INTP trait you like the most in yourself

[intpz]

In regards to @Architect's thread, just the other way around.

To start with:

I like being an information sponge. It's useful and fun, especially when you're in an argument with somebody who doesn't have that knowledge. It can be immensely fun! If only there would be no people who say "it's bullshit until I've read about it or heard it on TV/radio..."

 

[Architect]

I like how well and clearly I can think. I know some things as well as anybody, such as computers, economics, classical music, religion and physics. I know that my opinions on some matters may be wrong, such as life after death, the relative merits of the Western canon composers, and the state of the U.S. and E.U. economies, but that they are about as well informed and firmly based as they can be.

 

[shortbuss]

I like my ability to sound profound to others. Although I know I am not as wise as I sound, I find friends often appreciate my ability to put words to ideas and concepts. It makes me feel smart when otherwise I know I'm just an average person in almost every way. I'm close to being an INFP, so I'm also good at helping people sift through their feelings sometimes, and I genuinely enjoy trying to help people with their issues, or just provide a listening ear if that's all they're after.

Sometimes it seems like I'm living on a higher plain of consciousness than some. I'm fairly sure this is just my way of stroking my own ego, and rationalizing why I feel alienated from certain groups and individuals, but then again, other people can show the most remarkable feats of thoughtlessness. It's hard to tell what's real in this regard, but I suppose it doesn't matter anyway.

I'm happy with being INTP overall. I like being contemplative, even if its not a readily useful skill. At least we think for ourselves. That's worth something to me.

 

[pjoa09]

Comfort with solitude, 'tolerating' nature, and 'justified'.

 

[P.H.]

Being an INTP would suck big time without Ne.

 

[Proletar]

I have an ability to separate between true and false, and by god, is it great to have.

Combine that with a nonexistant respect for any kind of authority except the truth, and you've got a free thinker that may have some false beliefs (ironic) but still holds more knowledge than most people.


The low carb diet cures obesity and diabetes.
Cannabis is a great medicine for loads of illnesses.
Ibogain cures the physical and sometimes the psychological dependance on most drugs.

The moon landing was not staged.
Aliens did not build the pyramids.
The world is not controlled by the illuminati.


For examples.

 

[Architect]

I have an ability to separate between true and false, and by god, is it great to have.

The low carb diet cures obesity and diabetes.
Cannabis is a great medicine for loads of illnesses.

These two comments demonstrate a trait I see in INTP's frequently, which is drawing incorrect conclusions from a limited set of correct data. Spock was guilty of this in the old Star Trek, he only made mistakes when he had correct logical conclusions based on limited information.

Unless you are being ironic (hard to tell here), these are true statements, that are utterly false in the larger picture. Keep studying grasshopper ...

 

[Proletar]

These two comments demonstrate a trait I see in INTP's frequently, which is drawing incorrect conclusions from a limited set of correct data. Spock was guilty of this in the old Star Trek, he only made mistakes when he had correct logical conclusions based on limited information.

Unless you are being ironic (hard to tell here), these are true statements, that are utterly false in the larger picture. Keep studying grasshopper ...

I believe these things to be true, yes. On the other hand I'm not bound to my conclusion in any way. It can be refined or completely changed if I am proven wrong, no matter.

I do however know that these things work for me. But these are discussions for other threads.

 

[intpz]

I've noticed that quite some time ago, and so I'm trying not to do it anymore.

 

[Hadoblado]

These two comments demonstrate a trait I see in INTP's frequently, which is drawing incorrect conclusions from a limited set of correct data. Spock was guilty of this in the old Star Trek, he only made mistakes when he had correct logical conclusions based on limited information.

Unless you are being ironic (hard to tell here), these are true statements, that are utterly false in the larger picture. Keep studying grasshopper ...

I would side with @Proletar here. I may be talking out my arse, but comparative to other types I think INTP's are less inclined to commit to a position that is uncertain. Allowing for the possibility of being incorrect IMO is one of the hallmarks of logical thinking. Even as I write this I am strongly considering the possibility that I am wrong, but from the data available to me this seems the best conclusion.

