A new kind of quiz (low tech)

[Jonathan]

Here's a low-tech. quiz. I'm curious how people see the following list of behaviors, particularly how they relate to INTj and INTp. As I've mentioned in many posts, I think that many people have a different image in mind when they think of these types, but many people don't believe me that that's so. It would be interesting to see what composite images people have of these types, and to see what degree of consensus there is.

So I've come up with a list of behaviors to help flesh out an image of a person. Now be warned: Many of these behaviors aren't specific to INTj or INTp, and may seem more like other types, or may not even seem type-related. However, it would be interesting which ones people think are *more* likely to come from an INTj or INTp.

In addition, sometimes people who in other Jung-based typology systems may be "INTP" might actually be ENTp in Socionics, since extraversion in Socionics doesn't necessarily imply extraversion in any "usual" sense of the term.

So here's the challenge: Consider your experiences with INTps and INTjs or your image of what they're like. Select and copy & paste those behaviors below that seem more likely to be found in an INTj under the heading "INTj," and paste those that seem more likely to be found in an INTp under the heading "INTp." Leave out any that are absolutely antithetical to both types. In addition, you can also put any that sound more like ENTp under "ENTp" (or even create a category for some other type...) but still have that in your "INTj" or "INTp" list according to which one it fits better. Also, if you want, create a list of which ones fit yourself the best. Then, if anyone takes me up on this , I'll comment on the patterns I see.

Behaviors:
* May become uncomfortable if there's not a "plan" for the day
* Criticizes others for not knowing social norms and rules or not being observant enough of one's surroundings to know how to behave
* May criticize people for moving too slowly
* Tends to follow whatever seems interesting to one's mind at the time, regardless of what was planned or expected
* When making statements, considers them as a point of departure to start a conversation, rather than as definite statements or plans to be taken too seriously
* Tends to extend assignments into something more "interesting," possibly making it difficult to get them finished on time or within the expected amount of effort
* Commits to few or no firm positions about matters, but rather tends to question others about their positions and point out logical inconsistencies
* Is interested mainly in getting the end result and forges ahead, even though one is bothered by the process and may even display anger while working
* Understands what is expected and does precisely that with very little extra effort
* Avoids routine or repetitive tasks and may be slow at performing them
* Tends to be in another world, "daydreaming," even while performing tasks
* Appears unproductive in a "clock efficiency" sense but is good at solving difficult problems and finding ingenious solutions
* Considers all questions open, and tends to persist in coming up with new angles even on matters normally considered to be solved
* Tends to want to stop discussion at some point when it appears the other person is merely speculating and not basing his/her comments on solid scholarship
* Requires that other people use the correct terminology when discussing something
* Comes up with some decisions that seem strange to others, and obstinately follows through with them, because they're logical from one's own point of view.
* Despite being able to put up a spirited intellectual debate, tends to give in to other's wishes, especially in practical matters, even to the point of changing course on major decisions
* Can masquerade at times as an F type by being expressive or sympathetic in certain circumstances
* Identifies with a community of experts; tends to represent their view and dismiss any ideas that are contrary to what the people "in the know" would say
* Works best when he/she can take advantage of ideas that come at odd moments
* Enjoys discussions with others on speculative ideas, even if those people aren't informed about the topic in a traditional or scholarly sense
* Is best at tasks that involve making things up and fleshing out ideas
* In a leadership situations, is uncompromising, demanding the highest standards, sometimes to the point of being dictatorial
* Tends to come up with many ideas and finish only a few
* Tends to finish what one has started
* Is a child at heart, tending to say silly or goofy things and devising unusual amusements
* Is somewhat domineering and very comfortable telling other people what to do
* May get bored doing just one thing, so frequently jumps from one activity to another
* Does what seems efficient from one's perspective, but is unaware or confused about others' expectations and rules
* Tends to be highly productive in spurts after periods when one seems unfocused
* Is especially good at quickly mastering well-defined structures and problems, and quickly finding the correct solution
* Sometimes has to force oneself to focus attention on predefined structures, problems, and tasks (as opposed to making stuff up)
* Is motivated by curiosity and wondering how some new idea or combination would pan out if one tried it
* Is motivated by the desire to master things
* In group situations, may passively join the group in tormenting others or performing unjust acts, or be tempted to do so to "fit in"
* In situations where the group is performing unjust or evil acts, will always be an outsider, standing in opposition to the group
* Is a strong believer in "no pain, no gain," and thus takes the most direct path instead of seeking easier ways to get the job done
* Seeks more comfortable approaches that may be unconvential but still get the job done, yet with less pain and annoyance
* Values as a primary self-defining principle the act of creating a unique product or understanding; seeking knowledge is important, but secondary to the idea of "creating"

