I enjoy solving math problems when it helps me understand things such as physics more, although I don't enjoy solving math problems for their own sake.
As for your question, I'd have to guess it's when the INTj is exceptionally intelligent and has derived some sort of societal benefit from exhibiting said intelligence.When we talk about math (algebra especially), we talk about symbols. A mathematical equation describes how quantities interact with each other. Quantities, not "things".
INTJs live in the world of "things": things imagined, things real and imaginable. We always have definite labels for our things. Even when we describe "ducks" we have in our heads the image of a duck we have seen, recalled from memory, front and center. (if only for a fraction of a second) INTJs cannot accept the concept of something existing without some concept of definite form connotated to it. It's absurd. Likewise, we have a less than enjoyable precept of the idea of blindly working with numbers to the end of working with numbers in themselves. ("blindly" as we as INTJs see it, of course) There MUST be a point.
So can I believe an INTJ teaching calculus? Yes, I can. I can even believe them teaching algebra. But there is a difference in educating people for a particular end, and geniuinely believing that that entire world must be "proved". To the INTJ, truth is self-evident.
Those who use math not at as a means to an end, but for the purpose of being certain in itself, are not INTJs.I enjoy solving math problems when it helps me understand things such as physics more, although I don't enjoy solving math problems for their own sake.
As for your question, I'd have to guess it's when the INTj is exceptionally intelligent and has derived some sort of societal benefit from exhibiting said intelligence.I do enjoy solving mathematical problems for their own sake... I only like doing this for its sake in PHYSICS, which helps me to gain a more fundamental understanding of the universe. I make the equations real in my head... not how most people think of them but in a metaphysical way that is real to me. To gain a complete understanding of this universe down to its fundamentals one must use Mathematics.If an INTJ is playing around with math problems on a regular basis then he is sacrificing his will to embrace new ideas, and to follow them in how they relate to his other ideas in search of a more detailed "big picture". Secondly, the ESFP shadow of the INTJ is the meticulous detail-maven.
The idea that Kurt Godel was an INTJ is absurd. Simply absurd. I've
Let’s say I wanted to attempt to prove the existence of God then I would use predicate calculus to derive the equations. T3 is defined as (p^~p)^(p<=>~p)^(~p<=>p) or p=>-p=>p=>, which leads to a contradiction. And T4 being (p)^(p=>-p=-(p=>-p)=>-(p=>-p=-(p=>-p))=>...), which continuously and holistically contradicts its own predicates. No one will end up with the predicates for this due to it is impossible to define what God is, we can merely define the qualities of God. And to think about it, what I just said is similar to saying: "1+1=2 because of T, where T states that 1+1=2" ... petito principii ... but anyway, I guess the job of the philosopher or the rationalist is not to accept something as it already is, but rather come up with an explanation for everything that does not need an explanation. That's the longanimity of rationalism. Or shall I say, irony of longanimity?To the INTJ, truth is self-evident.


Reply With Quote