INTP as a ruler

[Reluctantly]

Okay, so let's an INTP was appointed as an absolute ruler. They had no choice in the matter and no one seems to be against their appointment as a ruler either.

What kind of ruler would such an INTP be? What are the possibilities and why would you say so? Genuinely curious what people would say to this scenario.

 

[Ex-User (9062)]

Why not?

 

[Reluctantly]

Hah. So how does this particular ruler relate to INTP? Why not a wooden ruler?

 

[Hadoblado]

"Hey guys stop bossing each other 'round plz. I'll be over here if anyone needs me."

 

[Direwolf]

I would be a generous ruler for the mostt but wont take any b-s and will crush that with force quicker than you could say quaser^however long it takes me to crush it.

 

[z12]

Hah. So how does this particular ruler relate to INTP? Why not a wooden ruler?

Pretty simple. wooden rulers may break easier than metal rulers. INTPs' aren't particularly known for their organization skills and tidiness.. So, I'd say a wooden ruler has less chance of surviving under my chair

 

[Anktark]

Utilitarian and innovative. I don't think people would understand and/or like the changes at first, though. Press conferences would be rare, but s/he would actually answer the questions directly.

 

[onesteptwostep]

INTPs would get owned in wars, I think. You don't get to do a lot of trail and error..

 

[Perfectly Normal Beast]

"Hey guys stop bossing each other 'round plz. I'll be over here if anyone needs me."

i think i'd be really torn between that and absolute tyranny.

 

[Jennywocky]

If you want to take Lincoln as an example of some typical behaviors, it's fascinating to watch him bounce between both poles (giving free rein to his generals, then champing at the bit and wanting to take over for McClellan, because McClellan's strategies didn't necessarily make sense nor were effective); and then there's the whole debacle of staffing his Cabinet with some of his political enemies, so he definitely got all perspectives covered but politically hobbled himself. [The kind of staff that makes a round table discussion interesting is not necessarily the kind of staff that allow for productive activity.]

And focusing first on preserving the union and then evolving into a position to actively support freeing the slaves rather than having abolition as a side issue. (Beliefs evolve, I find, after gaining knowledge and experience versus starting with them.)

In positions of authority, I tend to either be "by the book" or very flexible, depending on the people I'm dealing with. If I can trust them, I let them all make their own decisions and merely facilitate for them; if their judgment and motives are suspect, I would lock everything down.

 

[Architect]

If you want to take Lincoln as an example of some typical behaviors ...

PJ puts him as an ISFJ. I don't know either way, but I have a hard time with just about any INTP being politically and people adroit enough to make it to the Presidency.

I was thrust into that kind of position. Basically four engineering divisions spread across the globe, about 400 engineers and I had a team of architects who represented each division (I was the chief architect).

If this example is representative, the issue wasn't with me making good decisions or being able to handle it (which was plenty difficult). The problem was in the perception and people management. The majority SJ's hated my logical decisions and prevarication. For example, there would be a decision and I'd say "Well here are the choices, they're all good, we could take this, or that, or ..." I couldn't help see reality for what it was. They however really just wanted marching orders. They wanted a "strong leader" who told them what to do basically. The SP's found me boring, and the few NF's/NT's didn't count as they were the minority.

Basically I spoke a different language from the majority, and even though I was good at faking it they knew. You can't really hide your essential nature. I wasn't good enough at the people interfacing either. Eventually I left it and a ISTJ replaced me, who worked out well.

So I don't think this discussion is useful in any real situation. Given the real world group dynamics it would be very rare an INTP would work out at all. Your conditions of "absolute ruler" and "everybody is OK with that" wouldn't be the reality.

 

[Jennywocky]

PJ puts him as an ISFJ.

It makes me wonder whether they even know any ISFJ males. Interaction style is very different.

I don't know either way, but I have a hard time with just about any INTP being politically and people adroit enough to make it to the Presidency.

Yeah, I agree with that regardless. In the USA at least, essentially the process of successfully getting elected president is not the same skillset as required to BE an excellent president. It's one of our country's systematic flaws.

I was thrust into that kind of position. Basically four engineering divisions spread across the globe, about 400 engineers and I had a team of architects who represented each division (I was the chief architect).

