Can an INTP understand emotions?

[Chimera]

_________
____________​

It seems a bit egotistical to make a thread about myself, but. . .I really am curious.
I took the mypersonality test about a two years ago and was INTP. I took it again sometime the beginning of this year and was INTP again. That's why I looked for forums about INTPs. This is the place where I actually feel like I fit in, with people who are a lot like me (in theory, anyway). ​

But my problem is there are a few key INTP characteristics that I apparently don't adhere to.
Most importantly. I understand emotions.​

My problem is, I'm very aware of people around me. Somehow I'm usually able to understand how they think, how they process things, and how their emotions will come into play. In social situations, I'm quiet, as many introverts are expected to be, but all the while, I'm understanding the people around me. Their emotions aren't mysteries. I'm cultivating theories about their dependance on those emotions, but that's a different topic. ​

Yeah, I know this might sound like the chameleon effect, but it's not. I'm not acting a certain way to blend in. If I'm around a bunch of very loud people, I'm as quiet as I am around the opposite sort. ​

What's more, I have this intuitive sense that is very attuned to other peoples' emotions. Many times, someone can enter a room I'm in, say one sentence, and I already have several theories about their emotional state wrapped up in my mind. From those I pick the most likely and continue to test it against that person's following actions. More often than not, I'm correct. Depending on how closed-off the person is, the process can take anywhere from a few seconds to half an hour. And of course, the better I know the person, the clearer they are to me. But there are many times when I can assess complete strangers just as accurately.​

Of course, just because I understand their emotions doesn't mean I always act on it. Usually, unless it's someone I care about, I just ignore it and keep it in the back of my mind. But when it's someone I care about, it's nice to be able to help them out, even if it's just avoiding words or actions that might make them feel worse. ​

So with all this extroverted-type emotional understanding. . .am I still INTP? Can you give me a few different definitions of how an INTP acts/functions/etc? ​

Also;;
I took the mypersonality test again a few minutes ago, My results:​

​

____________
_________​

 

[Ermine]

Sure. As you've shown with your test results, people can have varying degrees of different functions. And INTP is merely a default. You can deviate from it all you want, though your default is what you're comfortable with.

 

[flow]

"What's more, I have this intuitive sense that is very attuned to other peoples' emotions. Many times, someone can enter a room I'm in, say one sentence, and I already have several theories about their emotional state wrapped up in my mind. From those I pick the most likely and continue to test it against that person's following actions. More often than not, I'm correct."

This is true for myself as well, so I'm going to assume it's an INTP ability. Staying quiet in a room full of people and observing their behaviors while formulating theories towards their personalities and how they interact with the people around them is most likely classic INTP behavior.

 

[Artifice Orisit]

I'm trying to discribe the interaction of emotions and related behaviours via a programmed simulation, wish me luck.

And to answer your question, yes, but not by the default definition of understanding.

 

[loveofreason]

I don't know why we couldn't be acutely aware of other people's emotions - especially any of us whose 'survival' in childhood was dependent on correctly interpreting the emotional state of those around us.

Surely we can come to an abstract understanding of what these emotional games are all about, as we will certainly apply everything we can to solving the 'why' and 'how' of them. As to whether we want to become actively involved in the whole mess - I'd guess we'd all run the other way if we could.

 

[Jennywocky]

This is true for myself as well, so I'm going to assume it's an INTP ability. Staying quiet in a room full of people and observing their behaviors while formulating theories towards their personalities and how they interact with the people around them is most likely classic INTP behavior.

Definitely.

That process right there is simply INTPs bent towards observing and understanding the complex patterns of the world around them... just applied more to people rather than the impersonal world.

Note that most people really don't focus on the behavioral complexities so deeply; and they usually do so in order to take action, at best; but INTPs generally are most focused on the "accurate understanding" of the system and doing something with it is a secondary thought. Maybe it helps to put it in context of, "How would ANOTHER type respond?"

I don't know why we couldn't be acutely aware of other people's emotions - especially any of us whose 'survival' in childhood was dependent on correctly interpreting the emotional state of those around us...

Yeah. Sigh.

Survival pressure does odd things to people.
Expect to deviate from the stereotype.

PS. Chimera, are you using one of the black templates?
I always have to select your text and highlight it, anytime I want to read it, because otherwise I can't see it on the gray/blue default.
For awhile I thought it was secret code of some sort, but I'm thinking now it's not.

