Anyone find that a lot of Ganin's INTp uncovered profile sounds a lot like an INTj instead. I mean, he basically went from saying that INTps obey rules(in which they do) to say that they debate rules. His article contradicts itself. He goes from saying that:
"INTps fear rules and adore them, because what's clear - they fear, unclear - they dear! Nevertheless, they stick to the rules and they demand the same from others. The rules that can be interpreted in many ways guarantee freedom. Ironically, INTps learn about their environment through studying of the limitations. If the rule states you can't say "knee" and INTp decides to respect and obey it they could get extremely annoyed with someone who decides to ignore it.
The rules for INTps often transform into rituals and they have no problems with rituals. Because of this INTps could get comfortable with routine, often mistyping themselves into J types, resulting in many of them thinking of themselves as INTjs. However the most common way is for INTps to type themselves into INTxs, with undecided preference for J or P. "
"The arithmetic perhaps is the only discipline where INTps cannot use their powers of ambiguity. 2 + 2 = 4 will always remain true, although it is not inconceivable to assume that at some point an INTp was contemplating a different result. On the other hand, the very foundation of arithmetic was built upon few self evident axioms, and it is the self evident part of course that is very much INTp debatable.
In fact, INTps will debate for the sake of debate. The process becomes more important than the outcome. They often lose the point of a debate when they shift focus to other unrelated subjects in the process. When defeated, INTps can easily do a U turn on something they were arguing just seconds ago. They deserve respect for being able to accept the defeat and disrespect for never being truly committed in their views.
That quote sounds completely INTj, not INTp. I couldn't see an INTp debating an accepted idea. INTjs are the ones that debate things, not INTps.
And he's completely contradicting himself. He goes from saying that INTps "fear and adore" rules to an INTP " would not accept anything concrete and solid on principal. The more unshakable it seems the more challenging for INTp it appears. Irrefutable truth to them means death. If a sign "Take your hats off" is normally understood as a request to take headwear off, you may suddenly find yourself arguing with an INTp over what is considered a hat. Thanks God for dictionary! INTps respect it - it is printed and it is public. But beware of broad interpretations. A broad interpretation is INTp's ally; exact meaning is INTp's enema. "
He says INTps hate exact meaning, but that is not how Ni works. Ne is the function that works like this. Its like he doesn't know what he's talking about or something. I competely disagree with his profile.