I like how well and clearly I can think. I know some things as well as anybody, such as computers, economics, classical music, religion and physics. I know that my opinions on some matters may be wrong, such as life after death, the relative merits of the Western canon composers, and the state of the U.S. and E.U. economies, but that they are about as well informed and firmly based as they can be.

See how you acknowledge the shortcomings of your data?

 

[Architect]

I would side with @Proletar here. I may be talking out my arse, but comparative to other types I think INTP's are less inclined to commit to a position that is uncertain. Allowing for the possibility of being incorrect IMO is one of the hallmarks of logical thinking. Even as I write this I am strongly considering the possibility that I am wrong, but from the data available to me this seems the best conclusion.

My position is very specific, which is how INTP's can make mistakes by using Ti too much in preference to Ne. A common failing, which leads to faulty conclusions (I did not explain this). In this example a cursory examination of the scientific literature would show the value of a low carb diet (i.e. not very) That approach is purely a fad from Dr Atkins who profited from telling people what they wanted to hear, and who by the best accounts (the family wants to keep this quiet) was a fat, sick old man who died by slipping on the ice.

To be honest, I don't have the same level of knowledge on pot, but I have strong doubts it is a magical elixir.

See how you acknowledge the shortcomings of your data?

No.

Let me elaborate. On these subjects I exhaustively studied both sides of the issue (using my Ne), and developed hypothesis, all of which were subsequently proven correct. On the economy I developed a cyclic theory that did not incorporate the Efficient Market theories as I thought them to be mostly false - and I put my money where my mouth was. The crashing housing bubble and economy bore me out and so I profited from it. The only mistakes I made were underestimating the degree of unemployment in the crash, and not accounting for how willing people would be to 'kick the can down the road'.

The same goes for the other examples I gave, but I won't bore you here. The difference lies in the degree of issue exploration, which I agree INTP's are supremely talented at. As a caution I encourage all INTP's to treat their Ne with care.

 

[Proletar]

My position is very specific, which is how INTP's can make mistakes by using Ti too much in preference to Ne. A common failing, which leads to faulty conclusions (I did not explain this). In this example a cursory examination of the scientific literature would show the value of a low carb diet (i.e. not very) That approach is purely a fad from Dr Atkins who profited from telling people what they wanted to hear, and who by the best accounts (the family wants to keep this quiet) was a fat, sick old man who died by slipping on the ice.

To be honest, I don't have the same level of knowledge on pot, but I have strong doubts it is a magical elixir.

That's another one I'm proud of not having. This is a trait I notice on many people, and sadly, even the INTP.

"If it's too good to be true, it probably isn't" is a horrible preference to have when confronted with new ideas. That is, being conservative and suspicious BEFORE obtaining the data. If I told you the theory at this point, when you have already made up your mind, it wouldn't matter what I said, or how true it is.

Everything is relative. Sure - the atkins diet normalizes the metabolism and the blood glucose-level and as a result makes people lose weight and their sweet-tooth, but that doesn't mean it's a walk in the park. When obesity and diabetes seizes to be a problem, then planning becomes one. Imagine to all of a sudden not be able to order food that you can eat wherever you are, or to have to spend 20mins more in the kitchen every morning. It's not magic at all.


So my advice to you: Swallow it whole. THEN spit it out.

 

[Architect]

My apologies, your reply confuses me, it seems to be melding a number of points. I'll attempt to write a suitable response

That's another one I'm proud of not having. This is a trait I notice on many people, and sadly, even the INTP.

I think you're talking about my point of forming opinions before having adequate data. I agree, however most people make a mistake that is somewhat different than what I'm saying. Most people form opinions without taking in any data at all. They find out what their peers think (political or religious usually) and then embark on a course of trying to prove that correct.

INTP's can have a somewhat different problem, of not acquiring adequate data. We need to be cautious of having well informed opinions, that aren't well informed enough.

"If it's too good to be true, it probably isn't" is a horrible preference to have when confronted with new ideas. That is, being conservative and suspicious BEFORE obtaining the data. If I told you the theory at this point, when you have already made up your mind, it wouldn't matter what I said, or how true it is.

Completely agree, this seems to be a new point however, and I don't see that INTP's are particularly prone to this problem. Our problem, related to the one above, can be that once we've formed a theory on incomplete data, that we can be unwilling to reexamine based on new data. Again a failure of Ne.

