Is neuroscience field the best match for INTPs?

[WALKYRIA]

I feel kinda happy and proud to state this; but yeah, I think that working in the neuroscience field( which is a pretty broad and multifaceted field ) is the best or even perfect job for an INTP nowaydays. I've thought about it before and really, it makes sense... If you had to translate ancient philosophy(which is our natural job !) in modern terms--you would have guess what--... Neuroscience research. Being a professional philosopher doesn't make any sense nowaydays(do it in your spare time than !) since you can easily teach yourself all the ancient wisdom...

Now, why am I happy? Because I feel like I finally found an answer to the few important questions of my life and certain other like-minded "scanners"... I've heard that INTPs choose a job by default and stick to it because of the money. It's pretty lame!
And again, I recommend it to every little young semi science-semi humanist INTP; it's the best and you'll likely excel in it.

 

[Analyzer]

As an empirical science concerned with the physical and material reality, neuroscience research could still be limited in figuring out the problems of the mind. Social sciences which employ logical positivism can fall short as social actors(humans) are not like objects in the physical realm(nature) in that we use means to achieve ends. There are far to many variables and subjective scales of reference/measurements such as the scientific method, to construct a valid social theory with direct methods used in natural sciences such as physics.

If somehow with neuroscience humans can finally go beyond our ignorance of how all externals ultimately effect the individual and their actions, then that would be cool. Is it possible? If so how will we able to do this?

This could be a start: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unsolved_problems_in_neuroscience

 

[Architect]

To say some field is ideal for INTP's you have to mean that "with all other things being equal". In other words if you took a population of INTP's at an early age and gave them equal opportunity to pick it up, more than half of them would find fulfillment and long term satisfaction, and probably more like 75%. You would also have to run the same experiment for a variety of other fields and get correspondingly lower ratings. Obviously you can't run this experiment, but the point is that saying a field is ideal for a type means in the case that the individual had early enough opportunity to take to it.

At any rate, Neuroscience is definitely an option but I think it has some issues; namely that it is a science. Drenth/Personality Junkie identifies science as more the province of INTJ's rather than INTP's. There are several reasons for this, one is that INTJ's work better in institutionalized settings. Two is that science is about discovering what exists, rather than what can be. It's limiting, most of science is button sorting and stem collecting frankly. Once Neuroscience finds out nearly all there is to find out about the brain (a presently devilishly hard thing to do) what then? That's the point when the Sensors take over a science, the intuitives (except the INTJ's) largely vacant by then.

Nothing here against Neuroscience - I'm glad you found your passion. I'm just saying that for it to have such broad appeal is a high standard. I've tried many careers in my life - hard science, music, art, writing, engineering and many blue collar jobs, I believe the one field which is the ideal INTP career in this sense is programming. This is because it's not a science (computer science is a misnomer). Programming is only limited by imagination, and it's a bit like magic. It will take over everything we do and so there is no end in sight, which means an INTP can keep interested nearly forever.

 

[Analyzer]

At any rate, Neuroscience is definitely an option but I think it has some issues; namely that it is a science. Drenth/Personality Junkie identifies science as more the province of INTJ's rather than INTP's. There are several reasons for this, one is that INTJ's work better in institutionalized settings. Two is that science is about discovering what exists, rather than what can be. It's limiting, most of science is button sorting and stem collecting frankly. Once Neuroscience finds out nearly all there is to find out about the brain (a presently devilishly hard thing to do) what then? That's the point when the Sensors take over a science, the intuitives (except the INTJ's) largely vacant by then.

Yes science I would say is very Te in general. It relys on systems or physical properties that are established, to be applied. A Ti person probably coined the term scientism.

Nothing here against Neuroscience - I'm glad you found your passion. I'm just saying that for it to have such broad appeal is a high standard. I've tried many careers in my life - hard science, music, art, writing, engineering and many blue collar jobs, I believe the one field which is the ideal INTP career in this sense is programming. This is because it's not a science (computer science is a misnomer). Programming is only limited by imagination, and it's a bit like magic. It will take over everything we do and so there is no end in sight, which means an INTP can keep interested nearly forever.

I would say writing is the least limiting career/skill. Programming can be as well but you are still limited to the computational output possible Te? Also there are more Se based aspects of computers/programming. The Se parts are lower level closer to the code/hardware, Ne more of the design process. With writing you can always be dealing in abstracts.