[oyburger]

At a quick galnce, these are the one's that seem to apply to me

Behaviors:
* May become uncomfortable if there's not a "plan" for the day
* May criticize people for moving too slowly
* Tends to follow whatever seems interesting to one's mind at the time, regardless of what was planned or expected (this happens too, I readjust my plans if it does)
* When making statements, considers them as a point of departure to start a conversation, rather than as definite statements or plans to be taken too seriously
* Commits to few or no firm positions about matters, but rather tends to question others about their positions and point out logical inconsistencies
* Is interested mainly in getting the end result and forges ahead, even though one is bothered by the process and may even display anger while working
* Tends to be in another world, "daydreaming," even while performing tasks
* Considers all questions open, and tends to persist in coming up with new angles even on matters normally considered to be solved
* Tends to want to stop discussion at some point when it appears the other person is merely speculating and not basing his/her comments on solid scholarship
* Requires that other people use the correct terminology when discussing something
* Comes up with some decisions that seem strange to others, and obstinately follows through with them, because they're logical from one's own point of view.
* Can masquerade at times as an F type by being expressive or sympathetic in certain circumstances
* Works best when he/she can take advantage of ideas that come at odd moments
* Enjoys discussions with others on speculative ideas, even if those people aren't informed about the topic in a traditional or scholarly sense
* Is best at tasks that involve making things up and fleshing out ideas
* In a leadership situations, is uncompromising, demanding the highest standards, sometimes to the point of being dictatorial
* Tends to finish what one has started
* Is a child at heart, tending to say silly or goofy things and devising unusual amusements
* Does what seems efficient from one's perspective, but is unaware or confused about others' expectations and rules
* Tends to be highly productive in spurts after periods when one seems unfocused
* Sometimes has to force oneself to focus attention on predefined structures, problems, and tasks (as opposed to making stuff up)
* Is motivated by curiosity and wondering how some new idea or combination would pan out if one tried it
* Is motivated by the desire to master things
* In situations where the group is performing unjust or evil acts, will always be an outsider, standing in opposition to the group
* Seeks more comfortable approaches that may be unconvential but still get the job done, yet with less pain and annoyance

[Jonathan]

At a quick galnce, these are the one's that seem to apply to me

Thanks...This is interesting. You've picked some things I strongly identify with myself, and others that are very unlike me (especially the ones that seem to be me to be very classic INTj behaviors, such as the first two you listed, forging ahead even when bothered by the process, stopping the discussion if the other person is merely speculating, requiring people to use the correct terminology, 'obstinately' following through with unusual decisions, and being 'uncompromising' in leadership positions).

This makes me think of an interesting approach for analysis: If a bunch of people picked the behaviors that apply to them from a given list such as this (or others), we could use some sort of factor analysis, multidimensional scaling, cluster analysis, or some similar statistical technique to see which behaviors are related within the data we have. That may challenge our ideas about which ones really go together.

Obviously that's a commonly-used technique in psychological research. But it's not talked about much in the context of Socionics.

By the way, Oyburger, I'm curious: Do you consider yourself any particular subtype (i.e., INTj logical subtype or INTj intuitive subtype)?