 

[Perseus]

A very good question which I am trying to get to grips with. In the inferior function, the INTP can experience the following (which may or may not contain emotions, as I am not quite sure what they are):


Logic Emphasised to an Extreme

Effective dominant extraverted feeling types are quite comfortable making decisions that are nonlogical. Introverted thinking types in the grip of interior extraverted feeling may be compassionately insistent on the application of logic, becoming quite emotional about their approach. As an extension of the loss of control over the thinking function, the introverted thinker begins to engage in excessively logical, unproductive thinking. There may be an obsessive quality to this thinking. One ISTP feels compelled to "prove" the accuracy of his
perception of things. An INTP said, “lf a problem comes up that I’m unable to resolve, I work at it anyway and can’t let go of it, even if l know cannot solve it, convinced that he or she is unloved and ultimately unlovable.

Other introverted thinkers report becoming less articulate, speaking their childhood feeling of being extremely different from other children, rapidly and disjointedly, obsessively trying to solve the insoluble, using marching to a different and unacceptable drummer. often with no clue
sharp, clear, but “paranoid” logic. They may find that they forget things, about how others see things. The memory of childhood misery and misplace objects, and engage in futile projects that don’t accomplish helplessness may intensify the adult’s inferior function experience.

Quenk “Beside Ourselves” page 113

Further text at:

http://www.glaucus.org.uk/The-Grip.jpg

Hypersensitivity in Relationships

Emotionalism



I think the answer is of the emotions are very strong, perhaps from another INTP or high introspective type, some form of communication on a telepathic level occurs, which might be called emotions, or even love.

 

[Titania]

I don't think that INTPs are feeling blind. We are analyzing our enviroment all the time and when there's people around, their emotions too. Maybe it's the N that gives us ability to do that. I think that INTPs have more problems with expressing and really feeling their own feelings. I've noticed, that it's not difficult to me to understand or rationalize feelings, but really feeling the feelings and not just thinking about them... To me emotions are so uncontrollable force that I try to hide them in the deepest closets of my mind whenever they are about to rise into the day light.

I've understood that the T/F is about how do you make decisions: with thinking and logic or with your feeling, and maybe intuitive thinking is often misconstrued as feeling.

 

[Jennywocky]

Ne is the INTP's key to unlocking F.

(It's the empathy sense and receptivity we use to imagine ourselves in someone else's shoes, modeling their experience(s) and mindset and then being able to identify with them... thus knowing how to relate to them.)

I've met INTPs who are far more T, less N; and INTPs are who are far more N and less T. The N-focused INTPs tend to do far better with connecting with others on deep levels and accurately grasping where others are coming from.

It's funny when on other forums we have had "typing" arguments about members, the T-heavier ones -- using just T to process -- tend to be far off. N really fuels many more data points and is more perceptive of the variance in the data. the T-heavier ones have a stronger more powerful internalized logic and excel where that is a strength.

 

[Oblivious]

Life is like a 24/7 TV channel to me. I observe people all the time too. The rare moments people notice what I am doing or comprehend the extent of my analysis, hell tends to be freaked out of them.

Oh, our weakness is not in the inability to understand emotion, but to apply and react appropriately to it. I've been able to achieve marginal success by forcing myself to halt my thinking process and simply saying or doing the first thing that comes to mind. This often produces mixed and sometimes insanely hilarious results, but can be quite effective if you are in the right state of mind.

Off topic: Does anyone else tend to find complex systems easier to analyze and memorize? Extremely simple systems or random facts tend to come down to plain rote learning, but complex systems tend to have a purpose to which all parts become interconnected. It then becomes a matter of understanding the concept of the system before all its parts become derivable and open to theoretical verification.

People have always found it strange I easily grasp the most complex systems but seem to stumble on random details that are child's play to understand.

 

[NoID10ts]

Off topic: Does anyone else tend to find complex systems easier to analyze and memorize? Extremely simple systems or random facts tend to come down to plain rote learning, but complex systems tend to have a purpose to which all parts become interconnected. It then becomes a matter of understanding the concept of the system before all its parts become derivable and open to theoretical verification.

People have always found it strange I easily grasp the most complex systems but seem to stumble on random details that are child's play to understand.

Wow! I am the same way. On the job, I'm very good at trouble shooting the computers and the network as long as I understand the purpose of all the different components. I can solve complex network problems fairly quickly even if I have never encountered them before, because, logically, there are only so many things that can cause any one particular problem. I've never even had any formal training in computers and networks, often don't even know proper names of things (I have a system of doohicky-A, doohickey-B, etc. ), but it all comes very easy to me.

But ask me how to do something trivial with your iPod and I just might be confounded and maybe, just maybe, will throw your iPod at the wall.