 

[Architect]

I would say writing is the least limiting career/skill.

Writing and programming are quite similar. However, writing is ultimately entertainment (even non fiction to some degree) and thus is subject to style and trend, not something INTP's are good at hooking in to. Every INTP I've known including myself is spectacularly bad at this. Writing is more like composing (another field I tried my hand at) than it is iike programming. With composing you have to be knowledgable of and sensitive to the entire corpora of work that has gone before (remember what I said about style?) Same goes for writing, the first skill in writing is reading everything you can get your hands on, starting with the Bible.

Programming can be as well but you are still limited to the computational output possible Te?

No, ever seen programmers? Bunch of skinny nerds hunched over their computers. There's precious little Se in the work, it's all in the mind.

Also there are more Se based aspects of computers/programming. The Se parts are lower level closer to the code/hardware, Ne more of the design process. With writing you can always be dealing in abstracts.

No this is all backwards. Low level programming does cater to the hardware (even then it is abstraction, study gate array programming), so you can leave that alone if you wish (I do). Everything else is abstraction, whereas writing is for an individual; a human being. Ever read Finnegans Wake? That pushed past the boundary of English prose. The center of it is with Shakespeare. In computing there are no such limits. There is no "greatest program" (new great ones are written every day) and there are no limits other than NP hard problems.

It doesn't sound like you've done deep programming, while perhaps you have done so in writing. I've done both, spend a few years at it and then lets talk.

 

[Analyzer]

Writing and programming are quite similar. However, writing is ultimately entertainment (even non fiction to some degree) and thus is subject to style and trend, not something INTP's are good at hooking in to. Every INTP I've known including myself is spectacularly bad at this. Writing is more like composing (another field I tried my hand at) than it is iike programming. With composing you have to be knowledgable of and sensitive to the entire corpora of work that has gone before (remember what I said about style?) Same goes for writing, the first skill in writing is reading everything you can get your hands on, starting with the Bible.

I am mainly speaking about non-fiction writing, which INTPs would most likely gravitate too. Every type of study including computer science is theorized in writing.

No this is all backwards. Low level programming does cater to the hardware (even then it is abstraction, study gate array programming), so you can leave that alone if you wish (I do). Everything else is abstraction, whereas writing is for an individual; a human being. Ever read Finnegans Wake? That pushed past the boundary of English prose. The center of it is with Shakespeare. In computing there are no such limits. There is no "greatest program" (new great ones are written every day) and there are no limits other than NP hard problems.

It doesn't sound like you've done deep programming, while perhaps you have done so in writing. I've done both, spend a few years at it and then lets talk.

Yes you have plenty of experience doing programming but I am just talking about the range being used as a skill, compared to writing. Technology/engineering is figuring out how to achieve certain ends by adopting different processes or means. Isn't programming just one of these tools to problem solve with(arguably the most efficient)? Wouldn't pure math or other forms of theoretical math be more limitless?

The thing with writing is that it can encompass any field. With knowledge and experience of programming concepts you can document APIs, write books on programming and technology, ect. Any theorist, investigator, or scientist will use forms of writing as their method of getting their work out. If you want to be a historian you might create a program to help, but you will always write. Einstein, Darwin, and Jung all used writing as their method of showing their work.

 

[Ex-User (9086)]

I am mainly speaking about non-fiction writing, which INTPs would most likely gravitate too. Every type of study including computer science is theorized in writing.

Why would INTP choose non-fiction?

Wouldn't pure math or other forms of theoretical math be more limitless?

Limitless in what way? You can do almost unimaginable operations in math, but when it comes to realisations in real world limits of application naturally appear.

I don't agree that there are no-limits in programming. You program for a specific solution and if you want your code to run very well you optimise it for a specific machine.

Any theorist, investigator, or scientist will use forms of writing as their method of getting their work out. If you want to be a historian you might create a program to help, but you will always write. Einstein, Darwin, and Jung all used writing as their method of showing their work.

When you explain a theory, your writing is a set of procedures. It is directed towards understanding your research and experimental data in a way that has as little inconsistencies as possible.
It has little to do with a general form of writing imo.

 

[Analyzer]

e

Why would INTP choose non-fiction?

