Type Description on CPP Results

[Zero]

The CPP MBTI test has a bullet list of INTP traits:

-Logical, analytical, and objectively critical
-Quick, insightful, and ingenious; intensely curious about ideas and theories
-Adept at providing a detached, concise analysis of an idea of a situation

-Likely to approach situations with scepticism and form independent opinions and standards
-Likely to value intelligence and competence
-Flexible and tolerant of a wide range of behaviours
-Usually seen by others as quiet, contained, and independent

I think this is pretty general, even if it might be a "personalised" report. (I can't remember if I've posted this before. I have terrible memory and worse deja vu)

I put a space between the first three traits, which we share with computers (save for curiosity) and the last four. It seems like some MBTI quizzes and results get hung up on only the first three. The INTP description is kind of deceitful when it's only the analytical/logic side. It makes every INTP sound overly briliant. I know of annoyances who've typed themselves as INTPs just for the sake of it. It was hard to figure out if this was my type of not, because nothing about personal preference or likes was put in results.

I don't really think of myself as being a computer. Ingenious, logical, etc... are not words I would use to describe myself.

The last four I can relate to. The last four I could definitely say are a part of my personality.
Discuss: tricky results, descriptions and what parts do you relate to most?

 

[Firehazard159]

I definitely fit all of those quite well, and I've always thought of myself as being very "Vulcan" or like "Data" from star trek. Before I really knew those characters, I'd always say I work like a computer... heh.

Just curious, are you maybe borderline F? (like, 55% T 45% F?)

My other thought, is that people can develop traits in other directions, ideally the perfect person would be "100%" in every category, but more realistically they could only be 50% in each category.

For me, I'm just barely P, I could have easily been J with a few questions different. However, all my J traits are purely work related, when I come home, they all disappear and I'm fully in P mode. Hence my theory of developing other traits, and that affected our answers. Maybe you're INFP and have developed enough T to where you're more INTP now, but 'innately' (or maybe nutured, if not nature?) you're INFP, so the description of being computer like, doesn't fit.

Or, you're INTP with a lot of developed F, and that's why.. or tons of other possibilities. Just speculating, but those are my thoughts on it.

 

[Invoke Ninja's True Power]

The first 3 describe me fairly well, depends on your definition of quick. I rarely show up places on time...then again a wizard is never late, he arrives precisely when he means to!

The last 4 fit me pretty well although if there is a multitude of facts/opinions about something I haven't experience I will usually use those as a reference but still draw my own conclusions.

People used to refer to me as a walking dictionary when I was in 2nd grade. I was that know-it-all that would correct people and get picked on for it. I learned better by about 4th grade. That's when I started to dumb myself down.
I always thought of myself as mostly like a Vulcan but with a little bit of emotion that comes out every once in awhile. Probably due to the fine line between T/F I walk. Kinda like how Spock explodes on that one kid in the new Star Trek movie, the only difference is I didn't know how to fight as a kid. Good thing, I probably would have sent some kids to the ER. I was so literal that I couldn't take a joke/understand them at a young age. I love jokes and sarcasm now though, I still miss some of them once in awhile.

My one borderline trait is T, the link in my sig shows it. The INxP is very strong with me.

 

[Zero]

I definitely fit all of those quite well, and I've always thought of myself as being very "Vulcan" or like "Data" from star trek. Before I really knew those characters, I'd always say I work like a computer... heh.

Just curious, are you maybe borderline F? (like, 55% T 45% F?)

My other thought, is that people can develop traits in other directions, ideally the perfect person would be "100%" in every category, but more realistically they could only be 50% in each category.

For me, I'm just barely P, I could have easily been J with a few questions different. However, all my J traits are purely work related, when I come home, they all disappear and I'm fully in P mode. Hence my theory of developing other traits, and that affected our answers. Maybe you're INFP and have developed enough T to where you're more INTP now, but 'innately' (or maybe nutured, if not nature?) you're INFP, so the description of being computer like, doesn't fit.

Or, you're INTP with a lot of developed F, and that's why.. or tons of other possibilities. Just speculating, but those are my thoughts on it.