If this example is representative, the issue wasn't with me making good decisions or being able to handle it (which was plenty difficult). The problem was in the perception and people management. The majority SJ's hated my logical decisions and prevarication. For example, there would be a decision and I'd say "Well here are the choices, they're all good, we could take this, or that, or ..." I couldn't help see reality for what it was. They however really just wanted marching orders. They wanted a "strong leader" who told them what to do basically. The SP's found me boring, and the few NF's/NT's didn't count as they were the minority.

Basically I spoke a different language from the majority, and even though I was good at faking it they knew. You can't really hide your essential nature. I wasn't good enough at the people interfacing either. Eventually I left it and a ISTJ replaced me, who worked out well.

Yeah. I "feel" you... or "think" you or whatever. I've been in a leadership position before; it was highly formative for me and helped me understand group dynamics and change my view of "group" from "a bunch of people who does accomplishes one person's vision" to a "collective process facilitated by a leader." (That seemed to bring about the most positive outcomes but did mean I could not enact my own personal vision in the particulars.)

My ideal position in an administration is the "Merlin" of the group; give me the leader's ear and I'll give them wonderful advice and strategies that can almost seem magical -- I'll be watching people and getting a sense of "what makes them tick" which I can then impart -- and meanwhile leave me off to explore, tinker, learn, collect knowledge, and improve my ability to advise and otherwise just do my thing. If people want to think me mysterious, that's fine.

But someone else can lead (and likely will be a more effective leader).

 

[Ex-User (9086)]

I think an INTP would make for an excellent technocrat, one that would rely on the aid of other experts in their decision making and then make some thought out and educated choices.

The problem is that this INTP would require some kind of medium to connect with people, maybe an AI or ENXX trustworthy adjutant that would be good at conveying and supporting their voice in a variety of situations.

 

[Jennywocky]

....The problem is that this INTP would require some kind of medium to connect with people, maybe an AI or ENXX trustworthy adjutant that would be good at conveying and supporting their voice in a variety of situations.

Yup -- either the de facto figurehead, or some kind of position and/or apparatus that can be publicly disseminated and taken seriously. Sometimes you can luck into this if you provide a service/product that ends up being publicly known, so you develop some credibility and a vehicle by accident.

 

[Perfectly Normal Beast]

absolute tyranny

just to clarify - i meant in the sense that 'they must be forced to be free'.

 

[Yellow]

I'd say we would excel in some areas and fall short in others (to our doom).

We would excel in restructuring things to work optimally. We would decrease bureaucracy, repurpose roles and people to contribute constructively to our goals, and innovate systems to be more productive. This would be the fun part. Trying to mold the world to match our visions. I see this as the honeymoon period.

We would really tired of dealing with everyday necessities (public transportation, food distribution, disaster-relief, etc.) and therefore slack off on it (and not follow-up if we delegated these tasks). We would also give people too many freedoms and then we would be avoidant about the issues that arise from the freedoms (strong public dissent, battling factions, lawlessness, etc.). These problems would grow until we were forced to address them, and we would be miserable the whole time. This is when we would fake our own deaths to go live in the countryside or be overthrown.

Either way, if an INTP was absolute ruler, I think things would end infamously.

 

[nanook]

Ti types can sell you the holocaust as being just what you want, that comes in handy in politics and banking. But they are usually sidekicks (who excel in restructuring things to work optimally) or directors.

http://youtu.be/WAL7Pz1i1jU

 

[Bock]

I would walk in with good intentions, and be carried out with a bullet in my head a month later.

 

[Analyzer]

Similar to Marcus Aurelius even though he was probably a ISFJ.

 

[Architect]

My ideal position in an administration is the "Merlin" of the group; give me the leader's ear and I'll give them wonderful advice and strategies that can almost seem magical -- I'll be watching people and getting a sense of "what makes them tick" which I can then impart -- and meanwhile leave me off to explore, tinker, learn, collect knowledge, and improve my ability to advise and otherwise just do my thing. If people want to think me mysterious, that's fine.

But someone else can lead (and likely will be a more effective leader).

