• OK, it's on.
  • Please note that many, many Email Addresses used for spam, including GMAIL, are not accepted at registration. Select a respectable Free email.

INTP always intelligent?

Joined
Feb 19, 2016
Messages
41
#1
Every forum, every video always talk about INTPs being highly intelligent, especially at solving problems or puzzles. The older I get the more I begin to accept that I simply don't have the intelligence nor the mental stamina to solve complex issues. I switched my career from film making to IT for family reasons and learned coding. But it's really not coming easy to me. I'm learning slowly and forget what I don't practice daily.

So now I'm asking myself: should I just accept that I'm not intelligent even though I have the ambition to become a good coder? Or could there be a psychological reason?

Is using your brain also exhausting for you guys or does it actually wake you up and make you feel good?
 

Animekitty

World A.I. transfomantion is Near
Joined
Apr 4, 2010
Messages
5,169
Location
4D Archaeology computer grid
#2
I burned out my brain long ago (not INTP) but am slowly learning to be the way I was when I was 22 with the stamina but less so with the frustration of going too fast. I am letting my brain talk to itself internally, flushing out the fatigue and absorbing the negative energy. being embodied. Letting things happen not trying to control it just watching everything inside. Directing my attention, not my effort. This causes relief. Loving myself by holding myself from the inside.

We share Ne but Ti is supposed to be super organized and structured I have seen from INTPs. If you are having trouble with this I hope what I said above works. Ne is where I come up with this stuff to begin with as my dom function ENFP.
 

Sapphire Harp

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2008
Messages
649
Location
Denver, Colorado
#3
Every forum, every video always talk about INTPs being highly intelligent, especially at solving problems or puzzles. The older I get the more I begin to accept that I simply don't have the intelligence nor the mental stamina to solve complex issues.
I guess I'm wondering what you're thinking of when you say "complex issues." I don't think the solving problems & puzzles business is a great demonstration of the INTP mindset being intelligent. Not exactly. Usually, that observation is more of a comment on how INTP types are often deeply engaged and energized by that kind of abstract thinking.
It can be especially notable since INTPs are often wallflowers, then suddenly become very noticeable if a puzzle suddenly makes them really active and animated.
So now I'm asking myself: should I just accept that I'm not intelligent even though I have the ambition to become a good coder? Or could there be a psychological reason? Is using your brain also exhausting for you guys or does it actually wake you up and make you feel good?
This is a pretty huge topic. Would you mind elaborating some more? I don't want to just blindly jump in.
 

Hadoblado

The choicest fuckboi
Joined
Mar 17, 2011
Messages
4,848
#4
Just do it and don't worry about whether you can or not. It's a waste of time. Unless you've got a good reason to assume you can't do something, just assume you can and act accordingly. That's what all the normies do and it works for them :P

Mentally taxing stuff is stimulating, but still exhausts me, especially if I'm not making headway. The less familiar it is, the more taxing it is. When I get to be effective in an area I'm familiar with, I feel like I'm unleashed, but talking about stuff that is completely new costs more mental resources for fewer benefits, so burns me out real quick.

I think INTPs tend to be considered intelligent, but if MBTI is about personality, then there isn't much justification for INTPs always having a higher level of base ability. It's more likely they're better able to approach the top of their reaction range through curiosity and whatever else. If you think all the time you get better at it, same with coding and everything else.
 

Polaris

Radioactive vision
Joined
Oct 13, 2009
Messages
1,907
#5
The fact that someone demonstrates a preference for thinking doesn't reveal much about their intelligence. There seems to be this prevalent conflation of thinking with intelligence, but I guess it depends what one spends more time thinking about, how one thinks about it; whether one then goes and tests ideas against reality, and finally whether one actually learns anything from it.

According to some study(ies?), Ne doms appear to top the gifted category...cba posting link right now as I'm supposed to be asleep. I just wonder how culturally dependent all this typology stuff is though, because when you look to Asian countries the distribution seems all the more flat, or less type dependent....anyway, I'm probably pulling stuff out of my ass at this point because I'm tired, so don't quote me on that.

Edit: and listen to Hado, of course...I don't really have any useful advice because I just throw myself headfirst into things and hope for the best...well, it's a bit more calculated than that, but sometimes you have to take a risk because no matter how much one prepares, the future remains elusive.
 

sushi

Active Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2013
Messages
296
#6

did you solve the puzzle
 

Serac

Prolific Member
Joined
Jun 7, 2017
Messages
1,052
Location
Stockholm
#7
Cue the "just do it" Shia LaBeouf meme.