Where on this god-forsaken planet did you learn that?
You're confused. Feeling isn't literally feeling. It's subjective judgement. Thinking is objective judgement. I've studied trait theories for several years. I quiz tested as an INTJ the first time.

It's not good to be 100% at all, that's extreme. That's insanity. Normal people are usually around 40-80 if that.

According to my CPP, my thinking trait is my strongest. It's 60%. For a balanced evaluation that's well into the thinking side. As a matter of fact, perhaps it's my extroversion that's confusing you. My results say that my introversion is my weakest trait. It's only 36%.

The CPP MBTI is the official, you must pay for, MBTI.

For your benefit I suppose I should carefully explain my results.
Introversion and Perceiving are expressions. They are not functions.

The dominant function for INTPs is Introverted Thinking. This means, unlike INTJs, we ponder things in our minds and we do not extrovert our thinking.
The secondary function is Extroverted Inuition, this means that our intuition (our hunches) are extroverted. We speak from flexible ideas and theories we've been considering.
Our Third function is sensing. It's introverted. But probably appears more dominant during a early-mid stage of life. Because it's the third trait it's one we develop around or after teen hood.
Our last function is Feeling and it's extroverted. It tends to develop later in life, unless you're purposely developing it.

My reason for calling those traits computer like, is because they are computer like. So I'm not sure how to excuse that one. Simply I'm not entirely computer like. If you are it's probably because you have higher introversion and high judging (because J types are systematic and pattern recognition [they come to and express conclusions]). As a matter of fact I would expect a sensor to be even more computer like. All they want is the facts they, they don't want to deal with theory and creativity.

I think that's horribly confusing. I've even submitted the idea of making the mnemonics more understandable. The functions: Feeling/Thinking and Sensing/Intuition work as input and output devices. More carefully explained. Thinking/Feeling is how we make our desicions. Sensing and Intuition is actually how we interpert it and interact with it. A feeling person will make decisions based on personal/moral feelings about something and will make decisions depending on how it will effect other people's feelings. Thinkers don't use their personal values and beliefs and are more likely to think the end justifies the means. Sensors and Intutives are the actual division of creativity. Sensors are not conceptual or abstract. They like dealing with solid facts and using their five sense to interact with the world. Intuitive like ideas and like to ponder. Feeling Intuitive are more likely to be romantic. Why? Because they're more focused on people (and probably themselves). That mixed with the intuitive thinking makes for more whimsical creations. Feeling types also tend to have a broad, good sense of humour. They're also more socially aware.

It's also said that Feeling types are likely to take (random) things more personally than Thinking types.

The main underlining difference with F/T types is decision making. When it comes down to the bones- it's how you make decisions.

I should probably address the actual question. I'm not an F type. I've always been very bad with other people and have no long term friendships. I don't make my decisions based on my values or morals (which are few and far between). An extrovert wonders if people will be there. A Feeling type if people they know will be there. As for me I wonder if it will be entertaining/mentally stimulating (NT) and if there will be good food. And maybe cake. I love food sometimes. I hardly eat, because it takes so much effort, but I love good food. I've accidentally initiated dates, because I wanted food. I just wanted Pizza... Just Pizza....

The effect of J/P is actually very important. It switches what you extrovert. Do you express conclusions or theories? I had an INTJ friend and talking with him was like putting in terminal commands. He would just repeat everything I said. He would make conclusions when I was talking ideas. P types produce a lot of ideas, a bigger range, while J types are more like builders and will build on the most beneficial idea.

http://typelogic.com/intp.html has a great description of functions.

Also, I'm not logical and ingenious in my own opinion, because I'm So Damn Humble.

I think of Algebra as being Logical and ingenious. I'm terrible at it, because I can't keep tract of all those little bastards. The - signs and the weird little language written right into mathematics. It's all about details... and rules...

I wish I was an ENTP. I want to become and ENTP and control the masses.

 

[Zero]

The first 3 describe me fairly well, depends on your definition of quick. I rarely show up places on time...then again a wizard is never late, he arrives precisely when he means to!

The last 4 fit me pretty well although if there is a multitude of facts/opinions about something I haven't experience I will usually use those as a reference but still draw my own conclusions.