Everything is relative.

A meaningless statement, low caloric Relativism

Sure - the atkins diet normalizes the metabolism and the blood glucose-level and as a result makes people lose weight and their sweet-tooth

Agreed. So does eating nothing, or periodic fasting (one meal per day is enough), or eating a high carbohydrate diet consisting of purely complex carbohydrates and green vegetables.

but that doesn't mean it's a walk in the park.

Precisely, because it is a diet supporting heart disease, cancer, gout and a variety of others.

When obesity and diabetes seizes to be a problem,

'ceases' you mean?

then planning becomes one. Imagine to all of a sudden not be able to order food that you can eat wherever you are, or to have to spend 20mins more in the kitchen every morning.

Agreed, I can't order food whereever I am, and I might spend more time in the kitchen than others. However I've lived abroad (Europe and Asia mostly) without any difficulty on this diet. Not eating the Standard American Diet is hardly a handicap.

It's not magic at all. So my advice to you: Swallow it whole. Then spit it out.

Not sure what these statements are referring to.

 

[Somnus]

I've read some very impressive replies here, I'm actually rather intimidated from expressing my opinion but here goes!

I guess my favorite characteristic applies towards INTP is my cold objectivity. I don't think I'm completely objective, who is? But the friend circle I enjoy seems to respect my opinions on matters both personal and not because of my ability to not think too emotionally.

 

[TriflinThomas]

I like how weird it makes me, makes life a lot more interesting... I also like how I'm not fettered by social rules.

 

[The Gopher]

I like how I can mirror people and fit in with any crowd. (although this depends on if I am bothered to do so)

 

[P.H.]

I also like that (close) people value my opinion because they know I've thought it through and never just shout something. And people trust me with their thoughts and personal life because I won't judge them.

"I feel safe with you" is the next best compliment to "You're bordering Einstein genius".

 

[Arachnid]

I find that I have a somewhat rare openness to new ideas and possibilities while simultaneously having a more critical and skeptical mind. Everything gets examined and no matter the evidence, it never gets turned into a "law".

Most people appear to either be very shut off from "reality disrupting" ideas, and dismiss them before real consideration, or they're overly accepting of them, believing every cooky theory that get's thrown about.

I like this quality, but it makes it very difficult to find other people who are similarly open and rational. It also makes me feel somewhat like my inner world is like the hogwarts castle: everything stays somewhat the same, but the stairs and rooms shift around, never really allowing me to get completely comfortable with where everything is.

 

[addictedartist]

I can sit and stare at people and make them feel uncomfortable
alternately I can sit and stare at people and make them feel comfortable.

 

[Vidi]

It's not exclusively INTP trait perhaps, but anyway, most of all I like when some idea takes me over completely and I ride on that idea single-mindedly and with an undivided attention. Those are the best times in my life. I like to be obsessed, without an interest it is merely an existence, the more intense an interest in something/about something, the greater is enjoyment; I feel very alive then.

The trait per se would be ability to concentrate, to shut out the distractions.
I was often reproached for my supposed absent-mindness when I was small, and I remember answering back (I was about 8 or 9), that I'm nothing of the sort, it's just the opposite, because I'm so concentrated on something else.

 

[Coolydudey]

The ability to not take life too seriously, as well as some amazing intellectual abilities in certain areas, stemming mainly from the way INTPs think.

 

[Silentdawn]

I must say I struggle to find many INTP traits that I like in myself, though it might be the immediate mental obligation I feel to swap the word 'like' with 'advantageous' when I read the title. I guess I quite like how I'm not as 'readable' as a lot of people so even when I feel uncomfortable in situations I can still appear relatively calm. I also like my ability to put up with long periods of solitude and retreat into my mind when I'm bored. Also I tend to be less inclined to follow social trends and give into peer pressure which is a trait I like in other people.

 

[perkins]

Melancholy thoughtfulness.

 

[Mello]

The ability to crush peoples' egos with my giant pness.

I can also fly.

 

[Paradox42]

i like that logic come naturally to me. i find logical thinking both useful and fun.

 

[Brontosaurie]

I like the P

 

[Vidi]

The ability to crush peoples' egos with my giant pness.