Yep, exactly. Of course you have to be OK (or learn to be OK) with your leader ignoring you too, plus the managing upwards and downwards that can still be necessary. My present boss is about ideal. ESFP, but he's very people savvy and understands me closely, without knowing MBTI. Takes my technical advice as gospel.

A great public example to study is Paul Wolfowitz and George W. Bush. Wolfowitz is an INTP, and the proof is in a Senate testimony he gave during the Iraq war. I wish I had a clip of it, and I don't know why I actually saw it at the time (I must have been studying how politics worked), but he and Rumsfeld were justifying the actions of the administration. Anyhow some senator asked a question and the Wolfowitz INTP came out. To me it was hilarious, he leaned back, looked abstractly into the distance and started speaking incredibly precisely and abstrusely about all of the factors that went into the decision. He way laying out the whole plan and all the architecture for it.

Well Rumsfeld, probably an ISTJ maybe? obviously has seen this before and knows it's not the place or time for another long winded analysis, so he hurriedly, and somewhat disgustedly jumps in and ends the monologue. It was such an obvious and beautiful example of an INTP waxing on about their architecture and theory, I loved it. Clearly he was the Architect of the war, with Bush the Decider, Rumsfeld the implementor and Rove the Political manager. Powell was the token outsider, and I don't know what Rice was other than a high power cheerleader.

 

[Pyropyro]

The INTP will do a Cincinnatus.

They'll set up a good system which can sort out great rulers and then retire.

 

[paradoxparadigm7]

I could see an INTP being very successful in a ruler position especially if the country was in great need and suffering to such an extent that an INTP who had a brilliant system designed to turn the tide, could get elected. Say the threat was global warming of an imminent kind or an asteroid would destroy the earth or a systemic computer virus. If said INTP came to the rescue, the country would be primed for her to rule and the quirks and 'coldness' would be seen as potentially charming....maybe

 

[Reluctantly]

The INTP will do a Cincinnatus.

I remember reading about him when looking up examples of a benevolent dictator. I think I would be like this anyway, if ever given the opportunity. It's too bad government positions don't seem to be about acting as a servant to the people, rather than the common grabbing and utilizing of power. But I suppose that needs to be something the politician seeks to be or it's just not going to happen.

just to clarify - i meant in the sense that 'they must be forced to be free'.

I'd very much like to hear what you mean by this.

INTPs would get owned in wars, I think. You don't get to do a lot of trail and error..

You don't think an INTP could make a good commanding officer? I'd agree with you, if it came down to tactics, but when in control of an entire military, controlling the details isn't necessary. Creating a valid strategy that sets things on a good course, letting the executing officers and enlisted figuring out how to win the battles, is all that seems to be needed.

A great public example to study is Paul Wolfowitz and George W. Bush. Wolfowitz is an INTP, and the proof is in a Senate testimony he gave during the Iraq war. I wish I had a clip of it, and I don't know why I actually saw it at the time (I must have been studying how politics worked), but he and Rumsfeld were justifying the actions of the administration. Anyhow some senator asked a question and the Wolfowitz INTP came out. To me it was hilarious, he leaned back, looked abstractly into the distance and started speaking incredibly precisely and abstrusely about all of the factors that went into the decision. He way laying out the whole plan and all the architecture for it.

Well Rumsfeld, probably an ISTJ maybe? obviously has seen this before and knows it's not the place or time for another long winded analysis, so he hurriedly, and somewhat disgustedly jumps in and ends the monologue. It was such an obvious and beautiful example of an INTP waxing on about their architecture and theory, I loved it. Clearly he was the Architect of the war, with Bush the Decider, Rumsfeld the implementor and Rove the Political manager. Powell was the token outsider, and I don't know what Rice was other than a high power cheerleader.

I suppose you're right, which is rather sad. If only people cared about the reasons that go into the political decisions that are made, perhaps propaganda wouldn't be such an effective political tool anymore. It's almost like saying that a sensor type is necessary to water down the truth and get people to listen and follow.

My ideal position in an administration is the "Merlin" of the group; give me the leader's ear and I'll give them wonderful advice and strategies that can almost seem magical -- I'll be watching people and getting a sense of "what makes them tick" which I can then impart -- and meanwhile leave me off to explore, tinker, learn, collect knowledge, and improve my ability to advise and otherwise just do my thing. If people want to think me mysterious, that's fine.

