INTPs: how they think

[tcaudilllg]

The issue of how INTPs think is one that I've found pretty difficult. It's something I've thought a lot about because most of my close male friends are INTPs. (feelers dominate the women) In particular, a cousin of mine is an INTP. I credit him with introducing me to many of the activities I enjoy. I saw him doing them, first!

My cousin and I have a lot in common. He is an avid roleplaying game fan. (console-style only, no pen and paper stuff) I, too, play roleplaying games often, but not for the same reason. For me, it's about knowledge: seeing the game's storyline in action and relating the way the characters act to other people I know. (in particular, I use crosstyping a lot to solidly type the characters, and so better understand their motivations. Most storylines don't stray from the socionics models that much... but that's a story for another post.) I take everything in the games seriously: if it doesn't make sense, I make it make sense by designing some hypothesis with which to fill in the blanks. (like, for example, explaining the presence of magic by postulating a kind of warped electromagnetic field left over from a previous era, placing the event period of the story on earth in the distant future.) My cousin doesn't do this. He takes the story at face value, acknowledges any inconsistency as a plothole, and just goes on with the game. For him, the experience of playing the game, of interacting with its gameplay system, is an end to itself. He says there is no point trying to draw a link between inconsistent elements in the storylines, because the motivations for the people who write them can't be known, nor can their ideas of who the characters are.

The entire concept of "freethinking" to me is very foreign. I avoid it because I think that if I started, I wouldn't know when to stop. Instead I closely associate my appraisal of direction in life with the flow of my agenda. When it is blocked, I at first get frustrated. The blockage usually happens for some reason I could not have forseen, usually some completely random event (like a snowstorm, or a sudden computer glitch) or some idiosyncracy of people's emotions. (overreaction, for example) Only after I have taken at alternate path, and over the course of following that path for several days, or even a few hours, had a new insight that I might not have had before into my agenda, do I feel that there was a reason for the blockage.

Most INTPs I know don't take life so seriously. I think it's common for INTJs to. (though they rarely let on) My question is this: how does the experience of the INTP differ from that of the INTJ? I've heard that INTPs have absolute control over their spatial functions, but I am not clear how to understand what "absolute control" is. I can determine "what" is imagined, but I cannot control how I imagine it. What thinking process capable of having pinpoint control over how something is created mentally can be logically consistent? How can it be consistent? Is it a blur of extremely fast algebra, moving everything into place with the precision of a computer program? As I reckon it now, that's what my assessment of the INTPs thinking process reduces to. It may not be correct though, so I figure it best to ask the people who experience it themselves.

[Catholic Schoolboy]

Are you talking about MBTI or Socionics?

[mike_INTJ]

i'm an INTJ, and i'm not sure quite how to answer it. first off, i have some doubts that all INTP's are spatially aware, since it's how you use your brain and not a personality.


i'm spatial aware, absoulute control? not sure. i can imagine something so detailed that i can physcially touch it in my mind. i can play with it, break it, smell it, taste it (kind of), listen to it. i can take it apart and improve on the design in my head, without prototypes. sort of a sub-prototype. once i figure out what it should look like, i can then break it down, and figure out how to make it with what i have. i then imagine myself making it, work out the bugs then make it.

sometimes the images can be so detailed, that i do actually look for it in the real world. it can be dangerous as my current views will change to interactive fantasy. while driving this can be a real thrill, which is why i use music to distract my attention back to reality.

i can develop emotions over a person that i totally made up. have an entire life together, adventures and so forth. however the universe that's created HAS to make sense. as long as the physics are explained, then it's ok to create. however i don't like making fake people that often. i tend to be loyal to one person. so when i make a fake person to escape reality, i'm not looking out for a real person, but a fake one. or i'm applying what i want in a girl, to the real person, comparing her to the fake one.... however the "dreams" keep me sane and relaxed.

you need to be able to use both sides of your brain at the same time (alpha-theta waves), to be able to do this. to be able to generate a dream, make sense of it, modify it, and re-create it. so your struggles may simply be that, it's how you use the brain itself. girls supposedly have better access to the two halves. so in their case they could probably do it pretty well (being and NT on top of that).

as far as the rest of the thinking, i don't know. from my research, i think P=more playful. and J=more serious. we do care about the future, i can foresee many outcomes, both good and bad. plan for the worst, hope for the best. many don't do this, and are almost always caught off gaurd in a storm. where i have my glowsticks, LED flashlights, and wind up radio at the ready.

[tcaudilllg]

i'm an INTJ, and i'm not sure quite how to answer it. first off, i have some doubts that all INTP's are spatially aware, since it's how you use your brain and not a personality.

I don't think this is the case. Jung defined intuition as the ability to examine possibilities. It seems unlikely that a person can experience non-real scenarios, and therefore appraise possible event processes with any degree of success, without decent spatial awareness.