Anyhow, I'll tell you which ones in my list I think best apply to me:

* Tends to follow whatever seems interesting to one's mind at the time, regardless of what was planned or expected
* When making statements, considers them as a point of departure to start a conversation, rather than as definite statements or plans to be taken too seriously
* Tends to extend assignments into something more "interesting," possibly making it difficult to get them finished on time or within the expected amount of effort
* Commits to few or no firm positions about matters, but rather tends to question others about their positions and point out logical inconsistencies
* Avoids routine or repetitive tasks and may be slow at performing them
* Tends to be in another world, "daydreaming," even while performing tasks
* Appears unproductive in a "clock efficiency" sense but is good at solving difficult problems and finding ingenious solutions
* Considers all questions open, and tends to persist in coming up with new angles even on matters normally considered to be solved
* Despite being able to put up a spirited intellectual debate, tends to give in to other's wishes, especially in practical matters, even to the point of changing course on major decisions
* Can masquerade at times as an F type by being expressive or sympathetic in certain circumstances
* Works best when he/she can take advantage of ideas that come at odd moments
* Enjoys discussions with others on speculative ideas, even if those people aren't informed about the topic in a traditional or scholarly sense
* Is best at tasks that involve making things up and fleshing out ideas
* Tends to come up with many ideas and finish only a few
* Is a child at heart, tending to say silly or goofy things and devising unusual amusements
* May get bored doing just one thing, so frequently jumps from one activity to another
* Does what seems efficient from one's perspective, but is unaware or confused about others' expectations and rules
* Tends to be highly productive in spurts after periods when one seems unfocused
* Sometimes has to force oneself to focus attention on predefined structures, problems, and tasks (as opposed to making stuff up)
* Is motivated by curiosity and wondering how some new idea or combination would pan out if one tried it
* In situations where the group is performing unjust or evil acts, will always be an outsider, standing in opposition to the group
* Seeks more comfortable approaches that may be unconventional but still get the job done, yet with less pain and annoyance
* Values as a primary self-defining principle the act of creating a unique product or understanding; seeking knowledge is important, but secondary to the idea of "creating"

[oyburger]

I think that I'm a logical subtype. It seems to me that though all the INTjs (and other types) are similar, when you examine them closer there are a lot of differences in taste, thinking etc. more so than what subtypes can explain.

I like your idea for a factor analysis, we just need to get more people to participate.

[Jonathan]

I think that I'm a logical subtype. It seems to me that though all the INTjs (and other types) are similar, when you examine them closer there are a lot of differences in taste, thinking etc. more so than what subtypes can explain.

Yes, I think so, but I wonder if some of the behaviors I pointed out that you identified with but I didn't might be the very ones associated with the logical subtype of INTj. I have often speculated that behavior related to planning and control may be more related to subtype than to overall type.

I like your idea for a factor analysis, we just need to get more people to participate.

I think people are probably intimidated by the long list of behaviors, and by the "low tech." nature. Maybe sometime I could create a drag-and-drop version. Anyhow, if people just want to comment on a subset of the behaviors, that would be nice too. But getting to people to list all the ones that apply to them, as you did, would be very interesting.

[dreikin]