 

[Agent Intellect]

possible thread split?

but yeah, i'm the exact same way. i read a lot of science and philosophy stuff, and i can remember these complex concepts and even come up with numerous different ways of thinking about it, come up with my own analogies and look at these concepts in so many different ways, but i don't know my times tables and i can't remember if i have my keys with me or not. i have a definite "head in the clouds" syndrome, where my mind is off on hundreds of tangents thinking of complex concepts and abstract theories, but i'm terrible at the fundamentals.

 

[Jennywocky]

Off topic: Does anyone else tend to find complex systems easier to analyze and memorize? Extremely simple systems or random facts tend to come down to plain rote learning, but complex systems tend to have a purpose to which all parts become interconnected. It then becomes a matter of understanding the concept of the system before all its parts become derivable and open to theoretical verification.

I can't stand rote learning anymore.

When I was young, I did find it much easier. I would memorize things immediately, and all those details were soaked up like a sponge, by brute mental force. (I even would memorize large scripture passages to recite from memory at the release time programs, 15-20 verses at a shot in about 15 minutes -- all short term, but my brain worked very well.)

Nowadays? Ugggh. Not only do I have trouble with recalling isolated detail, but I get very bored when someone is dumping lots of detail on me without any context.

I think we organize from the inside-out, or top-down, or whatever. You need a skeleton on which to hang the facts; facts all by themselves have no context or meaning. The interrelationship is very much how people fight the effects of Alzheimer's (for example); the more connections you can make between a fact and OTHER facts in your head, the less likely it is for you to lose the information since there are multiple routes to get there.

I think we also enjoy systematic thinking because it's about the inherent RULES/definition governing the system, not necessarily the details. you can forget the details, but as long as you know the system principles, you can regenerate the details when you need them; it's very flexible... and an open-ended process, so that makes it even more appealing.

 

[Perseus]

I can't stand rote learning anymore.

When I was young, I did find it much easier. I would memorize things I think we organize from the inside-out, or top-down, or whatever. You need a skeleton on which to hang the facts; facts all by themselves have no context or meaning. The interrelationship is very much how people fight the effects of Alzheimer's (for example); the more connections you can make between a fact and OTHER facts in your head, the less likely it is for you to lose the information since there are multiple routes to get there.

I think we also enjoy systematic thinking because it's about the inherent RULES/definition governing the system, not necessarily the details. you can forget the details, but as long as you know the system principles, you can regenerate the details when you need them; it's very flexible... and an open-ended process, so that makes it even more appealing.

Don't tell the Guardians how you think, they will put your head in a guillotine. It is a judgement call.

Nowhere to hang my coat. Put it in the closet.

And then the Eagles (INTP) soar above so high that nobody can see them and they might ... I don't know cause I am not really an Eagle. I think that they think I am a Turtle (INXP) and I won't come out of my shell/closet.

But I could always be a Dragon (INFP) hiding in my Thundersbarrow, and trying to find a time when the Guards are not about and it is safe to come out.

 

[Fordy]

Well, as many have said before me, understanding emotions isn't a problem for most of us. Like the rest of you, just being detatched and analysing is what I do, and emotions are just one aspect to think about.

Anybody else here feel as though they can give some real good advice to friends in really emotionally difficult situations for them? It's probably just our N that helps us understand their issues, and our T that helps give rational and logical advice. Im not sure...

Having said that, I often don't like being given emotional advice. Constructive criticism I can take, but sometimes just general life guidelines tend to fall on a deaf ear to me, since I've thought of all their advice before (and prefer to think of it on my own, and decide for myself whats best for me).

Actually feeling and portraying emotions is difficult for some of us from what I've seen, but that's to be expected for our personality type.

 

[shaunjvallejo]

_________

____________​

It seems a bit egotistical to make a thread about myself, but. . .I really am curious.
I took the mypersonality test about a two years ago and was INTP. I took it again sometime the beginning of this year and was INTP again. That's why I looked for forums about INTPs. This is the place where I actually feel like I fit in, with people who are a lot like me (in theory, anyway). ​

But my problem is there are a few key INTP characteristics that I apparently don't adhere to.
Most importantly. I understand emotions.​

My problem is, I'm very aware of people around me. Somehow I'm usually able to understand how they think, how they process things, and how their emotions will come into play. In social situations, I'm quiet, as many introverts are expected to be, but all the while, I'm understanding the people around me. Their emotions aren't mysteries. I'm cultivating theories about their dependance on those emotions, but that's a different topic. ​

