This is in response to Tanzhe's last post. I had a similar INTj/INTp type confusion at first, but as I mentioned in an earlier post I made, the article up at socionics.com ("INTp or INTj?") ended the confusion for me because I knew instantly that my hidden agenda was "to love", or "to have an object of affection", or at least that this had something to do with me big time. Ever since I was a kid I remember having crushes on girls, or being fascinated with certain t.v. shows/toys for what has always felt to me like immature emotional reasons.
I've also always been kind of sentimental and almost melancholic about past events, especially when it comes to past affections, and while growing up I had many idols/heros, and I would sometimes fantasize that someday I would be the hero/idol to someone else like myself.
I often make mental hierarchies of things as well, namely in regard to hobbies. "Who's good?", "Who's on top?" "What's the fastest computer?", "Which is the nicest car"?; I would often try to find these kinds of things out to build such hierarchies possibly to justify an object of affection, or possibly a result of Ni/Te/Si/Fe style functioning. Certainly Te might be the powerhouse behind such categorizations.
I definitely live in a world of Ni as described here at this site:
(the site is using Myers Briggs style types, but the functional explanations are still interesting and may be of use, just substitue INp's for "INJ's")
which I feel is totally oppossed to the world of Fe as described here:
While I don't know how accurate exactly these descriptions are, I can say that personally I am sort of oppossed to the idea of roles set out by this explanation of Fe. More interesting to me is to live in a world of no roles or all roles, where simply the concept of said roles might be entertained, and I would only want to participate in one in order to better understand the concept of it, otherwise it holds no interest for me. (Unfortunately real life forces me to take some roles of course)
Also on this sort of randomized topic of how I came to the conclusion that I have an INTp type, I'd like to say that the way I feel when conversating with ESFp types really drives it home. I knew a couple ESFp girls before I ever read about socionics/myers briggs or any of this stuff (I later found out that they were "text book" ESFp types), and I can tell you the "natural" way I felt around them was/is absolutely uncanny. I was always personally mystified and fascinated by my encounters with these people because despite how rediculously different they were from me (the radical clothing styles, the huge group of friends, the many parties they go to, etc.) we often had _very_ natural and _very_ comfortable conversations. It was a known real world observation that I had had that socionics happened to provide a strong explanation for.
Lastly here are my original test results:
I tested "INTp" on the socionics type assistant at www.socionics.com
I tested "INTp" on this short little test here:
and I tested "INTJ" on the Myers-Briggs at my local community college.
A word on the INTj types, the ones i've met seem quite a bit different from myself. These are types that tested "INTj" at the socionics.com type assistant, and I also confirmed these findings with my own observations.
They seem different from me in that they are quite difficult to read emotionally, sometimes in conversation I can't tell whether they are smiling because they think i'm humerous or if they are smiling in pity because they think i'm a moron (maybe both?) . They often exhibit this grin that appears to be at a crosspoint between a grin of pure arrogence reflecting a brutal intellect inside and the kind of shy pensive happy grin that INFp types often make.
Just about every INTj type i've met also seem to think things out a lot more carefully, they are more thorough and consistent in their thought processes and in their speech. They are the true intellectuals, and I have great respect for most of the INTj types i've met. I would argue though, that INTp types are more laid back, more dreamy, conceptual and flexible in their thought processes rather than sticking to sometimes very dry and calculative avenues. Those are just some of my observations, you can probably read up on all the typological differences on the websites.