* Tends to follow whatever seems interesting to one's mind at the time, regardless of what was planned or expected
* When making statements, considers them as a point of departure to start a conversation, rather than as definite statements or plans to be taken too seriously
* Tends to extend assignments into something more "interesting," possibly making it difficult to get them finished on time or within the expected amount of effort
* Commits to few or no firm positions about matters, but rather tends to question others about their positions and point out logical inconsistencies
* Avoids routine or repetitive tasks and may be slow at performing them
* Tends to be in another world, "daydreaming," even while performing tasks
* Appears unproductive in a "clock efficiency" sense but is good at solving difficult problems and finding ingenious solutions
* Considers all questions open, and tends to persist in coming up with new angles even on matters normally considered to be solved
* Requires that other people use the correct terminology when discussing something (More like occasionally making sure the definitions being used are mutually understood)
* Works best when he/she can take advantage of ideas that come at odd moments
* Enjoys discussions with others on speculative ideas, even if those people aren't informed about the topic in a traditional or scholarly sense
* Is best at tasks that involve making things up and fleshing out ideas
* Tends to come up with many ideas and finish only a few
* May get bored doing just one thing, so frequently jumps from one activity to another
* Tends to be highly productive in spurts after periods when one seems unfocused
* Sometimes has to force oneself to focus attention on predefined structures, problems, and tasks (as opposed to making stuff up)
* Is motivated by curiosity and wondering how some new idea or combination would pan out if one tried it
* Seeks more comfortable approaches that may be unconvential but still get the job done, yet with less pain and annoyance
* Values as a primary self-defining principle the act of creating a unique product or understanding; seeking knowledge is important, but secondary to the idea of "creating"

[Zeia]

Behaviors:
* May criticize people for moving too slowly
* Tends to follow whatever seems interesting to one's mind at the time, regardless of what was planned or expected
* Tends to extend assignments into something more "interesting," possibly making it difficult to get them finished on time or within the expected amount of effort
* Commits to few or no firm positions about matters, but rather tends to question others about their positions and point out logical inconsistencies
* Understands what is expected and does precisely that with very little extra effort

Note: Any smart person who is lazy would do this.

* Avoids routine or repetitive tasks and may be slow at performing them
* Tends to be in another world, "daydreaming," even while performing tasks
* Requires that other people use the correct terminology when discussing something
* Comes up with some decisions that seem strange to others, and obstinately follows through with them, because they're logical from one's own point of view.
* Can masquerade at times as an F type by being expressive or sympathetic in certain circumstances
* Works best when he/she can take advantage of ideas that come at odd moments
* Is best at tasks that involve making things up and fleshing out ideas
* Tends to come up with many ideas and finish only a few
* Is a child at heart, tending to say silly or goofy things and devising unusual amusements
* Is somewhat domineering and very comfortable telling other people what to do
* May get bored doing just one thing, so frequently jumps from one activity to another
* Does what seems efficient from one's perspective, but is unaware or confused about others' expectations and rules
* Tends to be highly productive in spurts after periods when one seems unfocused
* Is especially good at quickly mastering well-defined structures and problems, and quickly finding the correct solution

Note: Once again not really type related, functions can help but, you have to be smart for this.

* Is motivated by curiosity and wondering how some new idea or combination would pan out if one tried it
* In situations where the group is performing unjust or evil acts, will always be an outsider, standing in opposition to the group
* Seeks more comfortable approaches that may be unconvential but still get the job done, yet with less pain and annoyance

[Jonathan]

dreiken: * Requires that other people use the correct terminology when discussing something (More like occasionally making sure the definitions being used are mutually understood)

Yours are very close to mine, as are Zeia's. Actually, from this limited feedback, I get the sense that INTjs and INTps may both resonate with most of the behaviors I listed, but there appears to be a subset of the behaviors where INTjs and INTps differ.

One thing your response points out is that even a given statement of a behavior may apply to different types, but with different interpretations. Your clarification, I think, is typical of INTp thinking...that is, the idea that definitions are flexible but should be mutually understood.

For INTjs, I wonder if they're more likely to want people to use the correct terminology according to a fixed standard...that is, to use the accepted terminology that people who are experts in the field use, instead of just making up any terminology as one pleases....This is just a hypothesis, of course...not sure if it's true (?).

[oyburger]

When I know the correct terminology myself, my skin crawls if those around me don't use it correctly. Its not just terminology, but pronunciation, song lyrics etc. I used to have a bad habit of correcting my teachers when I was in school.