There is an important thing to understand here. Although I agree that you should be very careful about putting limits on what you think you can achieve, I do disagree with the notion of "just do it and don't worry about it". If your idea of becoming better at programming – or any non-trivial skill – is to just do it on a regular basis and wait patiently for the progress, that's a pretty big mistake. You might improve a bit when you are a complete newbie, but after that out will likely stagnate very quickly.

An excerpt from a book on skill acquisition called "Peak" by Pool & Ericsson, describing a conversation between a music student and his teacher:

Teacher: Your practice sheet says that you practice an hour a day, but your playing test was only a C. Can you explain why?
Student: I don't know what happened! I could play the test last night!
Teacher: How many times did you play it?
Student: Ten or twenty.
Teacher: How many times did you play it correctly?
Student: Umm, I dunno... Once or twice...
Teacher: Hmm... How did you practice it?
Student: I dunno. I just played it.

I have seen my fair share of people in programming who may have programmed in the same language for a year or more, but still suck horribly. That's typically because they just type code without thinking about things like: how can the code be improved, how can the problem be solved more efficiently, what aspects of my coding reflect a lack of knowledge/skills. If they run into errors they just google the error message without even looking at their code, stuff like that.

That book emphasizes that in order to get better at things, at the very least you need something they call purposeful practice: it's when you can practice something with clearly defined criteria for what it means to "become better" at the thing, clear ways of measuring your progress, get feedback on where you do mistakes and where you do things correctly, etc.

When it comes to programming in particular: to me, coding is just writing down a solution to a problem. The actual solution of the problem is an algorithm – a solution which should exist even before you have typed a single character on the keyboard, and one which could be written in any language, for example pseudo-code. Now, you need knowledge about a programming language in order to implement an algorithm with it, but that's quite different from having skills in problem solving. I mean, you don't learn how to problem-solve by merely learning English.

I've mentioned this before on this forum, but my problem-solving skills have greatly benefited by things like project euler. Doing math also brings a lot of clarity to my mind which definitely improves my problem-solving skills in general.
 
Last edited:

Cognisant

Condescending Bastard
Joined
Dec 12, 2009
Messages
7,590
#8
Telling people they're intelligent is a great way to cripple them, if you think you're intelligent you expect intellectual tasks to be easy and so you won't work as hard as someone who assumes they're not.

Consider yourself an enthusiastic dumbass and you'll find encouragement in whatever progress you make.
 
Joined
Feb 19, 2016
Messages
41
#9
Thanks for all your answers. I would like to reply to everyone if I could. For now I need to think about t your answers first.
 

baccheion

Active Member
Joined
May 2, 2016
Messages
163
#10
INTPs are supposedly more likely to be gifted. More not always. Either way, you could look into a nutrient test like NutrEval (include hormone panel) to ensure there aren't any imbalances/deficiencies. If not taking a vitamin D or magnesium supplement, then those levels are likely low/insufficient.

A good nootropic (cognition enhancing) stack: AOR Ortho-Core, Doctor's Best Real Krill Enhanced, Life Extension D + K, SEMAX, selank, and alpha-GPC.

Cheaper (but get the previous if you can): Life Extension Two-per-day, magnesium oil spray as a deodorant, and noopept.

You could also try meditating or listening to brainwave entrainment audio (see Jeffrey Thompson presets on Spotify/Youtube) prior to learning.
 
Last edited:

Animekitty

World A.I. transfomantion is Near
Joined
Apr 4, 2010
Messages
5,169
Location
4D Archaeology computer grid
#11
After listening how Chris Langan talks intellectually I realized his approach was to reasoning was deductive. Michael Pierce has Ti in INTP's as deductive so I would say Chris Langan is INTP. Just for comparison to an example of a deductive Ti approach. Sometimes he just gives his opinion and is not always in logic mode. But can sure make sound reasoning that is hard to argue against. Very tight nit.