Yeah, I know this might sound like the chameleon effect, but it's not. I'm not acting a certain way to blend in. If I'm around a bunch of very loud people, I'm as quiet as I am around the opposite sort. ​

What's more, I have this intuitive sense that is very attuned to other peoples' emotions. Many times, someone can enter a room I'm in, say one sentence, and I already have several theories about their emotional state wrapped up in my mind. From those I pick the most likely and continue to test it against that person's following actions. More often than not, I'm correct. Depending on how closed-off the person is, the process can take anywhere from a few seconds to half an hour. And of course, the better I know the person, the clearer they are to me. But there are many times when I can assess complete strangers just as accurately.​

Of course, just because I understand their emotions doesn't mean I always act on it. Usually, unless it's someone I care about, I just ignore it and keep it in the back of my mind. But when it's someone I care about, it's nice to be able to help them out, even if it's just avoiding words or actions that might make them feel worse. ​

So with all this extroverted-type emotional understanding. . .am I still INTP? Can you give me a few different definitions of how an INTP acts/functions/etc? ​

Also;;
I took the mypersonality test again a few minutes ago, My results:​

​

____________

_________​

Speaking from my own personal experiance, I don't think the hard part is so much KNOWING what other people are feeling as much as understanding WHY.

I generally know how other people are feeling, but I always have to fight the urge to validate those emotions logically. If I can't work them out logically, it's hard not to have disdain for them.

It's also difficult when people ask me about how I'm feeling. My ex wife asked me the other day how I felt about her coming over to breakfast.(expecting an emotional response) I HATE these questions, because I don't operate that way. I recognized the benefits of her being there(we have joint physical custody of a three year old) and presenting a "united front", but I was "emotion neutral". Didn't matter to me personally whether she was there or not. 1 plus, no minus, works for me.
My response, which was along those lines, is probably an excellent reason why the marriage didn't work lol. It was not well recieved.

 

[NoID10ts]

When others emote in my proximity, I have learned to just be quiet and let them emote. Like a candle, the emoting usually dies out and they feel better "getting it off their chest". For some reason, not everyone wants their problems fixed, they don't want a solution, they just want someone to know about it.

 

[Fordy]

Good point. I have done that also... Sometimes it's just best not to try and interfere and possibly make things worse. Paticularly when anger is involved...

 

[Perseus]

I find I can completely miss the emotional world of the sensors.

This can be dangerous. On at least one occasion, I failed to notice a girl took a fancy to me (thinking about something completely different) and the result was being ambushed and nearly kicked to death by a jealous Horseman (ESFJ) with help from his gang.

Now, sometimes, I can detact the emotions using intuition and I am not a strong rational, so feelings can register on social occasions. Finding a mate is very tricky though, because of guardians (who lie), and because of off-loaders (people who get fed up with their girlfriends), because of the monogamous marriage traditions, because Pony girls are trouble and do not read body language, because of fucktwits and gold-diggers, and girls that are pregnant by another looking for a breadwinner, but the biggest problem are stalkers.

 

[Kuu]

But my problem is there are a few key INTP characteristics that I apparently don't adhere to.
Most importantly. I understand emotions.​

My problem is, I'm very aware of people around me. Somehow I'm usually able to understand how they think, how they process things, and how their emotions will come into play. In social situations, I'm quiet, as many introverts are expected to be, but all the while, I'm understanding the people around me. Their emotions aren't mysteries. I'm cultivating theories about their dependance on those emotions, but that's a different topic. ​

This is pure INTP. TI and Ne. As others have said, its not that INTPs don't understand emotions. It's that we don't share them, we don't feel sad when they feel sad. We can't empathize without rationalizing. OR, like Oblivious said:

Oh, our weakness is not in the inability to understand emotion, but to apply and react appropriately to it.

It's feelers who don't understand emotions. They just... feel them and know how to handle them instinctively without even thinking.

What's more, I have this intuitive sense that is very attuned to other peoples' emotions. Many times, someone can enter a room I'm in, say one sentence, and I already have several theories about their emotional state wrapped up in my mind. From those I pick the most likely and continue to test it against that person's following actions. More often than not, I'm correct. Depending on how closed-off the person is, the process can take anywhere from a few seconds to half an hour. And of course, the better I know the person, the clearer they are to me. But there are many times when I can assess complete strangers just as accurately.​

Feelers don't make theories of other people's emotional states. That's the Ti and Ne combo again.

