Riddle me this: Why do I always test as INTJ but I know I'm INTP?

[ejomby]

Everytime I've taken the test, my results end up INTJ, and usually moderately strong on the J side. But when I read the forums about INTJs, they sound like aliens to me. (For example, getting angry when someone is not on time to meet them? I couldn't care less.) And then when I read the descriptions of the INTPs, it's like someone has followed my life and is writing my biography.

Why do you think my results keep coming up wrong? I also scored once as an INFJ, but I might have been thinking too much about my role as a parent when I took that test.

Or am I really an INTJ? I'll give you three pieces of evidence.

1. I am always punctual, usually to a fault-- I'm always too early. I do make lists. And I do always plan ahead for things that are not part of my routine.
2. I have many theories that are ultimately unresolved, but are on my back-burner. Theories about beauty, about consciousness, about emotions, for example.
3. I am perfectly fine staying in my house for the rest of my life. My playground is in my head.

 

[Nezaros]

You might just be so familiar with the tests and their questions that you are unable to properly answer them. If you want a real P vs. J decision look at the difference between the functions rather than take a test. Although, it seems you're somewhat on the border. I'm not the best person to make a call on that, though.

 

[Absurdity]

Tests aren't very accurate. Flaws in self-perception can influence results. Better to read up on the cognitive functions and determine for yourself which ones fit the best.

INTJs and INTPs have zero cognitive functions in common, so it shouldn't be very difficult to determine which one best describes you.

 

[Architect]

INTJ vs. INTP: Type Differences

INTPs’ Introverted Thinking (Ti) vs. INTJs’ Extraverted Thinking (Te)

INTP's are inner judgers because Ti is a judging type. With INTP's the judging is directed inwards, meaning they order their inner world and themselves more than ordering the external world. INTJ's orient toward ordering the outer world, which is why they generally do well in the worlds of corporate and scientific/University. I mistyped myself as an INTJ before I understood all this. I don't care much about ordering the world, rather than ordering myself.

This is a common misunderstanding of MBTI. We're all Sensors, and Intuitive's, and Judgers, Feelers and Thinkers, it just depends on the orientation and where it lives in your functional stack.

 

[ejomby]

@Architect, so what probably threw the tests is that I kept answering that I planned things. But it didn't account for the fact that I was only doing this for myself. Which would be a sign of more of my dominant Ti and possibly my Fe, and reflects the consequences of ordering myself in relation to the world.

 

[snafupants]

Because the online MBTI tests aren't really gauging cognitive functions.

 

[Philovitist]

MBTI is bullshit. I suggest focusing less on labelling to yourself and more on simply understanding yourself. Personality tests can help you do this, but don't let go of the reins.

Otherwise you're going to be spending a lot of time 1) fitting yourself into a bubble precircumscribed by pseudoscientists, 2) developing post facto explanations of your behavior based on a defunct theory rather than more modern, rigorous science like you see even in this thread.

In 1991, the National Academy of Sciences committee reviewed data from MBTI research studies and concluded that only the I-E scale has high correlations with comparable scales of other instruments and low correlations with instruments designed to assess different concepts, showing strong validity. In contrast, the S-N and T-F scales show relatively weak validity. The 1991 review committee concluded at the time there was "not sufficient, well-designed research to justify the use of the MBTI in career counseling programs".

INTJ's orient toward ordering the outer world, which is why they generally do well in the worlds of corporate and scientific/University.

So...stop that.

 

[Reluctantly]

INTJ vs. INTP: Type Differences

INTPs’ Introverted Thinking (Ti) vs. INTJs’ Extraverted Thinking (Te)

INTP's are inner judgers because Ti is a judging type. With INTP's the judging is directed inwards, meaning they order their inner world and themselves more than ordering the external world. INTJ's orient toward ordering the outer world, which is why they generally do well in the worlds of corporate and scientific/University. I mistyped myself as an INTJ before I understood all this. I don't care much about ordering the world, rather than ordering myself.

