The Most Useless Type

[nightstreaking]

http://defaultuserblog.wordpress.com/2010/10/19/myers-musings-most-useless-type/

I have no reason to believe that personality type and intelligence correlate. We associate high intelligence with highly abstract constructs but that is only because the two go well together. We tend not to notice when average intelligence and abstract constructs mix because we dismiss those as eccentric nerds.

Therefore, for the person with average intellect, talent, and luck, INTP may be the most useless type. However, with some luck, a lot of intelligence, and some talent they may be the most useful. Of course, on average, we are all average. Indeed, half of us are below average. For those average and below, INTP probably counts as useless.

He's kind of joking.
From a comment:

Part of the reason an INTP may feel at odds with the world is that what he loves doing most (building abstract theoretical systems) is not what he will be usually called upon to do. Requirements will often force him into his weaker areas (e.g., selling those theories to others, creating plans for executing those theories, etc.).

Even NTP callings such as computer programmer and economic analyst may involve plenty of project planning, negotiation, and executing.

The world needs plenty of planners (SxJ) and expediters (SxP) but relatively few theorists (NTP). An SJ manager may spend a lot of his day using his favored role (planning and ordering, measuring and checking). A blue collar SJ may find much of his day checking quality and measuring against an approved standard.

An SP manager may have plenty of opportunity to react in the moment to events. He may find plenty of opportunity to troubleshoot immediate problems. A blue collar SP may spend much of his day operating and maintaining machinery or working with tools. He too, may find plenty of opportunity to troubleshoot and react to immediate changes in his environment.

In other words, NTPs (especially (INTPs) may spend more time out of their zone of competence (their heroic and parental roles) and in their zone of discomfort compared to other groups...

But the real reason I suspect that INTPs may be unhappy (restless and unsatisfied might be better descriptions) is that their great strength (envisioning possibilities) is always at work. Whatever their situation they always see it can be improved. Caught in their heads (Ne/Ti loops) they find it harder to just enjoy the moment. Make an INTP king of the world, give him a harem of beauties, provide an unlimited bank account, and he would still have the haunting sense that something was not quite right.

Edit:
Is it an INTP's social duty as a theorist to maximize his potential use? (This can apply to all other types.) What happens to INTPs that don't get the right set of luck and talent? Will they ever be really happy?

 

[walfin]

Indeed, half of us are below average.

I don't know about you but this certainly shows the author is below average. Half of us are below median. Average most commonly means the mean.

 

[nightstreaking]

I don't know about you but this certainly shows the author is below average. Half of us are below median. Average most commonly means the mean.

You know what he means!

No, sorry, you're right. I guess he didn't notice the semantics.

 

[snafupants]

Jung called Ni-dom the most useless of men.

 

[Architect]

Is it an INTP's social duty as a theorist to maximize his potential use? (This can apply to all other types.)

I believe so. This means developing ideas, plans, strategies and systems that ultimately benefit the greater good. A caveat however, from the OP

Even NTP callings such as computer programmer and economic analyst may involve plenty of project planning, negotiation, and executing.

I've found that the best mix for an INTP does involve these activities. I've had a job previously where I was a software architect and didn't have to do any coding. Wasn't good.

What happens to INTPs that don't get the right set of luck and talent?

You often see them posting on internet INTP forums such as this and INTP central.

Will they ever be really happy?

Not that I've noticed.

 

[Etheri]

I don't know about you but this certainly shows the author is below average. Half of us are below median. Average most commonly means the mean.

If he was still referring to IQ through intelligence, then both mean and median are just fine and exactly the same. But then again you could nitpick IQ does not represent intelligence. Either way, I don't think this nitpicking really changes anything to his argument.

Ps. I don't agree with everything in the blog myself, far from. I just felt like pointing this out, and I think the text is written fairly well.

 

[Duxwing]

I believe so. This means developing ideas, plans, strategies and systems that ultimately benefit the greater good. A caveat however, from the OP

I've found that the best mix for an INTP does involve these activities. I've had a job previously where I was a software architect and didn't have to do any coding. Wasn't good.

I've heard that you're not an INTP but an INTX. Is this statement true?

You often see them posting on internet INTP forums such as this and INTP central.

So do you, therefore, not have the right mix of luck and talent?

Not that I've noticed.

I don't think that anyone is 'really' happy (that is, happy all the time): happiness is not the lowest state of arousal, and considering that the brain likes to conserve energy, it would only 'want' to be as happy as it needs to be in order to reinforce good behavior.

-Duxwing

 

[Architect]

I've heard that you're not an INTP but an INTX. Is this statement true?

No. Somebody here believes so but won't tell me their reasoning, maybe they're spreading the idea. No matter, I do project a more J persona here, probably because I pretty much just bring out Ti to play, which is a judging function. It also matches my avatar which is a stern, more J type. In real life I have a lot more going on, and there's a lot about me you folks don't know.

So do you, therefore, not have the right mix of luck and talent?

I expected somebody to catch that.

I don't think that anyone is 'really' happy (that is, happy all the time): happiness is not the lowest state of arousal, and considering that the brain likes to conserve energy, it would only 'want' to be as happy as it needs to be in order to reinforce good behavior.

Yes the concept is problematic, you know what I mean however.

 

[Duxwing]

No. Somebody here believes so but won't tell me their reasoning, maybe they're spreading the idea.

Ah, thanks!

No matter, I do project a more J persona here, probably because I pretty much just bring out Ti to play, which is a judging function. It also matches my avatar which is a stern, more J type. In real life I have a lot more going on, and there's a lot about me you folks don't know.

*cue ominous music* Why bring only Ti out to play here?

I expected somebody to catch that.