The brain is the source of personality. It seems to me causally incoherent to presume that "how you use your brain" is apart from personality. (at least in regards to the higher functions, which intuition and mind certainly are)

i'm spatial aware, absoulute control? not sure. i can imagine something so detailed that i can physcially touch it in my mind. i can play with it, break it, smell it, taste it (kind of), listen to it. i can take it apart and improve on the design in my head, without prototypes. sort of a sub-prototype. once i figure out what it should look like, i can then break it down, and figure out how to make it with what i have. i then imagine myself making it, work out the bugs then make it.

Right. But I can do that too, or else I wouldn't be able to imagine the event pathways with which I reconcile fantasy storylines with reality. I also do that a lot in programming. It's a slow process, though, usually hinging upon random insight into the problems I'm trying to solves. I can only follow these pathways so far, though; then my perspective begins to "cloud", and things get more difficult to perceive. I reckon this difficulty as an exhaustion of perceptive energy.

sometimes the images can be so detailed, that i do actually look for it in the real world. it can be dangerous as my current views will change to interactive fantasy. while driving this can be a real thrill, which is why i use music to distract my attention back to reality.

Why not accept that reality is so fragile?

i can develop emotions over a person that i totally made up. have an entire life together, adventures and so forth. however the universe that's created HAS to make sense. as long as the physics are explained, then it's ok to create. however i don't like making fake people that often. i tend to be loyal to one person. so when i make a fake person to escape reality, i'm not looking out for a real person, but a fake one. or i'm applying what i want in a girl, to the real person, comparing her to the fake one.... however the "dreams" keep me sane and relaxed.

I've done this. I fantasize talking with people all the time. In fact, although I am often alone, I rarely feel alone because my appraisal of their character is so acute that I can converse with their mental image as well as, if not better than, with the real person.

I admit to doing that a lot in regards to this community's characters lately.
(and I use the term "character in this sense to refer to a specific pattern of personality traits that a person feels comfortable with sharing in a community environment)

you need to be able to use both sides of your brain at the same time (alpha-theta waves), to be able to do this. to be able to generate a dream, make sense of it, modify it, and re-create it. so your struggles may simply be that, it's how you use the brain itself. girls supposedly have better access to the two halves. so in their case they could probably do it pretty well (being and NT on top of that).

alpha-theta waves... these must be the work of neurotransmitters....
I question that girls have "better access". It seems to me likely that the researchers who are conducting these studies are being mislead by differences in personality type. There is a conflicting viewpoint to that theory in existence, and if personality type was indexed in the appraisal of the research sampling, then that conflicting viewpoint likely would not exist. The sampling data is not overwhelming, usually only representing a modest supermajority, when it should be 100%.

as far as the rest of the thinking, i don't know. from my research, i think P=more playful. and J=more serious. we do care about the future, i can foresee many outcomes, both good and bad. plan for the worst, hope for the best. many don't do this, and are almost always caught off gaurd in a storm. where i have my glowsticks, LED flashlights, and wind up radio at the ready.

Those who are caught "off guard": non-intuitives. It seems to me that one must trade spatial awareness for physical awareness, because both traits compete over the senses, especially the visual cortex. The duality between spatial awareness and intuition, therefore, seems self-evident.

I've not yet heard the INTPs (mbti, socionics, they're all the same; the difference is a misinterpretation) views. Cone, will you provide us with some insight into your thinking processes?

[Catholic Schoolboy]

Hello, I am INTp. You can call me Sycophant. Now that I have properly introduced myself I am going to bitch at you. Socionics and MBTI are not one in the same, you goddamned dolt. I hate you because you did not answer my question . I hate you because you play role playing games and I feel like stabbing everyone I know that plays those things. Ok, I’m done being childish and mean.

Now I want to know what you are talking about. I need to understand. Why? Because if you want to know how INTps think there are only two people here that can tell you? You got that? Okay. Now, question: Are you talking about socionics or MBTI? Can you answer this? Fine, good. This has been fun to write. I am being very cocky. Sorry.

I love you Darling, really I do.

[Cone]

Syc, sometimes not even I can understand your humor. Oh, and tcaudilllg's right; MBTI is the same as socionics.

How INTps think: like anyone else, I suppose. But I often find myself free-associating as a rule of thumb more than trying to restrict my thoughts.

For more information, look for the topic called "Ni+" in General Discussion.

[Catholic Schoolboy]

Syc, sometimes not even I can understand your humor. Oh, and tcaudilllg's right; MBTI is the same as socionics.

How INTps think: like anyone else, I suppose. But I often find myself free-associating as a rule of thumb more than trying to restrict my thoughts.

For more information, look for the topic called "Ni+" in General Discussion.

I don’t understand my sense of humor either ironically. And yes, I know that Cone, it is to an extent. But you must agree that the p looks much better if it is not a capital.

[Rocky]

I guess I never really liked that rule because it didn't seem to "do" anything. You could see people going on socionics.com and still think that they were talking about the MBTI models. Of course, you know I like using things like ISTP for non-socionic types, and SLI for socionic ones. But then again maybe we can all come together and hold hands and pretend that we all use the same types to describe everything and laugh and play and frolic and blah blah blah.