Merlin, yeah that kind of makes a lot of sense. So absolute ruler might be a bit of an oxymoron for an INTP then.

 

[Perfectly Normal Beast]

I'd very much like to hear what you mean by this.

i mean i would be extremely tempted to toss all my ideals about non-coercive, non-normative minimalist nightwatchman (preferably non-necessary) states out of the window and attempt to impose positive liberty according to my own conception of what individuals' "higher selves" should want if they are to ever be truly "free".

Positive liberty [...] is concerned with a person's wish to be its own master and has become associated with doctrines of self-realization. This concept implies a dualistic nature of a person: the higher self, which is reasonable and should be in control, in contrast to the lower, irrational, impulsive self. For it is assumed that a person is only really itself and in control of its life and consequently positively free, when the higher self controls the lower one. So to speak, it should be a person's only goal to become this higher, rational self. Proponents of positive liberty regard the coercion of forcing lower selves into the higher state as a liberation and therefore justified. They argue that it would be their own wish if they had already reached that higher rational level.

source

 

[Brontosaurie]

i would do this

reduce expenses: remove a lot of laws (no penalties for risk behavior - only actual crime in the libertarian should be illegal) and thereby reduce administration costs, also remove tax-financed social support, public service and infrastructure,

increase income: more progressive taxes

also remove taxes on purchases (what's the fucking point?)

yield: increase individual welfare benefits, even out the distribution of spendable money across population - less income gap, less segregation, a more cooperative and healthy and progressive social climate

 

[Architect]

I suppose you're right, which is rather sad. If only people cared about the reasons that go into the political decisions that are made, perhaps propaganda wouldn't be such an effective political tool anymore. It's almost like saying that a sensor type is necessary to water down the truth and get people to listen and follow.

In today's media world. It's interesting to look at a history of political discourse. Speaking of Lincoln, you know he gave a campaign speech as part of his rail tour that lasted for hours? He talked ex-tempore for 2 or three hours, then they broke for a brief dinner, then he and the audience reconvened and he talked for another 3 hours or something. Unimaginable today.

Now of course at most it's an hour, including commercials. And only short, punchy sound bites. More of a show, well it's entirely a show, rather than a debate or discussion. This applies to all leaders in just about all situations too. It's "inspiring".

Well NT's/NF's are a small fraction of the population, so they know what they're doing.

 

[Jennywocky]

Merlin, yeah that kind of makes a lot of sense. So absolute ruler might be a bit of an oxymoron for an INTP then.

perfect position if you want to lead -- being in charge (i.e., having people do things the way you see as most logical/fair way) without ever having to actually make a decision, bwa ha ha ha.

 

[scorpiomover]

Easy. Same as INTP department heads managed it,. There's an INTP here or on INTJF who said that he managed 70 employees. He would ask his subordinates for ideas, and then pick the best one.

 

[Rainer]

I'm an INTP (I have no doubt about this) and a few years, I might end up taking over ownership of a family light manufacturing business with about $2 million in sales and about 15 employees. I have a background in accounting already though I haven't finished school yet. Don't know how that would go, but my dad, the current boss, is an ENFP who is bored of the business and mostly ignores it in favor of his organic farm, which actually interests him. I understand the business pretty well having worked there in the past. I posed the idea of buying the business from him (he would finance it) and he tentatively accepted(!), though with the understanding that it'd be after I finish school. He knows selling it to an outsider would lead to its dismemberment, and he's quickly getting toward retirement age. The business is currently actually run on a day-to-day basis in a sort of egalitarian fashion by the IxFP sales manager, ESTJ production manager, and INTP bookkeeper (a friend of mine).

I don't know if I would be a good leader, but no other move would lead to me making so much money so soon (it will probably be about at the six-figure mark to twice that, depending on the year) without having to report to a strict, authoritarian boss. As long as I can segregate the company's liabilities from my own personal savings, I should be golden for a while.

 

[Frankie]

INTPs can be ruthless when it comes to it, but they generally tend to seek the opinions of others. My current boss is exactly like that.