Moreso then fiction. An INFP is more of the fiction writer. Ti is more about discerning logical implications then Fi which would be more value based. Both are internal subjective functions so they can blur.

Limitless in what way? You can do almost unimaginable operations in math, but when it comes to realisations in real world limits of application naturally appear.

I don't agree that there are no-limits in programming. You program for a specific solution and if you want your code to run very well you optimise it for a specific machine.

Yeah that's what I was trying to say. Pure math is limitless in its concepts same with logic-any formal science for that matter. Programming is similar, but they are both bounded by limits of physics in the external physical world. On the other hand the digital and abstract world is limitless which is where math and programming fall under. As an engineering profession, you program to implement a solution as you would in applied math like actuary or finance.

I am sure there are some areas of computer science or mathematics where you could research or come up with theories and not just solely engineer. You could say that's what engineering entails, but then what is science? Alan Turing a probable INTP, comes to mind as someone who was like this. Most jobs like this are either as professors or some non-productive government job. The few people who find there niche doing this(if it interests them, like Architect) in the private sector are lucky.

When you explain a theory, your writing is a set of procedures. It is directed towards understanding your research and experimental data in a way that has as little inconsistencies as possible.
It has little to do with a general form of writing imo.

You still use writing conventions.

 

[Ex-User (9086)]

Moreso then fiction. An INFP is more of the fiction writer. Ti is more about discerning logical implications then Fi which would be more value based. Both are internal subjective functions so they can blur.

I get your point. It is more like intp sees reality, logical outcomes that for many may seem like purely imaginative and ficticious works.

Spoiler

Yeah that's what I was trying to say. Pure math is limitless in its concepts same with logic-any formal science for that matter. Programming is similar, but they are both bounded by limits of physics in the external physical world. On the other hand the digital and abstract world is limitless which is where math and programming fall under. As an engineering profession, you program to implement a solution as you would in applied math like actuary or finance.

Procedural Content Generation comes to my mind. I see how in the future entire works of art, books, stories, games etc. All will be generated using different approaches. Even now entertainment industry uses procedural generation for graphics.

Spoiler

I am sure there are some areas of computer science or mathematics where you could research or come up with theories and not just solely engineer. You could say that's what engineering entails, but then what is science? Alan Turing a probable INTP, comes to mind as someone who was like this. Most jobs like this are either as professors or some non-productive government job. The few people who find there niche doing this(if it interests them, like Architect) in the private sector are lucky.

Thats what theoreticians do. There are experimental scientists and theorist or both at the same time. One needs the other but doesn't want to openly admit this.

You still use writing conventions.

True, there is a very small amount of purely logical texts.

 

[Architect]

Yes you have plenty of experience doing programming but I am just talking about the range being used as a skill, compared to writing. Technology/engineering is figuring out how to achieve certain ends by adopting different processes or means. Isn't programming just one of these tools to problem solve with(arguably the most efficient)? Wouldn't pure math or other forms of theoretical math be more limitless?

The thing with writing is that it can encompass any field.

As does software. However you cut it, non-fiction writing is essentially documentation. Where I work that department doesn't get paid what the engineers get nor hire the creative individuals like we do in engineering.

I don't agree that there are no-limits in programming. You program for a specific solution and if you want your code to run very well you optimise it for a specific machine.

I've never optimized code. Why bother? In a year the hardware it will be running on will be 50% faster. Except for particular situations most people in the industry work the same way. What is important is architecture, and in the run to get to market this usually doesn't get enough time. Then it comes back later to bite you - so in this sense optimizing the architecture is important.

Ultimately I won't spend much time here hashing the difference, we had similar discussions already in the AA thread. I actually worked in Learning Products for a few years so have done non-fiction writing professionally, so am speaking from experience in both. I'll just quote a passage from The Mythical Man Month

Why is programming fun? What delights may its practioner expect as his reward?

First is the sheer joy of making things. As the child delights in his mud pie, so the adult enjoys building things, especially things of his own design. I think this delight must be an image of God's delight in making things, a delight shown in the distinctness and newness of each leaf and each snowflake.

Second is the pleasure of making things that are useful to other people. Deep within, we want others to use our work and to find it helpful. In this respect the programming system is not essentially different from the child's first clay pencil holder "for Daddy's office."

