Telling apart INTP and INTJ

MikeA said:
This is an oxymoron, thus renders what you wrote after it not worth reading.
Click to expand...

How is it an oxymoron? I was me saying that I'm mature enough to not care if people are correct about their MBTI type. You were the one having a shit over it, not me.
 
MikeA said:
I did the 250 big Q's and got RCOEI or whatever, which loosely translated to INTJ if I'm not mistaking. And I can relate to the RCUEN descriptions.
Click to expand...

% is more important than letters for that one. The letters are virtually meaningless since most people are within trivial range of average on most of the scales.
 
bickelz said:
How is it an oxymoron? I was me saying that I'm mature enough to not care if people are correct about their MBTI type. You were the one having a shit over it, not me.
Click to expand...
If you can't see how much you cared about not caring it's not worth explaining it to you. Having a shit over it? Yeah, I did take a big dump on what you wrote.
 
MikeA said:
If you can't see how much you cared about not caring it's not worth explaining it to you. Having a shit over it? Yeah, I did take a big dump on what you wrote.
Click to expand...

Ok, you obvz don't remember my earlier posts. By "having a shit" I meant that you were getting mad over something that didn't matter, which you were. Now, you think you're winning when you're just plain wrong.
 
bickelz said:
Ok, you obvz don't remember my earlier posts. By "having a shit" I meant that you were getting mad over something that didn't matter, which you were. Now, you think you're winning when you're just plain wrong.
Click to expand...
You could might as well be talking to a tree. And I think that makes you a loser. Obvz yo.
 
I despise taking sides, but there's probably more truth in the proposition about Ni-dominants being uncommon. I would wager a guess that a large population of INFJs here and elsewhere are Fi-dominant.

I don't think Ni-dominants are necessarily rude or aggressive, but yes, they have a singular agenda, and they push it to achieve their desired outcome. (Unless of course, the Ni-dom in question is invalidated to the point where they where they slip into their shadow ISTP mode, in order to get any sort of validation from the environment whatsoever.)

There's nothing offensive about this from a definitional stand-point. It something fits, it fits; if it doesn't, it's not you.
 
I despise taking sides, but there's probably more truth in the proposition about Ni-dominants being uncommon. I would wager a guess that a large population of INFJs here and elsewhere are Fi-dominant.
Click to expand...

I think emotional expressiveness is probably more readily associated with F than is understanding of Feel based relationships. This probably results in many F-aux's not being sure of their F, perhaps especially in Fe-aux's where there isn't even a subjective experience of the Feeling. INFJs probably come across more as hard to penetrate/understand than as emotional, and if they apply their Intuition to areas typically associated with Thinking, then they would probably be assumed to be T.

There are probably many IXFPs on here, perhaps even a large number of ISFPs. Certainly there isn't really an F-aux feel here, nor N-dom.

I wonder what pecentage of people are typed correctly? It might be something like 75% for each letter, so roughly 30%.
 
Um, this thread is easy: INTPs are lazy. They're slackers. They procrastinate. INTJs are supposedly the opposite in those respects. There are all kinds of theoretical ideas and mumbo jumbo out there that try to formalize or give structure to the differences but, in practice -- when it comes to taking a questionnaire, it all boils down to whether or not you're a lazy ass.

If you're having trouble telling the difference between you and your friend, then chances are that you're both towards the middle of the J/P spectrum and are essentially the same type. After-all, the preferences don't have a bi-modal distribution.

Sali said:
INTPs come off very sarcastic to me a lot of the time, when I think "troll" I tend to think INTP >_<
Click to expand...

LOL
 
MikeA said:
Actually, mine is quite the average thing.
Would you care for some pie?
Click to expand...

I would fucking love some pie. I also believe that [whatever your type is] is fantastic at baking, so I'll be looking forward to some expectancy-effect-induced deliciousness!
 
idiom said:
Um, this thread is easy: INTPs are lazy. They're slackers. They procrastinate. INTJs are supposedly the opposite in those respects. There are all kinds of theoretical ideas and mumbo jumbo out there that try to formalize or give structure to the differences but, in practice -- when it comes to taking a questionnaire, it all boils down to whether or not you're a lazy ass.

If you're having trouble telling the difference between you and your friend, then chances are that you're both towards the middle of the J/P spectrum and are essentially the same type. After-all, the preferences don't have a bi-modal distribution.
Click to expand...

Yeah, except that that's wrong. An INTP isn't "someone who scores as INTP on the questionairre", it's an INTP.

You have to look at the more subtle differences. Js can procrastinate, Ps can be active.

Which MBTI CFs does the person best represent? Which socionics elements do they value/devalue?

You can't understand the types by looking at how the test dichotomies are set up.
 