[Creepy-pokeball]

When I know the correct terminology myself, my skin crawls if those around me don't use it correctly. Its not just terminology, but pronunciation, song lyrics etc. I used to have a bad habit of correcting my teachers when I was in school.

I correct myself. I always have problems with plant names that are french, southern or eastern european :/ Sometimes I accidently slip into UK English and write/pronouce the u in words such as colour.

[oyburger]

I find myself spelling things in the UK version too. I don't know where I picked that up
I guess I just have no patience for common stupidity. If you went to college then you should be able to say "library" instead of "libary" for instance.

[Creepy-pokeball]

lol yeah. I picked it up from reading a lot of books from the UK/Aus/NZ.

I have more patience for stupidity than I used to. I think I'm better off for it.

[Phaedrus]

I have left out some statements that might apply to both INTps and INTjs. I have also left out some that are not clearly typical of either (in comparison to the other type) and some that I am unsure of. I have chosen statements that I think illustrates some typical (normal) differences between INTps and INTjs. They may not apply to every member of each group, but all of those in my INTp list apply to me, and even though both types might show some of them to a certain degree, the statement chosen is (in my opinion) more typical of one type than the other. The main reason there are more INTp statements is that I don't know how to get "inside" an INTj's mind, so some of my guesses about what is going on there are left out.

INTps:
* Tends to extend assignments into something more "interesting," possibly making it difficult to get them finished on time or within the expected amount of effort
* Commits to few or no firm positions about matters, but rather tends to question others about their positions and point out logical inconsistencies
* Tends to be in another world, "daydreaming," even while performing tasks
* Appears unproductive in a "clock efficiency" sense but is good at solving difficult problems and finding ingenious solutions
* Considers all questions open, and tends to persist in coming up with new angles even on matters normally considered to be solved
* Requires that other people use the correct terminology when discussing something
* Is a child at heart, tending to say silly or goofy things and devising unusual amusements
* Does what seems efficient from one's perspective, but is unaware or confused about others' expectations and rules
* Tends to be highly productive in spurts after periods when one seems unfocused
* In situations where the group is performing unjust or evil acts, will always be an outsider, standing in opposition to the group (not sure if this applies to INTjs too, but I put it here anyway because it is so characteristic of me).
* Seeks more comfortable approaches that may be unconvential but still get the job done, yet with less pain and annoyance
* Tends to follow whatever seems interesting to one's mind at the time, regardless of what was planned or expected
* When making statements, considers them as a point of departure to start a conversation, rather than as definite statements or plans to be taken too seriously

INTjs:
* In a leadership situations, is uncompromising, demanding the highest standards, sometimes to the point of being dictatorial (this and the next statement applies to every INTj I know except my father maybe)
* Is somewhat domineering and very comfortable telling other people what to do
* Tends to finish what one has started
* Is motivated by the desire to master things
* Values as a primary self-defining principle the act of creating a unique product or understanding; seeking knowledge is important, but secondary to the idea of "creating"

[Jonathan]

* Values as a primary self-defining principle the act of creating a unique product or understanding; seeking knowledge is important, but secondary to the idea of "creating"

Thanks for the lists. Many of the ones you put in INTj were ones Oyburger identified with too, so at least we have one person self-described as INTj who identifies with those. Of course, Oyburger also chose many of the ones in your INTp list, so perhaps some of those are still things that may be in common to both.

The one I quoted I find interesting though. I strongly identify with that one, and for myself probably would have put it in the INTp column, since it seems INTps strongly value imagination and often enjoy coming up with fantasy stories, etc. Maybe it's really one of the ones that could easily apply to both, though.

I suppose you put it in the INTj column because it sounds similar to your distinction between INTps being concerned with absolute "reality" or "truth" vs. INTj being interested in understanding systems...or something like that....??

[oyburger]

(this and the next statement applies to every INTj I know except my father maybe)
* Is somewhat domineering and very comfortable telling other people what to do

Yes this does apply to me but only if I know the people I'm telling what to do well.