I can also fly.

Mastery of the subject is more ISTP's stock in trade. Inventing flying would be more like INTP

 

[skip]

Objective critical analysis.

 

[Philosophyking87]

Easy. The absolute most ideal INTP trait -- that which is so entirely invaluable that it cannot be dispensed with, without entirely destroying the value of the INTP experience altogether -- is the ability to make very precise, fine, and clear distinctions between even the most complex and abstract information -- an ability which I call, "conceptual acuity." Without this computer-like ability to break down and sift through tough, abstract information, we'd be like almost everyone else.

Also, it has to be mentioned that our (extraverted-intuition-driven) inclination to seek "unusual," or "unobvious" (and perhaps somewhat "creative" or "unconventional") solutions to an entire array of problems, really is a very valuable aspect of the INTP mind/personality, as well. As coupled with our conceptual acuity, this compulsion often leads to rather inventive conclusions based on some very sharp/deep analysis. Yet, in comparison to our conceptual acuity (or even the general Ti ability to draw fine distinctions at all), I wouldn't say it's this Ne ability which really makes life as an INTP so unique and exciting.

Moreover, while much of this sounds generally like "Ti dominant" characteristics, there is a distinction to make. INTPs are likely "conceptually acute," whereas ISTPs are more "mechanically acute." Thus, while ISTPs may have similar cognitive powers, they are more driven to draw fine distinctions between various types of complex concrete data (such as mechanical systems), whereas INTPs are driven to make sense of highly conceptual, highly abstract information (such as philosophical systems).

At the end of the day, however, I think the general Ti inclination to draw fine distinctions from any sort of information is what I truly enjoy about being an INTP (with our Ne traits coming as mere "additionals" or unessential "supplements"). [The "thinking" is essential -- not the creativity.] And thus, the question isn't really, "What do you enjoy about being an INTP?" and instead, "What do you enjoy about being a Ti dominant?" Because it's really the introverted thinking -- in general -- that I love most about this type of personality.

Or maybe, my answer to the original question is this:
I enjoy Ti dominance the most as an INTP.

 

[Brontosaurie]

So, hooray for having a computer in our heads!
Not sure what I'd do without it.

computer in head is more ISTP imo

 

[Philosophyking87]

computer in head is more ISTP imo

Why?

I think both types equally engage in Ti logic (they just employ them towards different areas of life). Hence, both computer brains.

 

[Brontosaurie]

Why?

I think both types equally engage in Ti logic (they just employ them towards different areas of life). Hence, both computer brains.

yeah but intuition is geared toward new solutions, something I don't associate with today computers. although it's of course possible.

 

[Philosophyking87]

yeah but intuition is geared toward new solutions, something I don't associate with today computers. although it's of course possible.

Well, first of all, the difference between sensing and intuition isn't really relevant to the analogy between the mind of a Ti dominant and a computer, because both types (INTP and ISTP) equally engage in pure computer-like logical processes, regardless. They're just computer-like minds that use logic to solve different problems (or to solve problems differently).

But it's also true that some modern computers can actually "solve" problems, think "creatively," and even "invent" things. Some make actual music, some write poems, and some have even generated highly complex math proofs never before known to humans. Also, who hasn't heard of the computer that outsmarted the world's best chest player? haha

 

[NinjaSurfer]

I don't know if it's an INTP trait, but staying relatively content while single and not feeling the urge to have a relationship is kinda cool; I compare this to one of my best friends who's a serial relationship kinda guy since we were 14; he's probably spent a max 2 weeks single;

 

[Brontosaurie]

Well, first of all, the difference between sensing and intuition isn't really relevant to the analogy between the mind of a Ti dominant and a computer, because both types (INTP and ISTP) equally engage in pure computer-like logical processes, regardless. They're just computer-like minds that use logic to solve different problems (or to solve problems differently).

But it's also true that some modern computers can actually "solve" problems, think "creatively," and even "invent" things. Some make actual music, some write poems, and some have even generated highly complex math proofs never before known to humans. Also, who hasn't heard of the computer that outsmarted the world's best chest player? haha

the personal computers we use are ISTP. they take input data from their environment (us), perform strict calculations and present only the result we've explicitly asked for, keeping most of the process hidden. they are expected to behave in a predictable manner determined by our peer pressure, which strongly inidicates an S.

theoretically, computers may well emulate ENFJ but the calculating function is not only dependent on thinking but also on form of input data.

