"Oh my God! This is awesome! I'm so excited! I can't wait! I feel like jumping and screaming and clapping my hands!" behaviour will guarantee you the front seat before INTp firing squad. It is taboo as INTps cannot tolerate enthusiasm and you will soon be punished for openly showing the excitement. If you like something - you should stay quiet, if you don't like something - you must hate it! No emotional attachments or commitments are permitted either.
INTps fear rules and adore them, because what's clear - they fear, unclear - they dear! Nevertheless, they stick to the rules and they demand the same from others. The rules that can be interpreted in many ways guarantee freedom. Ironically, INTps learn about their environment through studying of the limitations. If the rule states you can't say "knee" and INTp decides to respect and obey it they could get extremely annoyed with someone who decides to ignore it.
The rules for INTps often transform into rituals and they have no problems with rituals. Because of this INTps could get comfortable with routine, often mistyping themselves into J types, resulting in many of them thinking of themselves as INTjs. However the most common way is for INTps to type themselves into INTxs, with undecided preference for J or P.
INTps would not accept anything concrete and solid on principle. The more unshakable it seems the more challenging for INTp it appears. Irrefutable truth to them means death. If a sign "Take your hats off" is normally understood as a request to take headwear off, you may suddenly find yourself arguing with an INTp over what is considered a hat. Thanks God for dictionary! INTps respect it - it is printed and it is public. But beware of broad interpretations. A broad interpretation is INTp's ally; exact meaning is INTp's enema.
The arithmetic perhaps is the only discipline where INTps cannot use their powers of ambiguity. 2 + 2 = 4 will always remain true, although it is not inconceivable to assume that at some point an INTp was contemplating a different result. On the other hand, the very foundation of arithmetic was built upon few self evident axioms, and it is the self evident part of course that is very much INTp debatable.
In fact, INTps will debate for the sake of debate. The process becomes more important than the outcome. They often lose the point of a debate when they shift focus to other unrelated subjects in the process. When defeated, INTps can easily do a U turn on something they were arguing just seconds ago. They deserve respect for being able to accept the defeat and disrespect for never being truly committed in their views.
So what is it that makes them so meticulously scrutinising? Being natively intuitive, INTps are not quite able to swallow big chunks of information. They choke on it. Big theories of everything are spam to them and people who make them are instant opponents. The combination of words like "in general", "on principal", "on the whole", "in most cases", "as a general rule" are not friends to INTps, as they befriend "in particular" in particular. They do not like trends, as trends usually encompass more than one tendency, making the trend more "in general" than "in particular". The notion that there are 16 psychological types is also alien to INTps, because in their heads the 16 types could be further dissected into oblivion, thus making them even more "in particular" than "in general".
Finally, INTps have this very special relationship with Socionics. They are like plague, eating its very foundation. They are like ever growing tumour that turns once solid and sound principals into a formless jelly. Just like a bunch of angry termites on rampage, they feed on anything structural, bearing clarity and simplicity... by turning it to dust.
That's all folks, it's a dissection time!
|Document URL: | Last modified: 17 July 2008|
|Copyright © 1997-2017 SOCIONICS.COM|