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

Trouble accepting INTP categorisation - any valuable insights?

Local time
Today, 09:32
Joined
Aug 2, 2008
Messages
5
#1
I first discovered MBTI around 4 years ago when I first started med school and one of my tutors who was a neuroscientist was really into the whole idea making our whole class take the test.

Honestly, I was skeptical, I couldn't really find much literature that backed up the MBTI/typology and had real trouble understanding the concept of categorising personality traits, which to me always seemed to be a continuous characteristic as opposed to a discrete one which would be amenable to categorisation.

Anyhoo I did the test and out popped this result, INTP. :confused: I read the descriptions which although they applied to me seemed to overstate the logic and eccentricism of the type which didn't fit me. So I dismissed the idea of MBTI as waffle and a shining example of the Forer effect.

I actually missed the post test discussion, and never got to find out whether people thought I suited the INTP result I got.

But here's the issue I have, I like people, I like to talk to people and be liked by people, but I'm not very good with socialisation. This seems to be the opposite to INTPs who appear to prefer alone time than socialising.

I'm also absolutely crap at maths and as you can probably tell, have a tenuous grip on English grammar.

A summary of how I would describe myself is shy but social with one close friend, academically high achieving like all med students, I don't share my feelings easily but show empathy, I am a bit vain and concern myself with how I dress and how I look, I have massive trouble focusing on my academic work (currently undertaking a genetic research project which is boring the pants off me), I don't trust people easily but once I do its like they're family, if anyone breaks my trust I cut them off entirely, I'm always suspicious of people trying to manipulate me and if I catch people at it I make sure they know I know (confrontational I suppose), I always pay attention to how people might be feeling - whether I act on this knowledge is another story but I usually detect small changes in mood etc and know when to back off.

I used to have strong goals but now I'm floundering I don't know what speciality to pursue, I am often late for my deadlines and prefer structured classes to what I'm doing now which is essentially a year of research where I set my own deadlines.

Since the first test I have done a dozen since then, ALL INTP.
My question is am I an INTP? Like really really cause if I'm honest I don't want to be an INTP, it doesn't fit in with who I want to be and what I want from life (family and career achievements basically). I'm not trolling, promise - its just I'm at a confusing point in my life and who I am seems to be an important question at the moment...
 

Awaken

Gone for good
Local time
Today, 09:32
Joined
Nov 24, 2010
Messages
329
#2
Being in medical school, I am sure you are aware that almost everything is a spectrum. Nothing is going to fit into a neat little box. That being said, I think it would be helpful for you to research the different functions. There are threads on here that really explain them in an in depth manner. I would suggest researching them a little more.

I would also suggest not looking at it as a predestination, which seems to be what you are doing now. Every individuals personality has strengths and weaknesses. It is up to the individual to work on those weaknesses, or not. Whatever floats your boat.

From your description, I do not see a need to negate the INTP personality for you. Some members of this forum seem to be a lot more socially awkward than others. However, imo, most share the commonality of gaining more energy/being able to center/balance themselves through alone time and introspection.This is in contrast to a social environment; where an INTP may or not be socially awkward in, where more energy is consumed than gained.

Medical school and/or the mid/late twenties of a persons life is a very trying time in regards to identity. As Im sure you are aware of, this is around the time where schizophrenia tends to rear its head. There just seems to be something about the age that has ties to identity(also look up Saturns return). I hope you take how others categorize you with a grain of salt. You are the only one with a window to your mind. I wish you luck in your endeavor.


http://www.intp.org/intprofile.html

I'm definitley NT but when it comes to social situations the INTP type is protrayed as someone not really in tune with other people's feelings which I think I am, to a point where I know exactly what some friends/relatives will say and how they will say it.
I do not find this to be true. I think many INTP's are in tune with other peoples feelings to the point of predicting their behavior. But how in tune are you with your own feelings? How do you go about expressing said feelings, if at all? What effects do others feelings have on your psyche? Predicting does not equal relating, although the outcome may be similar.
 

Awaken

Gone for good
Local time
Today, 09:32
Joined
Nov 24, 2010
Messages
329
#3
Seems relevant here:
^Everyone should read this. Really. It's very, very interesting. Also, please read Adymus's and/or Auburn's explanation of the functions. They're both very clear but Adymus's is more in-depth, while Auburn's is shorter. (Also worth looking through the 'visual cues' thread, because they further illustrate how the functions actually work in the head - especially the F functions. And maybe the thread on how Thinking and Feeling affect the smile (good breakdown with pics). Actually there're a ton of useful threads in the typology area.