This is a common misunderstanding of MBTI. We're all Sensors, and Intuitive's, and Judgers, Feelers and Thinkers, it just depends on the orientation and where it lives in your functional stack.

What do you think about this?

Ti as Inner Judgers
Jung labeled introverted functions as subjective, meaning they project characteristics onto the world. Ordering your inner world doesn't really fit with what he had in mind.
But if you organized the outer world to your own idea of how it is and/or how it should be, then you'd be doing exactly what Ti does. Of course, you could internalize an order of the world that you accept as a real part of it, without explicitly enforcing it, but by believing in it, it affects how you interact with reality and is thus projected in either case. In this sense, I could see how Ti is implicitly enforced by one's own conception of the world and Te explicitly enforced by current circumstances, but it doesn't mean Te is about ordering the world.

For example,
I've heard Ti being referred to as anything involving a Formal System (implied rules and ideas) or indulging in Qualitative reasoning (distinguishing between characteristics with reason and logic), whereas Te refers more to implementing Informal Systems (explicit rules and ideas) and exercising Quantitative reasoning (applying logic to understand and solve real world problems). But I wouldn't then call Te, ordering of the world; it's somewhat against rigid order, creating an extemporaneous order based out of necessity and circumstances, whereas Ti presupposes order and is very rigid in its classifications.

Another example, you identify yourself as Ti. But when I read your MBTI explanations and descriptions, I notice you are very rigid in how you explain things. I've never seen you change your mind about anything. It seems very fixed, even if other people disagree with you. You're asserting an order of the world that others may not agree with and I have a hard time seeing how that makes you just an inner judger of your own thoughts and not others.

 

[BigApplePi]

@Philovitist

In 1991, the National Academy of Sciences committee reviewed data from MBTI research studies and concluded that only the I-E scale has high correlations with comparable scales of other instruments and low correlations with instruments designed to assess different concepts, showing strong validity. In contrast, the S-N and T-F scales show relatively weak validity. The 1991 review committee concluded at the time there was "not sufficient, well-designed research to justify the use of the MBTI in career counseling programs".

High correlations with what? Doesn't say. It didn't say if the MBTI identified types or not. What one does with that info is another matter. Career counseling may not be the only value.

 

[walfin]

Which tests did you do?

 

[ejomby]

Which tests did you do?

I don't remember the names of them, but pretty much all the free ones. I can't take them anymore, because I know that I'm going skew the results towards INTP. Objectivity at this point is nearly impossible. But when I read the INTP profile by Paul James, pretty much everything he said described how I've approached the world.

 

[ejomby]

There was only one that finally said I was INTP-- it was split pretty close between INTJ and INTP and it gave me a tie breaker question: Are you more concerned about the conflict between your rational self and emotional self, or your rational and physical self. I chose rational/emotional and it told me I was INTP. Physical self? Ha! I am a floating cartesian cogito! Physical self be damned!

Plus, I hate scientists. Their need for definite answers. Their inability to question the foundations of their science. Their cockiness. Their judgmental nature. They never question themselves. They're materialists, empiricists, determinists. (I know it's hypocritical that I am in fact making a judgment on them, but I'm only doing it because they attack me.) I just stay away from them. In all their rationality, they are just too illogical.

 

[Architect]

Sorry @Reluctantly, I missed this

What do you think about this?

Ti as Inner Judgers
Jung labeled introverted functions as subjective, meaning they project characteristics onto the world. Ordering your inner world doesn't really fit with what he had in mind.
But if you organized the outer world to your own idea of how it is and/or how it should be, then you'd be doing exactly what Ti does. Of course, you could internalize an order of the world that you accept as a real part of it, without explicitly enforcing it, but by believing in it, it affects how you interact with reality and is thus projected in either case. In this sense, I could see how Ti is implicitly enforced by one's own conception of the world and Te explicitly enforced by current circumstances, but it doesn't mean Te is about ordering the world.

Ordering the inner world is more MBTI than Jung. I'm not a Jung expert but I find his work a little fuzzy.