You do not necessarily have to be intelligent to be a deductive reasoner. It is a structure, not a quantitative calculation at gifted or genius levels. Structure is a tool that solves many problems because it organizes thought rather than thought doing all the work to organize the data like in Te. I have Te as tertiary and its a pain when I miss data because I fail at research or make improper inferences I would not have made if I remembered data I had store elsewhere I forgot. Te doms usually organize so well, account for every puzzle piece of evidence the empirical proof leads to the inevitable conclusion/goal. (Ti next paragraph)

This one Te person never ceases to (on a blog I visit) ask inanely for you to substantiate your claims with evidence. I do not have evidence. I only think it is true because the idea popped into my head. I need to work it out. He is an idiot thinking I testest it for validity. It is one of those annoying things where instead of having conversations a person memorized the maybe 50 different logical fallacies and cannot talk normal anymore.

(Now the Ti stuff sorry)

Deduction creates frameworks Because it is basically algebra (don't hold me to that its analogy). On one side premise and on the other conclusions. And then proofs proving themselves from the outside. Kurt Godel. Lots of parentheses, sets, and inclusion. I am butching all this but hold on. I am getting at is this: Logic is structure and framework is your idea in a specific structure obeying logic. (I have trouble understanding semantics and syntax proof because no one explained it to me by how Godel did it) INTP's are supposed to navigate naturally maths in this way because their cognition just thinks in logics. Mine thinks in (Ne) so I get this stuff from no experience at all but from Concepts. If Syntax is empty of meaning but are just rules how does semantics become part of the rules? I understand the question no one ever told me this question. I naturally do not think in logics like INTP's. I just know (Ne)

Rember that you do not need to have a huge working memory to think in logics, just that you can do logics and this is advantaged because people like me cannot follow.
 

Niclmaki

Disturber of the Peace
Joined
Oct 21, 2012
Messages
321
Location
Canada
#12
As a super Ne user (ENTP) my brother that is an INTP is likely more intelligent than me in quite a few ways. He actually has the stamina and desire to deeply understand things.

Analogy-wise, he has 5 giant holes dug out, while I’m off digging a new hole every two scoops.

More specific to your question; almost everything things require a lot of practice. In my understanding, it is even more true for coding. It is very unnatural to learn, and really alters how you must think to do it.

As an ENTP, learning something new is exciting, but once I start learning the details and step-by-steps I get bored. That’s when it starts sucking all the energy out of me.

However; if you have the ambition for it, go for it. I would love ambition for something, I’d actually be able to get things done.
 
Joined
Jan 1, 2009
Messages
3,613
#13
Every forum, every video always talk about INTPs being highly intelligent, especially at solving problems or puzzles. The older I get the more I begin to accept that I simply don't have the intelligence nor the mental stamina to solve complex issues. I switched my career from film making to IT for family reasons and learned coding. But it's really not coming easy to me. I'm learning slowly and forget what I don't practice daily.

So now I'm asking myself: should I just accept that I'm not intelligent even though I have the ambition to become a good coder? Or could there be a psychological reason?
I'd focus less on intelligence and more on how your abilities line up with the tasks you want to do. Instead of thinking whether you're intelligent enough to solve this particular problem, rather consider whether you have the information, knowledge and ability to solve that particular problem,. Intelligence is more of a spectrum, and you can't always extrapolate whether something (someone*, freudian slip, those human thingies :ahh:) is intelligent or not based on their competence in a few select areas.

There is this one explained concept regarding self confidence and self perception. It's probably more complex in practice than what I'm about to explain, but I find it kinda illustrates possible methods of self perception in a helpful way

A lot of children grow up where they are praised for their intelligence and other inherent abilities when they do well in sports, school or whatever activity they do well in. When they do well, they are being told they're intelligent and smart. When parents and teachers do this, they teach children that success or failure is a matter of inherent ability. If they do well it's proof they're intelligent. If they fail, nobody ever tells them this but it's kinda implicit, it means they are dumb.

The other method is basically praising children's effort and applied abilities, rather than what they are born with. If you did well it's because you worked hard. Children start thinking their success is related to how hard they work or that if they fail it doesn't mean they are dumb, it just means they have to work harder or differently

Interestingly, the latter group is shown to be better able to handle depression and difficult problems (I read this in Norwegian some years ago, so don't have a source, maybe googling growth mindset and depression will yield results). When the former group meet complex problem solving, they give up and blame themselves. The latter group keep trying and don't feel bad to the same degree about failing. To them it's a challenge they can overcome, to the former it's proof of their innate missing abilities, it's static and unchangeable.