The Feeling function is not about emotionalism, not exactly (as you guessed), and especially not about being powerless and overwhelmed at all times - it's about being aware and unafraid of, and completely in tune with the feelings signals that are constantly being sent out, and experienced, by everyone. 'Feeling signals' would mean all expressions of value in bodily expression, tone of voice and words (value being ethical systems and personal priorities). Also one's own personal signals - being able to discern personal values (Fi - compass) from how you resonate with or against any given event (including the slightest action from another). And using all the information you have *as well as* your ability to tap into the communal emotional field to alter your environment (Fe - dynamics mover. This is why pod'lair talks about Fe users' faces moving in a conscious, feeling way meant to persuade).

Some of this is influenced from pod'lair but it fits well within MBTI too - being an F perhaps means you're statistically more likely to be aware of and own your emotions, but the Feeling function isn't just about having emotions, it's about using them to guide you in life and to connect with others.

There are a bunch of great quotes from that site I linked.

"Each function can (and moreover OUGHT to) be viewed in terms of levels of development. We wish also to specificy five levels of development for each function. In this paper we will focus primarily on the feeling and intuitive functions, as these are comparatively underutilized (and hence underdeveloped). They are, as a result, also most apt to be misunderstood and misrepresented. Although clarifying the nature of feeling and intuition may therefore be more difficult an enterprise, there is the promise of greater overall benefits in doing so.

We will argue that whereas the (T-based) cognitive and (S-based) perceptual sciences are relatively accepted and advanced areas of inquiry, it has not been considered legitimate (until relatively recently) to subject intuition or feeling to serious study. Furthermore, when these functions ARE studied it is often with the use of 'cognitive' (T-based) or perceptual (S-based) frames of reference.

These meta-level (ie, 'theoretical') biases result in a situation in which the definitions of 'thinking' and 'sensing' that are in general usage reflect a comparatively higher level understanding, whereas what is normally meant by the words 'feeling' and 'intuition' refer to comparatively lower levels of accomplishment with respect to those functions.

To put this simply and vividly: although we (as a society) are most likely, for example, to think of logic or philosophical reasoning (higher level examples of thinking) as 'exemplary' activities associated with the thinking function, we are more likely to think of 'hunches' and/or 'premonitions' as exemplary of intuition, although these activities are relatively lower level activities on the continuum associated with that function. Similarly, with the feeling function - we, as a culture, are most likely to think of EMOTIONALITY (which actually requires a comparative low level of development of the feeling function) as paradigmatic of the feeling function.

......

It is unlikely, for instance, that types who have feeling as their least prefered (eg 'inferior';) function will develop their capacity to feel at level three or four, and may consequently conceive of level 'two' as comprising the upper limit of the capacity of the function. A theory delineating levels might assist in pointing out how the feeling function extends beyond these arbitrary limits associated with type. It has been our experience with some individuals who are thinking types, for example, that the five level theory has helped them to entertain the possibility that there are levels of feeling that are comparable in sophistication to the levels of thinking that they have developed.

We have elsewhere suggested that current societal biases (toward ST types) are extreme and deleterious. These lead to unfortunate mistakes when it comes to cross-functional comparisons - a tendency to compare apples and oranges: higher levels of development of the thinking function with lower levels of development of the feeling function, and higher levels of development of sensing with lower levels of development of intuition - to the detriment (and continued undervaluation) of the currently undervalued minority types. For example, a capacity for critical reason (level three 'thinking') is often pitted in our society against EMOTIONALITY (level one 'feeling'). The deck is stacked, and a false conclusion is drawn - that 'thinking' is more valuable a function than 'feeling'.

....Even amongst members of the under-represented types, the intuitive and feeling functions may not be as fully developed as the thinking and sensing functions of the more populated types. Thinking and sensing are generally valued and encouraged in WHATEVER type they may occur; conversely, feeling and intuition are undervalued and likewise discouraged."

Last few paragraphs so important. I think a lot of Thinkers really don't realise this. And if you think Fs are silly, ridiculous people - perhaps it's because the ones you know have had their development stunted, and not because of an inherent inferiority of the Feeling function.

Damn, I'll just link the whole page. I really like the way it's explained. It's given me such a cool new and clean perspective, that at the same time makes perfect sense. Like rediscovering MBTI. (Of course, when I attempted to put this shit into practice, I simply ended up disgruntled at the world, especially the yucky, horrible, involved, creepy, emotional F sections.)