People used to refer to me as a walking dictionary when I was in 2nd grade. I was that know-it-all that would correct people and get picked on for it. I learned better by about 4th grade. That's when I started to dumb myself down.
I always thought of myself as mostly like a Vulcan but with a little bit of emotion that comes out every once in awhile. Probably due to the fine line between T/F I walk. Kinda like how Spock explodes on that one kid in the new Star Trek movie, the only difference is I didn't know how to fight as a kid. Good thing, I probably would have sent some kids to the ER. I was so literal that I couldn't take a joke/understand them at a young age. I love jokes and sarcasm now though, I still miss some of them once in awhile.

My one borderline trait is T, the link in my sig shows it. The INxP is very strong with me.

I've never had a good memory. I was like the most likely to drop out. I didn't go to highschool. I don't know who I'm like. I've never thought much about it. The Major, lol. No no, I've been compared to Sai from Naruto.

 

[Deleted member 1424]

It's not good to be 100% at all, that's extreme. That's insanity. Normal people are usually around 40-80 if that.

Are you sure about that? The percentages measure your psychological preferences, not your actual ability with the specific traits or whether your not your 'balanced'. If you have a link that suggests otherwise please post it. I've never come across anything that suggests it's unhealthy to be 80%+ in any of the categories. Like you said before it's about the development of the functions that determines behavior.

 

[Zero]

It's trait theory. Not preferences. Jung's original theory didn't have percentages or numbers to it. It was simply a device to understand people. It was M&B who changed that.

The quizzes call the traits preferences.

It's obvious why someone can't be 100 percent in a category. I guess I'll have to explain.

If someone was really 100%Introverted they'd be a total shut in and if someone was entirely extroverted they'd be batshit insane or severely insecure. If someone was entirely a sensor they wouldn't be able to adapt to slight difference in how something is constructed and they wouldn't be able conceptualise. If someone was entirely intuitive they'd never be in the real world. If someone was entirely feeling they'd probably be bi polar. If someone was entirely a Thinking they wouldn't be able to function as a human being. A feeler must reason that sometimes "it's not personal" and a thinker must reason that sometimes they have to have a personal preference and understand some social norms to understand humour. Someone who was entirely objective all the time wouldn't have personal preference or values or even likes, none of those things are objective.

People I've met who seem extreme as thinkers are STs.

Obviously if someone was extremely Judging might be autistic, because they could never adjust to something unexpected or something out of their routine. Someone entirely Perceiving would be ADHD or paranoid and random.

Maybe I should review the functions one more time.
Somewhat generally put: Input: Sensors and Intuitive.
Sensors explore the world with their five senses. Data is stored.
Intuitive explore the world with ideas, theories, etc. Data is processed (thought about).
Output Methods:
Feeling decides on personal values, reflection, preferences, and on how decisions will effect other people.
Thinking decides objectively for an "ideal outcome". "Ideal outcome" has to be defined, therefore some kind of feeling exists in thinking.

Both thinking and intuition need some kind of base input. Both feeling and sensing need some kind of buffer.

I will find some links for you.

 

[Zero]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MBTI
The Basics more or less

https://www.personalitypage.com/personal.html
This is a personal growth page.

http://typelogic.com/intp.html
He gives an indepth look at the functions and how they work.

http://www.keirsey.com/handler.aspx?s=keirsey&f=fourtemps&tab=1&c=overview
The Four Temperaments is kind of Keirsey's addition to Jung's theory.

http://www.geocities.com/lifexplore/
More descriptions with more aspects developmental aspects

http://www.myersbriggs.org/my-mbti-personality-type/mbti-basics/the-16-mbti-types.asp
This is the actual MBTI site.

http://www.knowyourtype.com/mbti.html
Another MBTI inspired site. Small profiles are useful. This one also focuses on career development.

I've also read "Do What You Are". And "Introduction to Jung" as well as a few sites about him. Do What You Are was mostly focused on career paths, but I think there was a section on growth/balance as well. It's been over a year since I read it.

 

[Firehazard159]

Where on this god-forsaken planet did you learn that?