And now I feel all warm and fuzzy inside.

Yes the concept is problematic, you know what I mean however.

Indeed, INTP's are not the XSTJ's that society seems to want, and this feeling of uselessness could very well trigger depression, thereby lowering modal happiness in the INTP population... population...?! I feel like I'm studying some sort of animal that lives in the darkest jungles of Africa.

-Duxwing

 

[Reluctantly]

Jung called Ni-dom the most useless of men.

So he thought he was useless?

 

[Hadoblado]

Not that I value societal perception of utility, but I'd have thought it would be INFPs. At least INTP's think about how to manipulate existent data, not faeries and shit (no offense, INFP's are cool with me).

It's an interesting thing to ponder, but even more difficult to measure. I'd say that whether or not the typical INTP is useless, if we're comparing type utility then their mean is probably higher than most others. The 0.001% contribute a ridiculously large amount, the outliers pull the weight.

 

[Reluctantly]

Useless types are smart. No one expects them to do as much as everyone else.

 

[redbaron]

Not that I value societal perception of utility, but I'd have thought it would be INFPs. At least INTP's think about how to manipulate existent data, not faeries and shit (no offense, INFP's are cool with me).

I was going to say something along these lines but I like your wording better

 

[snafupants]

So he thought he was useless?

Jung alternatively posited ISTP and INTP for his own type. I'm not really sure if Jung had a positive self-image. He certainly never called himself INXJ, however.

http://www.celebritytypes.com/blog/2012/02/jung-identified-himself-as-both-intp-and-istp/

 

[Reluctantly]

Jung alternatively posited ISTP and INTP for his own type. I'm not really sure if Jung had a positive self-image. He certainly never called himself INXJ, however.

Do you have the context for him saying that though? I think I remember reading something like that, but he was talking about extreme Ni introversion, where the person no longer cares about connecting with the world or trying to get people to understand what they do. It becomes completely self-serving. But anyway, it reminds me of all those Einstein misquotes that sound so absolutist and unlike Einstein's thinking that when you read what he's actually written you know immediately they were someone's interpretation of what he's written or just completely fabricated. Jung was heavy on Ni at times, so do you think he was viewing this in himself at the time that he said that?

But in the same light and in how an original message often gets modified as it goes through each person, MBTI is not Jung's Psychological Types. Correlating them isn't a good idea when people understand MBTI in a completely different way from what Jung's ideas were. That said, whether he thought he was INXJ or ISTP or INTP was never something he ever really said. He did however posit what Psychological Type(s) he had at periods of time in his life. And Ni was a heavy factor in his life, part of Psychological Types, and a heavy factor in The Red Book and his theory of archetypes, something he attributes to Ni, etc...

Actually though a lot of people like to interpret that interview where he talks about his type as inferring a type. But I'm sure he was vague on purpose because he knew himself better than to pigeonhole one type. I know at one point he considered himself Ti+Se, but that's not how he felt toward the end of his life. I couldn't find what he said exactly in the interview, so I copied it myself (from here, starts @8:30 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hD-W-1z_qco)

speaker: have you concluded what psychological type you are yourself?

Naturally i have put a great deal of attention to that painful question, you know. #Painful question, enneagram 4?

speaker: "and reached a conclusion?"

well...you see...the type is nothing static
it changes with the course of life
but i was certainly characterized by thinking...or with thought (mumbled something)
...and i had a great deal of intuition too
...and i had a definite difficulty with feeling
...and my relation to reality was not particularly brilliant
i was often at variance with the reality of things

now that gives you all the necessary data for...*starts stuttering*...diagnosis #was he uncomfortable/reluctant with calling it a diagnosis?

First off, he makes it clear his theory isn't absolute. This is why I roll my eyes when people say MBTI is about nature to the exclusion of nurture...but nevermind. He had a lot of intuition, difficulty with feeling, and had a hard time with the reality of things (I'm assuming this to mean introversion). N+T+introversion pretty much means that. Heavy Ni and Ti or whatever you want to call it.

 

[Cherry Cola]

All the n types that can't contribute through usage of their n are just inferior s types as far as societal worth is considered.

Looking at the amount of contributors and comparing it to the amount of n types which have statistically walked the earth makes me fairly certain that most n types are doomed to live sad unfullfilling lifes, their potential wasted.

 

[scorpiomover]

When I finished high school, I couldn't see any use for my talents. But in every place I'd been, in college, in university, in every workplace I'd been in, they kept telling people they valued the questions and ideas that were borne from my INTP-ness, and they made a lot of effort to accommodate me. Eventually, I came to see that other people valued INTP-ness almost more than anything else.

However, what I also came to discover, was that INTP talents are so necessary to the smooth running of businesses today, that they pretty much dictate how the company has to run. This in turn means that the CEO is not as important to the company as the INTP, and so his job is potentially at threat, at least, from his perspective. What a lot of people in business do, when they desperately need someone, but don't want the other person to know his value, is to lie to him, and tell him that he's useless and unnecessary, to keep him from realising just how much they need him.

Consider this: INTPs are brilliant at logic and thus, debugging. I was recently reading that the #1 skill that all programmers need, is to be good at debugging. Consider that almost every business now runs on computers. When their IT systems shut down, they are forced to stop work until their IT systems are up and running again. In the meantime, they are haemorrhaging money. If a company cannot function for a few months, it's enough to kill the business. So if you like, programmers now run the world, and what programmers need most, is to be good debuggers, and INTPs are brilliant at debugging. Ergo, the world cannot do without us, not even for a day. If all INTPs realised that, we'd have the world by the balls. Don't you think that terrifies businesspeople? Don't you think that they want INTPs to never realise just how much the world needs us?