I think you'll find a lot of self-professed INTPs are at Level 1, or perhaps Level 2, which are characterised by fear, distrust and disdain of emotions, and attempts at suppression in order not to be overwhelmed. Higher levels involve becoming aware of the emotional 'energy field' always present and in/around us at all times, enabling us to read and connect with people and shape the environment. Also involves learning to accept being part of a group, understanding the whole is greater than the sum of parts, not fearing the loss of individuality, etc (all things INTPs struggle hugely with). This is also why Fe, though a rational function in some ways (as it uses data from the environment to construct plans of attack) is not detached like Te but *involved* - because it needs to be part of the emotional pool in order to move it, and therefore connection and emotion must come into play.

I hope all this makes sense. I'm not sure if I explained it very well. (It's very messy, sorry.) Takeaway point: Fe is not about plain emotions. But when you're a low-level Fe user, it will seem like that because the function is too weak to be put to much use. If you repress emotions and avoid connections then you cut off most contact to the 'field', which means you can't use it. Basically, you have a tool at your disposal but you don't know how to wield it.

I think. :D As always, anything could get toppled over. But at the moment this is looking pretty nifty.
 

scorpiomover

The little professor
Local time
Today, 09:32
Joined
May 3, 2011
Messages
1,645
#4

Dapper Dan

Did zat sting?
Local time
Today, 03:32
Joined
Aug 1, 2011
Messages
465
Location
Indiana
#5
Read http://intpforum.com/showthread.php?t=2599. It's the observations of lots of different INTPs about their behaviours that only they seem to do. Either you'll feel at home, or you'll come to the conclusion that you're dealing with idiot savants. Read several pages before you make up your mind, just to be sure. That ought to tell you if you're an INTP or not.
I disagree with this. Probably 25% of the posts in there have nothing to do with type. Then about 50% of it is too general to assign solely to INTPs. Much of it I simply don't identify with.

At any rate, people just post whatever they want in there, and no one stops to question it. Typing yourself based on that thread is probably a bad idea.
 
Local time
Today, 04:32
Joined
Dec 28, 2011
Messages
21
Location
Indiana, USA
#6
I disagree with this. Probably 25% of the posts in there have nothing to do with type. Then about 50% of it is too general to assign solely to INTPs. Much of it I simply don't identify with.

At any rate, people just post whatever they want in there, and no one stops to question it. Typing yourself based on that thread is probably a bad idea.
Indeed.

I know someone who took the MBTI in college three times (because he's an analytical INT type) and tested as INTP once and INTJ twice. He seems to be exactly like the OP. He cares about his appearance, enjoys talking to people, cares about what others think of him, is not socially awkward, etc. But all his other traits are obviously INTP. I think that varying levels of development with regards to the Jungian functions combined with one's upbringing (after all, we in the Western world are brought up to believe that everyone should be extraverted and Sensing) hold a much greater sway in determining an individual's behavior than most people think. Only you can really ascertain the truth of the matter, but you sound like an INTP other than a few modes of behavior. The cognitive functions are best to determine your true type, as the behavioral analysis (available through Keirsey, PersonalityPage, etc.) is only accurate insofar as you were raised that same way and/or preside at the same level of functional development.
 

SpaceYeti

Prolific Member
Local time
Today, 02:32
Joined
Aug 14, 2010
Messages
5,600
Location
Crap
#7
The thing about personality testing is that it asks you what you're like, and then tells you what you're like based on that. Personality types aren't wrong, they're simply not all-inclusive. That's why it's a typing instead of a total description of every aspect of an individual.

However, there are also those jerkwads who deny the applicability of labels in general, undermining language itself. "Don't call me blank!"

Why? Is because it doesn't apply, or you simply don't like it? Either way, okay, whatever. It either doesn't apply or you don't like it. If it doesn't apply, ignore it. If it does, and you don't like it, that's your problem.

My tests still come up INTP, though a few on this forum deny that's what I am. I'm not the perfect INTP, and I do have some traits of other types, but that doesn't mean I'm not an INTP. It means only INTP is not the perfect description of me... but it's a good baseline.
 

rattymat

Active Member
Local time
Today, 04:32
Joined
Aug 15, 2011
Messages
139
Location
New York
#8
Awaken,
that is probably the best description of the INTP that I have yet to read. There are some aspects I feel I do not personally fit but overall related much more so than any other description.
 

Awaken

Gone for good
Local time
Today, 09:32
Joined
Nov 24, 2010
Messages
329
#9
I thought so as well. As I've stated before, I felt like I was reading a biography about my life.
 
Top Bottom