Third is the fascination of fashioning complex puzzle-like objects of interlocking moving parts and watching them work in subtle cycles, playing out the consequences of principles built in from the beginning. The programmed computer has all the fascination of the pinball machine or the jukebox mechanism, carried to the ultimate.

Fourth is the joy of always learning, which springs from the nonrepeating nature of the task. In one way or another the problem is ever new, and its solver learns something: sometimes practical, sometimes theoretical, and sometimes both.

Finally, there is the delight of working in such a tractable medium. The programmer, like the poet, works only slightly removed from pure thought-stuff. He builds his castles in the air, from air, creating by exertion of the imagination. Few media of creation are so flexible, so easy to polish and rework, so readily capable of realizing grand conceptual structures. (...)

Yet the program construct, unlike the poet's words, is real in the sense that it moves and works, producing visible outputs separately from the construct itself. It prints results, draws pictures, produces sounds, moves arms. The magic of myth and legend has come true in our time. One types the correct incantation on a keyboard, and a display screen comes to life, showing things that never were nor could be.

Programming then is fun because it gratifies creative longings built deep within us and delights sensibilities we have in common with all men.

Code is INTP poetry.

 

[WALKYRIA]

I smoothly laugh when I hear something like "science fits better to INTJ"; but what is science again? Let's altogether define it. If we go back to etymology( I love to go by etymological or historical definition...), science=scientia= knowledge.. and really in terms of broad knowledge we are likely to be far more competent than INTJ since knowledge becomes an end in itself for us. While INTJ seek to apply theory to certain limited, worldly defined problems("they know how to do this, they know how to solve that...") ; We apply theory to theoretical(real or hypothetical) problems and then we expand the knowledge basis.

Anyways, U guys are funny, these other jobs you state are good but let's not compare things of different importance scale, let me remind you guys...

A reason why Neuroscience is the answer(for INTPs) is because it involves everything we INTP are excellent in---it's like neuroscience was made for us, it becomes something more than a job; it becomes a passion since even when we do nothing we use neuroscience, we think, we see etc. IT involves : social sciences, biochemistry, pharmacology, quantum physics, psychology, maths, statistics, philosophy, discussion, IT, AI, debates... haha shit no, I was actually simplifying... Neuroscience IS everything; thus the broadest knowledge basis job since the reality we live in is merely a reflection of reality as perceived by our limited lil brain. You wouldn't be able to hear without the brain part involved in hearing. You wouldn't be able to speak without the brain part for speaking. You wouldn't be able to see without the brain part for seeing. You could be now death for a long time or dreaming that you wouldn't realize it. You could be lost in illusions or hallucinations that you wouldn't even know it. The human brain is the most complex instrument and invention of the universe( atleast that's how scientist depict it ..) for now. And WE.. love complexity. Also, neuroscience is just an open-ended source of knowldedge.

Seriously guys, tell me now : if you had one shot, one lifetime and you had to become the greatest version of yourself. What would you choose? A normal good paying, great but not outstanding job or a job that fits perfectly your life and that makes your job "easy and at the same time the most interesting and open ended"?( since life is made of many dichotomies;many lifechoices(girlfriend, studies, career,..Etc) ; people choose continuously and thus hypothetically, there are millions of trillions YOus in alternate realities that took other life directions and with varying levels of happiness and life satisfaction... The goal is to be the greatest of all them trillions. HAHA hell yeah, the most complex( and thus the greatest sign of intelligence; and yeah I laugh when I hear something like "genius boy failed his life because of wrong decisions " !) thing in this life is to make the very best and optimal decisions and choices in order to become who we are as quoted by Nietzche; I think many people are not really aware of it in this lifetime !).

Also, I'm pretty angry against INTP and their sometimes flawed reasoning and anxieties like " I would love to become this or that, but the schooling is too difficult or too much schooling years involved or too boring so I'll do one year programming and then work a 6 figure salary job".... Hell, the road to a goal is supposed to be always difficult; I would not want of a goal I reached easily because I would have the famous "impending sense of failure" going on... Go for something difficult but with outstanding outcome. Tha fuck if the road is complex, you will grow into someone better... Also, if you don't go for the most difficult, you'll realize when you'r around 40s of how foolish you have been and the multiple and sometimes irreversible consequences of your flawed early choices.


Lol, I sounded arrogant and dumb here but no time... c ya !