For example,
I've heard Ti being referred to as anything involving a Formal System (implied rules and ideas)

Yes but I'd be cautious of the word Formal. Every ISTP I've met has been almost hostile towards formal systems. They love systems from a mechanical standpoint, they can't stand abstract systems which Formal implies.

or indulging in Qualitative reasoning (distinguishing between characteristics with reason and logic), whereas Te refers more to implementing Informal Systems (explicit rules and ideas) and exercising Quantitative reasoning (applying logic to understand and solve real world problems). But I wouldn't then call Te, ordering of the world; it's somewhat against rigid order, creating an extemporaneous order based out of necessity and circumstances, whereas Ti presupposes order and is very rigid in its classifications.

These are more nuanced than my take above which was just a quick excerpt.

Another example, you identify yourself as Ti. But when I read your MBTI explanations and descriptions, I notice you are very rigid in how you explain things.

I have a declarative style of writing. Chalk it up to a lifetime of communication in a science environment.

I've never seen you change your mind about anything. It seems very fixed, even if other people disagree with you.

You'd have to know me better, my world view is continually changing and evolving. For whatever reason my assertions aren't challenged a lot. However my attitude is "bring it on".

You're asserting an order of the world that others may not agree with and I have a hard time seeing how that makes you just an inner judger of your own thoughts and not others.

I have my own ideas of the world which I put out here for others to learn from or critique. That is simply communicating my personal world view, I could have written a book or a blog post too.

The Personality Junkie posts express it better than I am here, INTJ's I've known do better working in institutional settings. They're the ones who rise to the top of their fields. INTP's do better working alone, and when successful its by some really remarkable work. The other INTP's are virtually unknown, because they struggle with institutional life. That is the idea I was trying to express.

 

[BigApplePi]

Damn. I wrote a reply to this two days ago, decided it was incomplete and then forgot about it but thought it important.

INTP = Ti Ne Si Fe
INTJ = Ni Te Fi Se

At first I thought we could see whether you using more Ne or Se. Then I thought about Se versus Si and started to parse one of your posts. I stopped because I couldn't clearly do the Se versus Si. My guess is you have a developed S. So the question is which do you prefer, i or e?

... to be continued ...

 

[Reluctantly]

Yes but I'd be cautious of the word Formal. Every ISTP I've met has been almost hostile towards formal systems. They love systems from a mechanical standpoint, they can't stand abstract systems which Formal implies.

I guess that's where I tend to find discussions regarding types a little frustrating. Sometimes people type based on what makes sense intuitively, other times based on a profile, and at other times based on concepts.
Conceptually speaking, Jung talks about Ti as abstracted logic. In a way, it's like a phrase I heard from NCIS, "Science is poetry; it's about making order from chaos."
But behaviorally speaking, ISTPs when typed intuitively or by the descriptions don't really identify a whole lot with Ti as abstracted logic. They sort of integrate into the chaos. Then...well...I guess MBTI just isn't Jungian then and nobody wants it to be.

You'd have to know me better, my world view is continually changing and evolving. For whatever reason my assertions aren't challenged a lot. However my attitude is "bring it on".

I have my own ideas of the world which I put out here for others to learn from or critique. That is simply communicating my personal world view, I could have written a book or a blog post too.

okay.

The Personality Junkie posts express it better than I am here, INTJ's I've known do better working in institutional settings. They're the ones who rise to the top of their fields. INTP's do better working alone, and when successful its by some really remarkable work. The other INTP's are virtually unknown, because they struggle with institutional life. That is the idea I was trying to express.

Maybe it's just me, but I find the profile descriptions not to ever really be that helpful. I'll end up identifying with pretty much all the INXX types. I like learning concepts better because then I can understand when they apply to me and when they don't. A description forces me to decide between different descriptions and decide on what fits best, shunning aspects I might have from the other descriptions to one overall fit. It feels dishonest and like a lie and it seems to invalidate any benefit from doing so, if the point is to understand myself. I don't want to lie to myself.

But okay.