See:

We speak from flexible ideas and theories we've been considering.

You're a lot more well read on the subject than myself... It's just something I was considering and wondered about :P

The main underlining difference with F/T types is decision making. When it comes down to the bones- it's how you make decisions.

^ Is the reason I was thinking what I was. You say you're not computer like... I feel like my decisions are very dry, logic based, lodged in thinking, rather than based off my emotions, which feel like they're cut off and in a separated part of myself. I was thinking that if you're more F-type, your decisions could be based more on feeling rather than thinking, which is why you don't feel computer-like.

As for my P / J, I was reflecting on the tests questions and which ones I answered which way, and in which context, and I realized the work related questions were the ones that upped my J%, and the once I decided to answer as to my home persona were the ones that upped my P%. Didn't really learn it anywhere... just am theorizing -_-


I hope that made sense... I don't disagree with anything you said, I think I just communicated my idea poorly >.> I could be entirely wrong, like I said before, just throwing my ideas out there.

. I'm not an F type. I've always been very bad with other people and have no long term friendships. I don't make my decisions based on my values or morals (which are few and far between).

I dunno about this. My niece is an INFP, and she has very few friends and her only long term friendship her cousin / my other niece. I don't actually observe her amongst her social group, but she always tells me her problems and we talk about everything together, and she's not great with people either overall, by the sound of it. She does make her decisions based on morality and virtue, but so do I... I think that is part of how we were raised as well as, for me at least, my personal role models / ideals. In the end though, I tend to ignore my morals when it's convenient or I'm curious about how something will affect me / how a situation will turn out.

As for me I wonder if it will be entertaining/mentally stimulating (NT) and if there will be good food. And maybe cake. I love food sometimes. I hardly eat, because it takes so much effort, but I love good food. I've accidentally initiated dates, because I wanted food. I just wanted Pizza... Just Pizza....

That was a fun tangent ^_^ - I also found it funny though, anytime I go anywhere I bring my bag of things to do, always has a book, disc golf, art materials, and soon will have a netbook in it, so I can ensure I'll never be bored! Often I wish to bring my instruments too... but I could never really play in front of others, plus, would be kind of awkward. A laptop bag full of stuff is fairly common and easier to tote about without attracting attention, haha.

I always thought of J as being more decisive and P more or less thinking about all the decisions without (necessarily) making a decision - theorizing. Though, a decision could be made, it's more about the theorizing than the actual end result. At work, I tend to just make a decision to do something, though internally I'm always thinking "We could totally do this this way or that way and it'd be so much more efficient! Too bad the boss say it has to be done this way :/" And sometimes I'll make my suggestions to other coworkers / boss. My point is, there were questions that I answered based on my behavior at work rather than my thoughts, which were at conflict. At home, I tend to sit and think about everything without ever getting anything done, because I can't really get fired for that.

Hopefully that clears some things up X.x (Though I probably just made it all worse XD haha)

Edit: Thanks for all the links by the way

 

[Zero]

My interest in analytical psychology is like an obsessive disease.

Computer-Like apparently needs to be explained.
I'm not very quick, well spoken or consider myself systematically logical. I don't fetch, decode, execute, "writeback". My thought process is . . .
Schi zo phre ntic

I think you are wrong, but that's probably influence by what I know of computers (which is apparently not enough) and what I know of Jungarian psychology.

If your niece is an INFP and doesn't have close friends outside of family, I would be somewhat concerned. Close relationships are kind of a support for F types in general. Maybe not all, but it's quite unusual. . . If I had a friend who was an F type and it didn't seem like they had an emotional support or close friendships I would be concerned. I might think they have some kind of emotional scar or hindered. That's what I think, after reading about and knowing many NF types. Every INFJ I've met I've liked. They're so considerate and they kind of have this romantic side that's not as stereotypical or cookie cutter as S types (I'm assuming). But they're easily hurt, even by indirect comments. I sometimes think of the sort of relationship I could have with an INFJ and I think I would drive them crazy with my P aspect and then emotionally drain them and make them feel isolated. It's kind of disheartening to think of being in a one sided relationship in which you leave someone a miserable shell of a human being. It's like having something fragile and important and then killing it on accident. Ten times worse than accidental killing a goldfish or a plant... .... That's kind of understating it, isn't it...