 

[Architect]

the personal computers we use are ISTP. they take input data from their environment (us), perform strict calculations and present only the result we've explicitly asked for, keeping most of the process hidden.

That's a common misunderstanding, actually computers can be very nondeterministic. As a simple example, consider a neural net visual pattern recognizer.

 

[nanook]

wisdom = trans-rational understanding of how life actually moves or develops.
wisdom is not a boolean trait, of course.

i have an ambiguous relationship with all other traits of mine, sometimes i like them, present them somewhat proudly, but often enough i hate the restriction that comes with every single one of them. i'm sick of being me.

i guess it's most easy to 'accept' semi-typological barebone traits: introverted, intuitive, humble, gentle, sensitive (excitable), inquisitive/honest/straight. accept them like an old bicycle. it's subjectively yours and equally objectified.

 

[Brontosaurie]

That's a common misunderstanding, actually computers can be very nondeterministic. As a simple example, consider a neural net visual pattern recognizer.

of course patterns can be chaotic and nonlinear but the role of the computer is as our tool, always subject to our motives, goals and desires, analogous to the S types being subordinate to the values of society in a very direct fashion.

at micro-level the process may be non-deterministic but at macro-level that would make for a very bad computer - we need to know that it operates within certain boundaries and is predictable in terms of what queries it answers. otherwise it ceases to be a computer - our computer - and becomes a competing lifeform.

alas, my reasoning comes more from an attempt at essential definition than from knowledgability in the computer field.

 

[hopeandpray]

I like that I don't feel the need to do or not do things just because other people do, or don't do them. Most people stop blowing bubbles when they are children, it's fun so I still do it. Most people assume that there is a god because they were told so. I don't find that a good enough reason.

 

[Philosophyking87]

the personal computers we use are ISTP. they take input data from their environment (us), perform strict calculations and present only the result we've explicitly asked for, keeping most of the process hidden. they are expected to behave in a predictable manner determined by our peer pressure, which strongly inidicates an S.

theoretically, computers may well emulate ENFJ but the calculating function is not only dependent on thinking but also on form of input data.

Again, you're confusing how a computer uses (predictable/unpredictable) information with how computers actually logically process information. I'm saying that both INTPs and ISTPs logically process information in the same fashion. And this is just as true for computers.

Where we start to draw distinctions is between "personal" computers and "complex" computers with some level of artificial intelligence (even if superficially). The average home computer does use information in a predictable, practical fashion, much as an ISTP, while complex computers process information in less predictable, more complex, more creative ways, much as an INTP.

But despite the fact that both ISTPs and INTPs, and personal and complex computers, can use information differently (the personal computer using strict programs, which is like an ISTP going by a "standard" of some sort, and with complex computers using creative programming to actually "invent," like an INTP), it's still the case that -- like both complex and personal computers -- both ISTPs and INTPs essentially logically process information in the same fashion. This is because both share Introverted Thinking.

That means both types are like computers in general (even if ISTPs seem to more closely resemble home computers that follow strict programs which aren't actually "inventive" like INTPs).

of course patterns can be chaotic and nonlinear but the role of the computer is as our tool, always subject to our motives, goals and desires, analogous to the S types being subordinate to the values of society in a very direct fashion.

Not necessarily.
Modern AI computers aren't exactly "subject to our motives."
They can actually "think" creatively, without following simple programmed patterns. One computer has actually been developed that can go toe-to-toe with the world's best Jeopardy players. That is a new form of creativity. It involves less predictable decision-making.

 

[Brontosaurie]

I don't think this is going anywhere. I respectfully disagree. take this as a cop-out if you wish!

 

[m.love]

I believe I have the ability to quickly understand complex issues and get to the bottom of an issue. I am still working at making sure those around me achieve the same understanding.

 

[knight in battle]

I like how weird it makes me, makes life a lot more interesting... I also like how I'm not fettered by social rules.

Don't you comply with at least some social rules?