[mike_INTJ]

[quote]

i'm an INTJ, and i'm not sure quite how to answer it. first off, i have some doubts that all INTP's are spatially aware, since it's how you use your brain and not a personality.

I don't think this is the case. Jung defined intuition as the ability to examine possibilities. It seems unlikely that a person can experience non-real scenarios, and therefore appraise possible event processes with any degree of success, without decent spatial awareness.

The brain is the source of personality. It seems to me causally incoherent to presume that "how you use your brain" is apart from personality. (at least in regards to the higher functions, which intuition and mind certainly are)

i don't trust just one persons observations. jung pointed things out, but his word isn't law. since intuition people are in a small number, there is no way he could have gotten an accurate account on each one.

intuition is a bunch of things. from understanding how a person works, to understanding how to put something together without instructions. to understanding how the universe works, future, etc.

without the brain there wouldn't be anything. the personality is merely a program, and how it accesses the brain. it's sort of like saying a computer program , like the OS, is the personality of the computer. change the software, the computer remains the same, but it's used in a different way.

i'm spatial aware, absoulute control? not sure. i can imagine something so detailed that i can physcially touch it in my mind. i can play with it, break it, smell it, taste it (kind of), listen to it. i can take it apart and improve on the design in my head, without prototypes. sort of a sub-prototype. once i figure out what it should look like, i can then break it down, and figure out how to make it with what i have. i then imagine myself making it, work out the bugs then make it.

Right. But I can do that too, or else I wouldn't be able to imagine the event pathways with which I reconcile fantasy storylines with reality. I also do that a lot in programming. It's a slow process, though, usually hinging upon random insight into the problems I'm trying to solves. I can only follow these pathways so far, though; then my perspective begins to "cloud", and things get more difficult to perceive. I reckon this difficulty as an exhaustion of perceptive energy.

i think it all depends on how you think. since i already see and think in clear pictures - the one's in my head are no different then those in reality. if the idea isn't totally sound, i'll see it in a cloud. otherwise, once i see it fully, i can play with it.

sometimes the images can be so detailed, that i do actually look for it in the real world. it can be dangerous as my current views will change to interactive fantasy. while driving this can be a real thrill, which is why i use music to distract my attention back to reality.

Why not accept that reality is so fragile?

reality is pretty fragile. however there is a mechanism in your mind that let's you know what world your in. sort of like when you have a dream, you usually don't feel like your totally there. reality is different than imagination. however if you let yourself be abosorbed by it, then you can slip into insanity.

you need to be able to use both sides of your brain at the same time (alpha-theta waves), to be able to do this. to be able to generate a dream, make sense of it, modify it, and re-create it. so your struggles may simply be that, it's how you use the brain itself. girls supposedly have better access to the two halves. so in their case they could probably do it pretty well (being and NT on top of that).

alpha-theta waves... these must be the work of neurotransmitters....
I question that girls have "better access". It seems to me likely that the researchers who are conducting these studies are being mislead by differences in personality type. There is a conflicting viewpoint to that theory in existence, and if personality type was indexed in the appraisal of the research sampling, then that conflicting viewpoint likely would not exist. The sampling data is not overwhelming, usually only representing a modest supermajority, when it should be 100%.

i think the brainwaves, could be closer to the math that's in your head. or a power level. i think that the occurance of these waves could release other things like endorphines, i know i'm pretty mellow when i'm in the zone.

there's a section in the brain, the name of which totally escapes me, that has more receptors. supposedly for a female they have this better tuned. so they can access the sides easier. however i don't totally believe in a male or female brain. but since i'm not a doctor, i don't have access to experiment...

as far as the rest of the thinking, i don't know. from my research, i think P=more playful. and J=more serious. we do care about the future, i can foresee many outcomes, both good and bad. plan for the worst, hope for the best. many don't do this, and are almost always caught off gaurd in a storm. where i have my glowsticks, LED flashlights, and wind up radio at the ready.

Those who are caught "off guard": non-intuitives. It seems to me that one must trade spatial awareness for physical awareness, because both traits compete over the senses, especially the visual cortex. The duality between spatial awareness and intuition, therefore, seems self-evident.

I've not yet heard the INTPs (mbti, socionics, they're all the same; the difference is a misinterpretation) views. Cone, will you provide us with some insight into your thinking processes?

maybe someone can setup a list of definitions for everyone to go on. as to what the meaning of intuition, spatial, etc is. so we are all on the same level. just like when i asked about thinking modes, thinking in pictures - everyone had their own definition. we could be going in circles.

[tcaudilllg]

Syc, sometimes not even I can understand your humor. Oh, and tcaudilllg's right; MBTI is the same as socionics.

How INTps think: like anyone else, I suppose. But I often find myself free-associating as a rule of thumb more than trying to restrict my thoughts.

For more information, look for the topic called "Ni+" in General Discussion.

Thank you for the reference, Cone. Unfortunately it didn't prove very helpful. I tend to experience the same behavior in large part.

Perhaps I should get to the point: how do you experience visualization? How do you represent your ideas in your mind? I would appreciate your openness on this subject, Cone.