Artsu Tharaz said:
An INTP isn't "someone who scores as INTP on the questionairre", it's an INTP.

You can't understand the types by looking at how the test dichotomies are set up.
Click to expand...
Actually, it is, and yes, you can. MBTI is basically a sorry excuse for a Big 5, and has very little relation to actual Jung.
 
Resonance said:
Actually, it is, and yes, you can. MBTI is basically a sorry excuse for a Big 5, and has very little relation to actual Jung.
Click to expand...

Correct. There is a tendency toward correlation between the MBTI dichotmies and Jung's functions, but even if self assessment were prefectly accurate, the two won't always line up. MBTI makes too many assumptions... like social attitude equaes to mental perspective, etc.

That's why I'm more inclined to give preference to tests that attempt to measure specific cognitive functions... like this one. http://www.keys2cognition.com/explore.htm and as a back up correllation proof, this one... http://www.teamtechnology.co.uk/mmdi/questionnaire/

Also technics... I've been meaning to mention this for a while now... I doubt that you are an INTJ. Your thought process has a very strong Ti/Fe lean. I'd be inclined to guess you are an INFJ male that has over rated his T function. I see Ni and Ti in you.
 
Resonance said:
Actually, it is, and yes, you can. MBTI is basically a sorry excuse for a Big 5, and has very little relation to actual Jung.
Click to expand...

Oh, hi there.

Well that's a definitions thing. But even still, the "true" MBTI goes into way more detail. I don't know what the details are though.

Basically, I associate an MBTI type as one who represents the respective MBTI function model, as interepreted by MBTI in a way that is consistent. So INTP is an MBTI Ti Ne Si Fe, or roughly socionics Ni Te type, or whatevar.

I don't care what something "techncially" is, if a different interpretation works way better.
 
Artsu Tharaz said:
Oh, hi there.

Well that's a definitions thing. But even still, the "true" MBTI goes into way more detail. I don't know what the details are though.

Basically, I associate an MBTI type as one who represents the respective MBTI function model, as interepreted by MBTI in a way that is consistent. So INTP is an MBTI Ti Ne Si Fe, or roughly socionics Ni Te type, or whatevar.

I don't care what something "techncially" is, if a different interpretation works way better.
Click to expand...

I believe the definitive book on MBTI was "Gifts Differing" which I've read. Basically, you've got the logic of the type process sorta backwards if you believe that someone of a tested type is only that type if they fit a model. The MBTI aimed to have a scientific basis, and as such, the model is supposed to fit around gathered data, and the only source of that in practice has been self-assessment.

So, when someone takes a questionnaire and comes out INTP, any structural/functional extrapolations are judged "true" by how they fit the test takers personality, not the other way around.
 
Artsu Tharaz said:
Oh, hi there.

Well that's a definitions thing.
Click to expand...
Definitions are important! Anything other than how they score on a test means it's open to interpretation (even though the test itself is open to interpretation but w/e) so unless you want to start telling everyone that they are mistyped when they don't exhibit a certain intangible quality that causes you to admire them, it's best to stick with 'my test results say X so I am X'.

Artsu Tharaz said:
But even still, the "true" MBTI goes into way more detail. I don't know what the details are though.
Click to expand...
The details are 'a certified professional talks with you about your results and helps you do a certified interpretation of each question according to their own certified understanding of it.'

Artsu Tharaz said:
Basically, I associate an MBTI type as one who represents the respective MBTI function model, as interepreted by MBTI in a way that is consistent. So INTP is an MBTI Ti Ne Si Fe, or roughly socionics Ni Te type, or whatevar.
Click to expand...
Those are never consistent :X

Artsu Tharaz said:
I don't care what something "techncially" is, if a different interpretation works way better.
Click to expand...
I agree with this sentiment, but the trouble is none of it works very well. Thinking it works well is um...what was it... Forer effect? or maybe something else.

VH said:
Correct. There is a tendency toward correlation between the MBTI dichotmies and Jung's functions, but even if self assessment were prefectly accurate, the two won't always line up. MBTI makes too many assumptions... like social attitude equaes to mental perspective, etc.
Click to expand...
Yeah, there's that....

VH said:
That's why I'm more inclined to give preference to tests that attempt to measure specific cognitive functions... like this one. http://www.keys2cognition.com/explore.htm and as a back up correllation proof, this one... http://www.teamtechnology.co.uk/mmdi/questionnaire/
Click to expand...
I don't like cognitive-function-oriented tests either, because they are always horribly convoluted. Last time I took one I ranked myself as Ni>Ne>Ti>Te>Fe>Si>Fi>Se or something like that. You can kind of see the INFJ in there, but... damn, it's not clear at all. Plus, it's taking the theory one step further while eschewing both Jung and experimental data.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top