 

[Architect]

Maybe it's just me, but I find the profile descriptions not to ever really be that helpful. I'll end up identifying with pretty much all the INXX types.

I was the same when when I was younger. As I got older I saw myself live more of life so got a better handle on how I am, and also I developed further. Because of this I found it much easier to identify with my type, and identify it as an older INTP.

 

[ejomby]

Damn. I wrote a reply to this two days ago, decided it was incomplete and then forgot about it but thought it important.

INTP = Ti Ne Si Fe
INTJ = Ni Te Fi Se

At first I thought we could see whether you using more Ne or Se. Then I thought about Se versus Si and started to parse one of your posts. I stopped because I couldn't clearly do the Se versus Si. My guess is you have a developed S. So the question is which do you prefer, i or e?

I am by no means a sensationalist. I don't like to go "experience" things.

 

[BigApplePi]

@ejomby.

I am by no means a sensationalist. I don't like to go "experience" things.

Lead "S" is not the same as supporting tertiary or lower "S."
Let's quote some of what you said. Repeating:
INTP = Ti Ne Si Fe
INTJ = Ni Te Fi Se

We all have "S." Ti's and Ni's take priority for INTx's.

Or am I really an INTJ? I'll give you three pieces of evidence.

1. I am always punctual, usually to a fault-- I'm always too early. I do make lists. And I do always plan ahead for things that are not part of my routine.
2. I have many theories that are ultimately unresolved, but are on my back-burner. Theories about beauty, about consciousness, about emotions, for example.
3. I am perfectly fine staying in my house for the rest of my life. My playground is in my head.

1. Could be read as Si.
2. Sounds like Ti
3. Same as #2.

More on #1. Are you punctual on principle? Do you make lists on principle? Intuitive principle? Objective principle? I am always on time and make lists also. But not on principle. I'm on time because I hate to miss something. I make lists because I don't want pressure to interfere with what I'm thinking. For me, it's Si. It's out there in external form so I don't have to think about it ... so that's not Se.

If only one could get at the judgmental Q's on the test you took for a better look.

 

[McBean]

So I've never actually checked the reliability of these tests, but we were taught in my organizational behavior class that these tests are typically reliable in typing people. The teacher said that while there may be slight changes in the percentages due to mood and external environment etc., but he said the changes weren't usually very great. Which I've seen to hold true when taking the test 4-5 times now. He did say that the tests weren't very reliable when being used for prediction - namely job performance , however, many businesses use them in the hiring process now.

 

[JimJambones]

I'm a strong proponent of an eight function model because I have found that at some point I have used all of them, I think everyone does. The big two for INTP are Ti-Ne. Overtime, trying to use anything other than those two as your dominant/auxillary functions will create a psychological imbalance that will eventually correct itself. To accurately type oneself as an INTP, one has to look at the probability of having INTP, or merely Ti-Ne, preferences during a length of many years. The higher the probability of these preferences over others, the more accurate your type.

 

[snafupants]

MBTI is bullshit. I suggest focusing less on labelling to yourself and more on simply understanding yourself. Personality tests can help you do this, but don't let go of the reins.

Otherwise you're going to be spending a lot of time 1) fitting yourself into a bubble precircumscribed by pseudoscientists, 2) developing post facto explanations of your behavior based on a defunct theory rather than more modern, rigorous science like you see even in this thread.

In 1991, the National Academy of Sciences committee reviewed data from MBTI research studies and concluded that only the I-E scale has high correlations with comparable scales of other instruments and low correlations with instruments designed to assess different concepts, showing strong validity. In contrast, the S-N and T-F scales show relatively weak validity. The 1991 review committee concluded at the time there was "not sufficient, well-designed research to justify the use of the MBTI in career counseling programs".



So...stop that.

Although stridently presented, I agree with the beginning. Find out your dominant function, develop it and learn how to cultivate its paired opposite. On the middle part, the MBTI correlates with the Big 5 factors, so that's probably junk science. The Big 5 is science's darling haha. Academia is just spiteful towards Jung and analytical psychology for being basically non-empirical.