 

[pernoctator]

I smoothly laugh when I hear something like "science fits better to INTJ"; but what is science again? Let's altogether define it. If we go back to etymology( I love to go by etymological or historical definition...), science=scientia= knowledge.. and really in terms of broad knowledge we are likely to be far more competent than INTJ since knowledge becomes an end in itself for us. While INTJ seek to apply theory to certain limited, worldly defined problems("they know how to do this, they know how to solve that...") ; We apply theory to theoretical(real or hypothetical) problems and then we expand the knowledge basis.

Hopefully you are only laughing at the irony of the words, and not suggesting that the opinion expressed by people who say this is wrong because of it. That would of course be totally disjointed.

The human brain is the most complex instrument and invention of the universe( atleast that's how scientist depict it ..) for now. And WE.. love complexity. Also, neuroscience is just an open-ended source of knowldedge.

But we don't like complexity for complexity's sake, we like gaining understanding and playing with its implications. The reason complex systems are preferable to simple ones is because they provide a bigger repository to pull understanding from. The problem with (neuro)science is that much of the system is hidden, so it might as well be a smaller system, in terms of what we gain from analyzing it.

The difference with software is that the system is constructed. Programming is expressing an internal system, not pulling in an external system, so there is no ambiguity. Complexity will always be available to analyze because it's generated by the practitioners.

Also, I'm pretty angry against INTP and their sometimes flawed reasoning and anxieties like " I would love to become this or that, but the schooling is too difficult or too much schooling years involved or too boring so I'll do one year programming and then work a 6 figure salary job".... Hell, the road to a goal is supposed to be always difficult; I would not want of a goal I reached easily because I would have the famous "impending sense of failure" going on... Go for something difficult but with outstanding outcome. Tha fuck if the road is complex, you will grow into someone better... Also, if you don't go for the most difficult, you'll realize when you'r around 40s of how foolish you have been and the multiple and sometimes irreversible consequences of your flawed early choices.

I'm surprised by this. Where did you hear that this is the tendency? I would expect changing jobs frequently would be more likely, on account of the tendency to become bored of subjects whenever proficiency is reached.

 

[Ex-User (9086)]

I don't agree with your opinion. Neuroscience is seemingly broad and complicated and yet it is directed only towards a small area of science, despite using many other disciplines.

Why would i dare to say neuroscience in itself is not comparable to more creative areas?
It is mainly because humans are not that complex of a system to devote someones life solely to study the different implications.

It is a matter of 30-100 years when computing will be more advanced than human brain capabilities. It is important to realise a role of a human as a temporary solution of life rather than beginning and the end of all means.
You seem to like Nietzsche:

I know my fate. One day my name will be associated with the memory of something tremendous — a crisis without equal on earth, the most profound collision of conscience, a decision that was conjured up against everything that had been believed, demanded, hallowed so far. I am no man, I am dynamite.

You can describe him by his "superman" status. His beliefs seem strong, but you should also remember that there is a opposite term to the superman, there is no absolute for you in his thought. He suffered from many uncertainties, really the concept of fending off your depicted failure is as important as working towards idealised life.

If you really wish yourself being what you want to be, you should strive to be superior to Nietzsche's thought. Seeing flaws where they really count, in your thinking, thoughts of people you relate to.
I tend to interpret overman as a next step in evolution, it could even be AI or some Bionic Machines/Fleshlings.

Science generally is open ended as long as we don't grasp the entirety of a subject.

It is nice to read how you show passion for some things. However, you can use the same arguments for many fields of science (computer science, sociology), if you want to design a really complex and implicative system for evolution analysis, you not only need to understand every major aspect of human lifes, but also to incorporate their psyche, their minor variances and specifics, relations, sets, physics, etc.

Deep understanding of many if not all contemporary aspects of existence requires this interrelation.

The things with making the best decisions is that you view only yourself in this world. World comprises decisions, many of which do not agree with yours.

To be honest, you won't really know what is best for you unless you test it. Put this neuroscience to test, see how you like it. Experiment.

 

[Pikachu]

Neuroscience is an interdisciplinary study.
There are lots of "branches" of Neuroscience, from the molecular to the computer, from medical to cultural, etc.

I guess it needed to be clear which branch of Neuroscience is the best match for INTP, because there are many branches of Neuroscience that probably better to be handled by the extrovert, i.e. social neuroscience.