 

[PhoenixRising]

Don't you comply with at least some social rules?

Hell no, most INTPs completely disregard social rules because we understand that they are nothing but nonsense. It's only the weak-minded who rely on rules, because they can't figure out how to behave on their own, just like sheep taking cues from a herding dog.

 

[Etheri]

Hell no, most INTPs completely disregard social rules because we understand that they are nothing but nonsense. It's only the weak-minded who rely on rules, because they can't figure out how to behave on their own, just like sheep taking cues from a herding dog.

The P is strong in this one.

She's right tho. I think it's just hard for us to follow rules we find illogical, we won't follow rules per-se, we'll follow them when they're convenient or rational, and we'll break them when breaking them is the more rational thing to do (which is rather often )

 

[Architect]

The P is strong in this one.

lol ... seriously I enjoyed that

She's right tho. I think it's just hard for us to follow rules we find illogical, we won't follow rules per-se, we'll follow them when they're convenient or rational, and we'll break them when breaking them is the more rational thing to do (which is rather often )

I'm not sure it's due to us thinking they're illogical however. I don't follow general social rules because I think they're pointless, even while I think there is a reason behind them. Subtle difference.

Besides which I think we just like being different.

 

[intpz]

The P is strong in this one.

You made me smile for a split second!

She's right tho. I think it's just hard for us to follow rules we find illogical, we won't follow rules per-se, we'll follow them when they're convenient or rational, and we'll break them when breaking them is the more rational thing to do (which is rather often )

For me, I see why the general etiquette rules and all that shit is there and why people follow it, however I don't follow them. I do what I find logical, independent on how it is thought that it should be done. It is irrational to follow if you can lead, and I am arrogant enough to believe that I can make logical conclusions better than thousand-year rules can. I am for change and innovation, not for stagnation and obedience.

 

[Etheri]

I'm not sure it's due to us thinking they're illogical however. I don't follow general social rules because I think they're pointless, even while I think there is a reason behind them. Subtle difference.

Besides which I think we just like being different.

Exactly. They're pointless. Following them is an irrational waste of energy, unless following them prevents more hassle than breaking them creates.

I might have no morals opposing myself from killing people who do me grevious wrongs, but it's probably not worth going to jail for (or planning out a flawless murder).

I might not want to say hello to the entire fucking room I enter, but I know that when I ignore specific people, they'll only end up ranting to me about it - which is rather counter productive from what I tried to achieve.

I choose whatever my brain says makes most sense in a given situation. I think the most should be underlined here, while rules have reasons to back them up, that doesn't mean they're the best choice... I've always looked upon rules and advice and the stuff everyone does as a heuristic to life. It shows you one way of living an okay life, but it'll rarely be the "best" path. (Whatever your definition of best may be.)

TL DR: I don't see your subtle diffrence, I think it comes down to one and the same thing.

 

[Architect]

TL DR: I don't see your subtle diffrence, I think it comes down to one and the same thing.

Social conventions are grease for keeping us from killing one another. Take smalltalk and cocktail parties. I despise them, but these perform a useful social service by getting people together to remind them that we are all working toward common goals (advancement of civilization etc). You'd have a hard time not working with somebody you had a pleasant conversation with over drinks.

Take the Middle East problems, I think if we had more cocktail parties with the Libyan people we'd all find each other more agreeable. I'm being somewhat tongue in cheek here, but the essential truth of this is clear. This is why I think the internet is a wonderful mechanism in this way.

Now I also think they're pointless. People wouldn't need to do small talk if they were just smarter about it. I know not to bother other people just because they are different from me. Most people aren't like that, most Sensors won't accept you until they have a pleasant, pointless chat with you over drinks. And to be fair I'm somewhat that way myself.

Necessary, and pointless if we were all INTP's. However if we were all INTP's we'd probably all die from a disease caught from a dirty telephone too.

 

[Intellect]

most of all I like when some idea takes me over completely and I ride on that idea single-mindedly and with an undivided attention. Those are the best times in my life. I like to be obsessed, without an interest it is merely an existence, the more intense an interest in something/about something, the greater is enjoyment; I feel very alive then.

Ah, beautifully summed up.
This is probably my favorite trait in myself as well.