To some point everyone refers to their "world model". My everyday decisions are usually based on whether or not I have any good reason or desire to do something. I don't really consider that if I don't go out with a social group I might miss out on something social and clingy. My decision making is pretty much "Am I hungry?" or "Will that be amusing?" Then I consider how much of a struggle it will be to accomplish the task. (There are special circumstances in which I'll go out of my way to meet someone who's from out of town.) Then I likely procrastinate unless what I've found is exciting or involves sweets.

What were we trying to clear up? (That I'm right and you're wrong? Or most likely.) I just got hit by a wave of boredom. Hopefully it'll pass.

 

[Firehazard159]

Not really any right or wrongs, just clarification / communication / furthering understanding, though, by your post it does seem like you got bored of this :P haha.

I think you take a much more strict / limited view of computers than I am. I imagine my mind to be more like how a computer is on the whole, rather than the detailed processes it actually goes through. I receive data and process it intensely, analyzing and organizing it, creating patterns and losing it somewhere in the deeper recesses of my mind, where I'll vaguely recall the concept back up later when needed (rather than actually have an exact copy like a computer would.)

Out of the first three, quick is the only thing I'd consider myself most definitively not. But, it's also kind of a relative term, and when I think about it, I can have some quick / witty retorts, but due to the way I process all the data, it usually takes me quite a long time of sitting and thinking before I'm actually through all of it. Then I tend to think of much better things I could've said or done, in retrospect. (Hindsight is 20/20!)

The definition of behaving like a computer comes from from ones mannerisms than ones actual internal processes, I think. The tendency to respond literally, using pure logic, being very cold and distant, people see us and feel like we operate much like computers do. Going to Data, the epitome of a 'human computer' so to speak:

"They were just sucked into space" -- Riker
"Blown, sir" -- Data
"Sorry, Data" -- Riker
"Common mistake, sir" -- Data (The Naked Now)

(INTP's general quality of correction for clarities sake)

[after they kiss] "What were you just thinking?" -- Jenna
"In that particular moment, I was reconfiguring the warp field parameters, analyzing the collected works of Charles Dickens, calculating the maximum pressure I could safely apply to your lips, considering a new food supplement for Spot..." -- Data
"I'm glad I was in there somewhere" -- Jenna

(Being extremely literal, even if it's somewhat cold, though we're sometimes oblivious to the idea that it is actually being cold to someone :P)

YouTube - Star Trek - Data's Lessons In Humanity - Strikes me as a total INTP discussion / argument.

YouTube - Advice on trust and betrayal

YouTube - Data is taking it literally (Star Trek: TNG) - Being literal again, for the sake of clarity. Granted, we understand figures of speech and such, but I know I have a tendency to miss things occasionally and translate them literally.


Err... I'll stop now ^_^ Got really distracted with this.. haha.

 

[Vatroslav]

The best and the widest description of an INTP I've seen is on this link:

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

It fits me about 95%...

 

[Firehazard159]

I don't think there's anything in that link that doesn't fit me, I'd have to read it again to be sure, but the first time I came across it I was pretty astonished :P

 

[Vatroslav]

It is very good indeed... there are only a couple of details where I don't recognise myself... for example a claim about the dissonant music... I really don't like dissonant music... but, again, I do like gloomy atmosphere and minor key...

 

[Firehazard159]

It is very good indeed... there are only a couple of details where I don't recognise myself... for example a claim about the dissonant music... I really don't like dissonant music... but, again, I do like gloomy atmosphere and minor key...

I thought that was what they meant by dissonant... minor key / gloomy (and eerie) is always how I described my taste, but to get those sounds you need a certain dissonance to the music, that's what makes that sound...

 

[Cogwulf]

dissonance isn't very well defined and can mean different things in music, but I think the way it's used here means the harmonic intervals which are used, it would be notes which are considered to clash when played together, such as augmented and diminished chords

 

[Vatroslav]

I thought that was what they meant by dissonant... minor key / gloomy (and eerie) is always how I described my taste, but to get those sounds you need a certain dissonance to the music, that's what makes that sound...