Off topic: Does anyone else tend to find complex systems easier to analyze and memorize? Extremely simple systems or random facts tend to come down to plain rote learning, but complex systems tend to have a purpose to which all parts become interconnected. It then becomes a matter of understanding the concept of the system before all its parts become derivable and open to theoretical verification.

People have always found it strange I easily grasp the most complex systems but seem to stumble on random details that are child's play to understand.

YES. I eat complex systems for breakfast. Anything less is so mind-numbing stupid that my mind just throws it in the recycle bin. The beauty of complex systems is no matter how chaotic they are, ultimately they are composed of simpler rules. Getting at the rules that connect everything is the hard part for other people, but for us it is easy to encapsulate the complexity and therefore memorize a system without needing the fine detail.

 

[Perseus]

This is pure INTP. TI and Ne. As others have said, its not that INTPs don't understand emotions. It's that we don't share them, we don't feel sad when they feel sad. We can't empathize without rationalizing. OR, like Oblivious said:



It's feelers who don't understand emotions. They just... feel them and know how to handle them instinctively without even thinking.

A good point. the Horsemen (ESFJ) just seem like maniacs, liars and cheats to me.

They feel what they want inside and this does not seem to matter what the Other wants as they don't read body language. I am sick to death of them.

 

[Artifice Orisit]

From a game coding and design perspective,
I coming up with some effective is higly complex systems for simulating emotions in a virtual enviroment and imparting them upon the player, however I have only figured out how to handle first stage emotions. Emotional responses based upon mixed emotions (i.e. confusion) is simply beyond logic, but with randomised variables and the inclusion of a sanity variable I hope to simulate that too. Just for clarity I'm just trying to make a system for simulating emotional affects on NPC behaviour, not actually make emotionally cognitive NPCs, I theorise that is impossible with current technology.

I know my little experiment is silly, but it's fun, I'll submit a full pesudo-code discription at some stage for kicks.

 

[Gorgrim]

What you described Chim is pretty accurate to me. I guess i just tend to be too passive and observe instead of helping people with emotional problems. I try to help out subtlely.

INTP's understand emotion's of others and alot less the emotions of themselves. Answer would be yes in my case.

Details also get the better of me, even if i seem to understand the whole thing better than anybody else .
on the matter of jenny's post before, i'd like to say I find it funny when talking of topics in school, I seem to skip by the details and focus on the big thing, the conclusion, what all the small things sum up to.

while the teachers, will say yes, but lets start at the start first. Happened today, talking about roman history actually. Hopefully you can relate

 

[Wisp]

Hmm... As I've said in other threads, I'm rather bad at seeing individuals, but the connections between them, that I can synthesize easily. So, I suppose I'm a bit Ti heavy, although I'm still quite Ne... I dunno. Maybe I'm just not emotionally Ne. I had a fairly stable childhood, with more or less understanding parents, so I suppose I don't have the survival aspect.

As far as the complex systems go, I am immersing my self in Linux, currently, coming from an XP background. I find it exhilarating as it is complex, but unlike 'doze, everything is transparent, and I can, with enough time and effort comprehend all of the inner workings of *nix systems

I'm *trying* to learn to program, but I'm being hampered by being in a school with a 2-bit programming course.

Anyway, back on topic.

 

[Perseus]

I don't know why we couldn't be acutely aware of other people's emotions - especially any of us whose 'survival' in childhood was dependent on correctly interpreting the emotional state of those around us.

Surely we can come to an abstract understanding of what these emotional games are all about, as we will certainly apply everything we can to solving the 'why' and 'how' of them. As to whether we want to become actively involved in the whole mess - I'd guess we'd all run the other way if we could.

I get into a horrible mess with emotions.

Mainly to do with irrational hatred from others. It gets obscured and I cannot see the danger.

 

[Lobstrich]

Chimera, why do you post like that? I'm just curious.

 

[hablahdoo]

Off topic: Does anyone else tend to find complex systems easier to analyze and memorize? Extremely simple systems or random facts tend to come down to plain rote learning, but complex systems tend to have a purpose to which all parts become interconnected. It then becomes a matter of understanding the concept of the system before all its parts become derivable and open to theoretical verification.

I share the feeling, for whatever reason it seems like INTPs have very segregated knowledge, as if it's organized in a theoretical sense instead of a practical one. I still can't tell you how to drive to my high school that I attended for 3 years. Agent Intellect has the same problem with times tables. Perhaps there's a secret to learning through osmosis, but I find it more likely that it has to do with our habits of knowledge access. Complex systems fit right into our anal ways

I'm curious whether there's a more scientific explanation for INTPness, like whether it's relevant to brain growth before influence from the outside.