Socionics Personals | | Female Straight 16-25 Oceania Libra ENFj |
| | Male Straight 16-25 Middle East Sagittarius INTj |
| | Male Straight 26-35 North America Pisces INXj |
| Join now! |
Who is who?Learn how to convert between different systems
V.I.An introduction into the widely used Socionics Visual Identification technique
TestsA collection of Socionics related tests and quizes
Q & AsAsk a Socionics related question or provide an answer to an existing one
ArticlesVarious articles on the subject of Socionics and Types in general
ForumsWant to discuss Type? Head to Socionics Forums!
|
On Being INTj
by I/O
Most times, I
can figure out what's happening or has happened; and if need be, I usually have
or will come up with a way to deal with it. I spend a lot of time inside my head
analyzing information, or formulating strategies to achieve something; I try to
perfect plans, concepts or understanding, or to prove or disprove ... various
courses of action. I seem to have a natural ability to turn my understanding
of a situation into an executable plan, but I need time and space to fully
understand what I'm up against. I'm not at my best on the spur-of-the-moment
or under close scrutiny, which may be reasons why I avoid competition or
conflict. I also never want to be judged as incompetent or not contributing,
so I can be rather uptight in social situations where this is a very real
possibility.
I'm not one to
ask for help; I need independence and space above all else, and distance seems
to be the best way for me to remain objective. I can isolate my mind even in
the company of others - go blank as many might perceive it. When I'm thinking,
I'm often oblivious to things happening around me; thus, I can miss key
information, and appear unenthusiastic or uninterested. In this detached
state, I'm very impassive and focused on a triggered memory or thought,
sometimes forgetting about activities, people or things to which I should be
paying close attention. Because I need to define my own approach, I treat the
opinions of others tentatively, which can perturb many individuals. However, I
also treat my own knowledge and abilities somewhat sceptically. Although I'm
largely indifferent to what others say about my ideas or me, I can be extremely
hard on myself when I realize that I've done something stupid or inconsiderate.
The most
recent information is more relevant to me than my experience or what I know
from the past; I easily integrate new information or start from zero. I give
others a chance to lead, say or do as they please unless they prove themselves
incompetent. I do admire diversity and uniqueness, but not as much as quality,
efficiency and accomplishment. I take personal responsibility for executing
plans. I'm very tolerant and flexible in most situations, unless someone is
deviating from an agreed-to plan, in which case I become intransigent and
abrupt. I defend plans by showing the stupidity of inaction or alternate
courses of action; I can be ruthless with anyone or anything that's confounding
progress.
To undertake something,
I must first be convinced that it's necessary and that I can actually do it. I
like doing activities that have multiple purpose; for example, I bicycle to
work because I want to be healthy but don't want to waste time exercising or in
traffic. I'm reluctant to start something when I don't have enough energy,
information or know-how. However, once started, I'm timely and self-assured
because I put enormous amounts of planning effort into minimizing the risk of
failure. I rarely jump to conclusions although I can be dismissive at first.
I'm a good strategist because I usually have a practical vision of the way
ahead and I tend to plan for every conceivable contingency, sometimes to the
point of obsessiveness. However, I do see the reality of situations, and my
need for actual output forces me to stop planning and start implementation.
When underway, I'm able to quickly change my plans ad hoc if I see things
aren't working well.
My psyche is
led by rationalization in absolute terms, which means that I like to produce
quantifiable output: make go or no-go decisions, express yes or no judgements,
and make everything definable or specifiable. I don't do well in grey areas,
with insufficient data or where expectations are unrealistic, which can make me
rather anxious. I like directing the destiny of realizable projects without
having to supervise or control people - allowing them independence to deal with
the detail. If they're incompetent, I'd prefer to discount them and do it
myself rather than confront them.
I think
decisions should be based on real factors, not on subjectivity or feelings. I
can easily express my insights, but not my feelings to which I'm oblivious most
of the time. Although I've provided for the well-being of others, I'm rarely
in-tune with their feelings or able to exude emotional warmth or empathy.
Although diplomatic, I'm not naturally demonstrative about my regard and
affection for others. I usually feel uncomfortable when I receive praise or
attention. I prefer a low profile at the periphery where the risk of detection
is minimized. I'm not a shy person nor a coward and I certainly don't lack any
confidence, but I won't go out of my way to meet or reach out to people, or to
initiate something unless I think that it's absolutely necessary.
My
rationalization is fed by relative input; I easily sense the 'big picture' -
aura, process, structure, relationship and consequence. I'm so aware of
consequence that I tend to be pessimistic looking first at what is or could go
wrong. I see everything in terms of how it can or cannot be orchestrated or
connected, or integrated into a pattern. I cut out all that I think may be
irrelevant to the issue or that may cloud the composite picture, so I sometimes
overlook even obvious detail. For this reason, many may think that I have a
bad memory when in reality, I have selective input. Hence, any planning that I
do is focused at a systems level because I'm not well equipped for minutia - I
prefer to orchestrate leaving the details of implementation to competent
others. But, because I'm such a perfectionist who expects quality, especially
from myself, I will attend to much detail in order to perfect my work.