Of course, in reality, people tend to do a bit of both, and probably have other types of input regarding their self perception. But I think this kinda illustrates how wrecked you can get if you grow up with the "you're intelligent" perspective or if you continue to cling to it as an adult. It's possible to change perspective as an adult and start focusing more on your own results compared to yourself, rather than others. Or to start recognizing failing doesn't mean a lack of intelligence. It's not necessarily easy to do this shift, but if you start being able to shift it, you might start feeling less concerned about how a task says something about your intelligence and to what degree your innate abilities is a limiter from what you can do. Mastering tasks might come a bit more into focus and you might start feeling generally more relaxed. It's about the challenge, not the result. Well, ofc you'll get fired if you get no results, but you know what I mean.

I'm kinda with Serac on recognizing there sometimes are things we can't do, but sometimes I think Hado's "just do it" approach can encourage people to make leaps where they grow and are better off for. Sometimes people need to realize they can't do that thing they really wanted to. Other times they need to make the jump and realize they could do more than they thought

So basically, most people wont have any idea what their choice will result in, so I guess we're just generally fucked :alien:

I guess if you know you can handle the consequences of failing, then, sure, try it.

Oh, also, I don't know anything about coding, but I agree the kind of mindset you get into stuff, process and learn have a lot to say in regard to how well you will do. It's not just about being intelligent, it's about being able to take in information in a way where you understand the implications and logical consequences of it. Which is kinda difficult to explain how to do, and when you were in school, most of the time you only learn how to memorize, not how to apply what you learned in a larger whole. Kinda.

Lastly, sometimes your brains will get exhausted as you use it in new ways, sometimes it's more of an temporary exhaustion where you teach yourself to become a more efficient thinker. Other times, things are just hard, man. As long as you're not braindead after working with something for a few hours, don't worry about it. At least you (probably) wont get alzheimer

Analogy-wise, he has 5 giant holes dug out, while I’m off digging a new hole every two scoops.

As an ENTP, learning something new is exciting, but once I start learning the details and step-by-steps I get bored. That’s when it starts sucking all the energy out of me.
Enfp (Ne dom), same here. Though, I still want to learn the details because I know it's improves understanding. I just very easily get bored by them :mad: For instance, spelling is a boring detail
 

Serac

Prolific Member
Joined
Jun 7, 2017
Messages
1,052
Location
Stockholm
#14
@Minuend I agree with everything you wrote, but I want to clarify what my message was. It was not that one should recognize one's inherent limitations - I view that as a sure way to rob oneself of any opportunity one might have for self-realization. My point was that when one fails to achieve things in endeavors requiring skills, it is quite guaranteed that the cause of that failure is a failure to understand that skill acquisition has little to do with innate intelligence - and everything to do with persistent, prolonged and right form of training. The reason I dislike the "just do it" mantra is that it will likely lead to indiscriminate, aimless action, which in turn will lead you back to square one, making you reconsider once again whether your genetic makeup will allow you to achieve your goals. One should be paranoid about one's skills, but in the right way.
 
Last edited:

Animekitty

World A.I. transfomantion is Near
Joined
Apr 4, 2010
Messages
5,169
Location
4D Archaeology computer grid
#15
I was solving problems where you had to rotate several shapes at the same time to sort out the 5 shapes of the 10 shape given that correctly made the picture. So of the ten 5 were not part of the picture and the 5 that were in random order and rotated not in the position they were in the picture. I had to select the 5 correct shapes. This was simple with 3 shapes but I could not do 5 or 4 I think.

The aim was to find the shapes that made the picture. The shapes got more complex and more shapes were given and decoy shapes. It got tougher and tougher. And I reached my limit.

The technical term is abstraction which as how it is used means tracking the order of many items at once. I can agree with this term in that past a point I lose track of the order of items when the number of items gets to a certain point. I simply forget everything I need to do. If I can work inside that limit I do not forget but my intelligence as I see it is equitable to what I can remember because that is what I can manipulate.

Since being INTP is the mental approach of the psyche and not the quantity of memory it has. Intelligence and Type are quite separate. You can be proficient at deductive reasoning associated with Introverted Thinking and not necessarily have a large memory but also you could be the opposite, a large memory. But with deductive reasoning as a dominant way of mentally functioning deductive problem solving is much easier.