Hmm...possibly... i understood it differently...

... and yes, dissonance IS needed to create the gloomy atmosphere. But, the difference between how I understood is that I thought they speak about non-tonality (Atonality, not defined music scale). (I hope you understand what I want to say, english is not my mother-tongue)

The point is- the dissonances must be solved in the end. In modern music, especially when it's about atonality (I do hope it is the right word...), there is no solving. When it comes to professionally composed classical music, the harmony becomes SO COMPLEX, that human ear cannot hear it...

Hmm... now I wonder about the development of music through history... but it's an off topic...

EDIT: just to add something about that complex classical compositions- it isn't too often amongst the composers themselves. They do that on universities, making music based on logic only, so they come to very complex harmony which we can't hear...

 

[Zero]

I do work with computers and supposedly my minor should set me up to work with them in the future. When I think of a computer I'm thinking of CPU, ram, harddrive, wires, ports, fans, heat sinks and then programming and such. I also think though things and spend too much time thinking about them. That's how I process emotions.

Ha, but a computer doesn't do that. A computer is simplified. Compared to a human it's only the logical part. It doesn't make it's own decisions, everything is a command, a pathway and there have to be buses and all this crap. A computer is a piece of machinery/technology that we input commands to get programmed reactions. Those reactions are ruled and those rules don't change and as long as there are rules there's logic for the computer. Seven of Nine is like a computer, she just operates on a set number of understandings and rules (from what I understand she doesn't stay like that).

I need a new computer, well a new desktop. I think my Laptop will live a little while longer if I actually update the damn ram every once in a while. I haven't updated it. It's like a 2GB computer. That's it too. 2GBs and I've been trying to run all kind of crap on it. Geez, no wonder if broke down. It shames me, I didn't know it only had 2GBs...

After I mentally process some input I usually make a general rule or overview of it and if that experience is particularly unneeded I shuffle it away. I'm very slow with emotional things. It took me like 3ish years to get over an incident. And another one I got over about June and that was about a two year one. That was over buying from a fraud moron who then web-stalked me. I failed to recognise what kind of state the person was in when I took their shoddy merchandise. I felt it was ultimately my own failure for not trusting my gut feeling and passing judgement on someone's intelligence when dealing with them in a "business" situation.

I don't know of any introverts who are quick and witty when it comes to speaking. I'm always half shocked to be talked to and then my stunned reply, to that human garble noise we call language, is usually less than satisfactory when I review it as well. I try not to let every social situation ruin my week with picking it apart. I'm actually more or less over that phase. It might last for the night, but then I try not to worry about it.

What the hell is "pure" logic? I think algorithms. Should it be surprising that I'm particular about language and very literal? Logically, "pure" logic isn't human.

I know who Data is. I cannot believe you linked those.

The only thing I don't like about that profile is that it's long. Yes, lots of words. I don't relate with all of that of course. I don't like it when it's not exact. I'm not quite proud of being an INTPl. I keep hoping something else will come along... Something better.

Boredom strikes me suddenly and sometimes it suddenly leaves. Sometimes it means it's time to change the scene.

I need changes most of the time. Not everyday...maybe every week. Every few days. If I feel like things have just been the same I kind of get ... random. It's not like I need to move, just need to change something, even if it's small. Sometimes if something is becoming too much an obligation or commitment I'll randomly get hit by waves of boredom.

Sometimes it hits me when I'm incredibly tired, but I don't realise I'm tired.

I think it's strange that I'm not very musical when most INTPs seem to be. I don't often listen to music. It's like there's enough noise... even if it's just my clock.

 

[Firehazard159]

My apologies, Zero. I feel like I'm missing something, and like I'm continually insulting you / putting you on the defensive, and it's not my intention. -_-

 

[Zero]

No. I do that naturally.

I have a desire to argue all the time and it comes out whether I try to control it or not. I'm not trying too hard to control it right now. I want to win, I guess. But, more importantly,
I'm Bored,
so I'll try to coax "disagreement".
(I'm trying really hard not to write something "coaxing")

In short, I'm just rambling.