In everyday
matters, I'm a minimalist who does not like clutter or possessing things that I
don't really need; most things I undertake must have purpose and be done
efficiently, and most things I own must be well made. I'm intensely interested
in achieving a result, and will put forth tremendous amounts of time and energy
into perfecting a resolve. However, when under stress, I need idle and away
time or diversions; it's how I defragment and improve clarity. For myself, I
do not place much value on traditional goals such as money and power but I do
need a stimulating environment and an occasional kick in the ass to get me
moving because, deep down, I want to be productive and relevant.
|
|
C11 C10, One can arrive at the same result or behaviour from many different approaches. Input operates somewhere between totally S-dominant to totally N-dominant while output operates somewhere between F and T. I can see the possibility for sub-typing when the ratio N/(N+S) or T/(F+T) is very high. However, Te is associated with a closed loop temperament like ENTj so I do not agree with your Te-INTj classification; this would create a serious conflict in rationalization processes - like having a TeSi rather than FeSi as a secondary function. I think that the psyche must establish balance points (not conflict) for stability. -- I/O |
C12 Where do all these crazy people come from? not referring to the article poster, just for instance C8, I really can't work out if the persons joking..but who'd write all that about someone they didn't even know for something that's not even humourous? -- Anonymous |
C13 @C12 Typical ENTJ information processing. Exercising the primary function reads out according to your ignoring function. So for ENTj they'll verbalize according to Ti. Also explains why I/O sounds like an ENTJ's mind and why most ENTJ forums look like an INTj's mind. ENTj forums sound aloof and disconnected while INTj forums sound like ENTjs. The other part is that while exercising the primary function the second creative function becomes more active, although unlike the first function it cannot sustain prolonged activation thus it occurs in pulses. Ni being the second function during long conversations we ENTjs come up with seemingly prophetic (heavy Ni) understandings of the subject matter. Therefore in order to be able to develop a theory we must be in a state of constant communication burning our Te. Te is about defining things at the most basic level, i.e. the most basic form of logic. Imagine your fuel gauge is a pure Te example. If the fuel gauge says its full, then according to Te the "Fuel gauge says its full". Saying that the tank is full is a Ti example, it is derivative logic. Perhaps (N) the car is on a slant and the gauge reads that it is full (Ti) maybe the fuel gauge is broken and perma stuck in full position (Ne). This much fuel will get you X distance (Ti) but not if there's a meteor collision (Ne) which is unlikely in the near future (Ni). No the fuel gauge says its full(Te), we're leaving NOW! (Se) Don't yell honey you'll upset the children (Fi) Waaaa!(Fe). The point is that we say things which sate our Te and if we should happen to upset people's emotions (Fe) or say something unethical (Fi), or something that is obviously wrong (Si: According to their perception; try arguing with an IStp) or just talk too much (Se) Once the rampage is finished we have our definition, our proof and our wake of destruction be damned. Think of it like solving a really difficult mathematical proof, it requires 3 blackboards of space. (Good Will Hunting had an ISTp genius with a creative Te HA!, but was also lazy and needed an ENFp to pull him out of his ISTp rut). In the process we end up going off on long tangents which may or may not have anything to do with the original subject. What you're reading is exactly what I would speak to someone and in a sense we're having a conversation. No revision, no forethought, just pure unadulterated brain wave to keyboard. Yes, I think and speak like this, ALL THE TIME. Ohh I just read C11: I'm exercising Te and using Ni for input but and because my Ti function is so developed my verbalization comes out more profound than other people's. If your Te function is well developed, lets say an 8 to your Ti's 10 then your verbalization (output) would be well structured and definitive. It's why everything you say is a definition, while everything I say is more of a troubleshooting guide for every possible derivative. You still use all of your, w/e balancing you mentioned, which has nothing to do with how well specific functions are developed. Your temperament is unaffected by the strength of your functions. WHAT YOU SAY CHANGES, HOW YOU SAY IT DOESN'T. Psychology, like most sciences, is about labeling the unknown, labeling is Te. By studying socionics for years and producing many articles about it you have inadvertently developed your Te to a heightened level, just as anyone else who develops socionics for the sake of understanding the mind. How socionics affects people can be predicted based on where their Te is in their model. INTj become more vocal, INTp become more creative, ENTj become more, just read the above. ENTp turn nuttier because they discover their subconscious strong Te and become Einsteins/Ayn Rands/Aushra. -- C8/C10/C13 |
C14 Thank you, C10, what you describe is exactly how I see ENTj. It is easy to confuse an ENTj for an introvert or other types. I like ENTj very much, although they are my Supervisors )) I feel guilty sometimes for my reverse reaction to them, but nevertheless they are really nice persons, no matter how weird their "out of the blue" statements may sound to me. -- INFp |
C15 I/O, do you mind describing more INTp behavior? I'm trying to decide whether I'm INTp or INTj. -- Anonymous |
C16 C15, that would be a complete article. See C5. If you are not sure about what you know but are driven by an internal conviction of the way things should proceed regardless of what others may say, you're likely INTj, one who has or wants a plan. If you feel sure about what you know but listen to others about how to deal with what you know, your likely INTp, one who's good at winging it and would feel constrained by a plan. If you're young, you may not be able to distinguish yet. -- I/O |
|
Would you like to add anything? |
( When posting, we ask you to make the effort to qualify your opinions.)
|
|