo distributive it's slightly different.

4(3x + 3) = 180

times everything within the brackets by the number next to it then do away with the brackets. that leaves you with 12x + 12 =180. then just do what you did before. take away the 12 because it says to add it. That leaves you with 168. then divide that by 12 because it says to times it.

So thats 168/12 = 14

x = 14

simples
 
When it comes to math, I usually understand it quite well, provided I learn it correctly. I don't focus on the rules so much as how they work and what one does with them, like finding the area under a curve in calculus. I'm currently in Calc III. It's intriguing but pretty challenging. Which is kind of like what all math has been like for me after I decided I kind of liked it.
 
There is at least one infj who does applied math and annoys physics student as a TA. You will do just fine ;)
 
So long as I can simplify things down to the basic levels, math in the end is just addition and subtraction on different scales.
 
Math is hit or miss, I don't mind algebra, and I get A's in it so thats legit. However, ironically for being an infj, I'm really bad at the abstract maths. Not sure why.
 
As an INFJ too, I laughed when I saw this post - Glad i'm not the only one who has trouble with maths! I wasn't very good in school, college and when I got to university, things just got worse. I was lost after the second class but somehow I managed to do enough to scrape through, and that's pretty much what it comes down to. No one is a pro at everything.

Best advice I can give is to hang out with the geeks when the time is right. Also helps to write an 'extenuating circumstances' letter thrown in just in case things go pear shaped. It's the overall grade that counts.
 
Well I have managed to get through 3 semesters of calculus and 2 semesters of physical chemistry so I would say yes I am good at math, as in with a high level of effort I can understand it to a degree and actually do it. However I strongly dislike math.
 
My problem with math is that I do everything backwards. My brain just can't process it from start to finish. I can't follow a series of steps and have it come together. I need to know how it works from the back to the start and why certain things go in certain places and where particular values come from.

I'm capable of being quite good at math. Unfortunately I didn't realize when I was in school that the way that I processed it was differently than some people and so I figured I was just a math idiot.

If you're bad at math or it makes you uncomfortable I really encourage you to get a tutor or talk to a math teacher who will take aside some time and really go through the problems until you can formulate a way to understand the work and be successful at it. I wish I had done the same!
 
I'm not too good at math. It doesn't come naturally. I'm pretty good at algebra, but not other types of math. I'm a reading and writing person by natural skill, but I have a lot of interest in the sciences.
 
I was really good at math...until Calculus . A lot of people in my class thought I was "smart", but really it was me spending copious amounts of time and energy on it. I get more worn out doing math problems than I do when I exercise. :p
 
sandra_b said:
I need to know how it works from the back to the start and why certain things go in certain places and where particular values come from.
Click to expand...

Something you share with many mathematicians (those who do proofs).

To be good at math you have to have (a) interest (b) intelligence (c) a good teacher and learning resources

Too many blame a lack of (a) or (b) when (c) might have been a significant factor.
 
i think i definitley lacked a, somewhat b, and somewhat c
 
I'm good, could be excellent if I invest more time and effort. Though I'm a lot better at solving complex problems than some simple things. I even get confused with simple subtractions while I can do some really complicated proofs without pen and paper. I used to go for math championships and had some really good results without any preparation, just because the problems were not the usual boring ones that you do at school. I like creativity in math, and I like more pure math than some branches of applied math like those in economics. Though control and stability theory is quite interesting.

I love the simplicity and beauty of theorems that are very often extremely hard to prove and have great consequences.

Now I have the desire to practice some math. :D
 
it's a struggle to stay awake in that class every time. does that mean i'm good or bad? :D
 
Architectonic said:
Something you share with many mathematicians (those who do proofs).

To be good at math you have to have (a) interest (b) intelligence (c) a good teacher and learning resources

Too many blame a lack of (a) or (b) when (c) might have been a significant factor.
Click to expand...
I definitely lacked c first time I took calc 2, whick lead to lack of a. When I took it again and did not lack c, I didn't lack a either. Of course, this can't be considered a conditional statement for everyone
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top