INTj description (Filatova) edited!

[misutii]

Logical-Intuitive Introvert
LII – INTj – Robespierre (Analyst)

Installation of the consciousness of the leading bloc: Reality is defined by its conformity with laws, which must be discovered by the LII. Through this it’s possible to more deeply investigate the essence of phenomena and processes.


Description of the strong functions:

Ti: LII’s ideology is founded upon the idea of the interdependence of phenomena in the surrounding world; everything that occurs is subordinate to laws and structure.

Her thinking takes an analytic nature. She gathers knowledge and, investigating it, analyzes the facts. She understands the essence of a situation by creating a model for this knowledge in her consciousness that corresponds with her experiences. She’s guided by the universal ideas she’s found and comprehended, regardless of others’ opposition. By no means will she be distracted from what she deems the principal purpose in her life and will only forsake something she’s started if convinced, on her own, of its error. Her work frequently becomes the focal point of her existence.

LII loves precision and order in everything; she is scrupulous and meticulous. Finds pleasure in systematizing, organizing everything “on the shelf.” Everything is done according to plan. Considers that the behaviour of people, especially at work, must be subordinate to a logical and definite system. Immediately notes the illogicality and contradictions present in the actions of people and, as much as possible, attempts to introduce corrections: depending on whom she’s dealing with can express criticism or propose assistance. Generally is irritated by chaotic, disorderly, inconsiderate people.

Ne: In order to build a convincing system, compliant with the laws of logic, LII attempts to penetrate into the essence of objects and events; seeks the underlying reason for the occurrence. Cannot live without a basic set of beliefs; if it is necessary to abandon one (such occurs extremely rarely), she’ll formulate another. In such cases it is very important to be convinced of the validity of the values, which compose her interest: her ideology must have solid internal support.

She’s drawn foreword by intuitively penetrating into universal matters, but as soon as she’s satisfied with understanding one, is drawn to another. What she already wholly understands is very clear and seems uninteresting. She’s only capable of admiring the result she’s obtained for a short time, for soon after appears a sensation of triviality for what she’s done.

One of the LII’s most positive qualities lies in the ability to dismantle intricate and complex questions, to focus on the important points, to view the problem “from above” and clearly present this understanding. If she comprehends the essence of the problem well enough she will not yield to those that oppose her, will always promulgate her position.

A very characteristic feature of the LII is the ability to sense well the course of time. She cannot naturally spend it in vain. She works peacefully, from afar appears to do so leisurely. Her ability to concentrate, to not be distracted by external interference, guarantees her efficiency with work. As a rule the LII is capable of determining when the job is done. Her precision manifests itself in her personal obligations: if LII agreed to be at a meeting but never showed up – it means that something serious befell her.


Description of the Weak Functions:

Se: LII poorly conveys volitional pressure. Though she may find herself in an executive position wherein orders are relayed, she will not execute the commands of superiors, which in her view are incorrect.

In reconciling with others LII will state the rules rather than beginning with the injustice at hand, may sometimes express sharpness and ardor, which catches others by surprise.

She finds it difficult to be placed within the strict framework of a hierarchic structure, where everything is previously stipulated and there is no space for creativity.

LII maintains rationality in material expenditures; frequently she’ll stow away a sum of money in the case of an unforeseen situation. Will not spend money in vain – is thrifty.

Her ideal of happiness is in a regulated and proper life, where work and play are separated. Can for a very long time, sometimes an entire lifetime, adhere to the same daily routine. She feels very uncomfortable when circumstances violate her routines, in such cases will focus her resources on retrieving order, since it is in such routines that she finds internal support. Disorder and chaos, whether in her private life or at work, she experiences painfully.

In regards her health LII relates to the objective reality, but she does not entrust herself to her own sensations, completely relying on physicians. When she falls ill she strictly adheres to her physician’s instructions, obtaining the prescribed medication, administering the correct doses.

In regards to clothing LII frequently adheres to a “business” style, stressing more so her professional position than any specific features. She does not care for pretentiousness and bright accessories. Is constrained in expressing her sexual attractiveness.

Fi: The realm of ethics presents weakness for LII. In this area she adheres to the norms and traditions of society. May develop sufficient care and restraint so as to avoid such situations, in which she’s badly oriented. LII poorly measures the emotional climate, prefers not to interfere in conflicts and – as much as possible – to avoid such situations. Finds it difficult to comfort others. In such cases prefers to render concrete assistance, or, if this is impossible, to simply walk away and not interfere. Does not understand what to do, or what to say, when confronted by another’s tearful emotional outburst.

Tends to associate from a distant psychological distance; does not express familiarity well with others. Thus, as a child and as an adult, she fails to develop and maintain many friendships. In this the weakness of the ethical function manifests itself.

LII follows tradition. Is proper and exercises restraint, does not succumb to deplorable expressions of behaviour, but this is not the essence of her nature – under the mask of restraint is often hidden a strained spiritual life, influenced by intense experiences. However, her reserved nature does not permit her to share her misfortunes with others. For years she may carry an offense, in the depth of her soul, only with difficulty pardoning the offender.

LII develops relations with caution, behaves towards others with restraint and respect. Is noticeably enkindled by intellectual conversation – in this area she feels herself sufficiently well grounded.


LII at Work and in the Home

LII does not aim for leadership positions. Administrative activity is not her element. If, nevertheless, LII must be occupied by such she will attempt to utilize objective criteria. She will provide logical reasons to convince subordinates of the need to undertake one approach over another. In leadership is more so inclined towards democratic methods, but is always very exacting. Due to her high standards of accuracy and precision, she cannot be wholly entrusted to an executive position. If given authority she will try, by herself, to check over everything, to personally convince herself that everything that must be done has been brought to completion.

A person of system and order, LII also adheres to principles in the organization of her workspace – everything that is necessary is within arm’s reach, and there is nothing in excess, which could distract from her work. After work LII will put everything necessary in order, everything assumes its previously intended place; all necessary materials are accurately organized in and around her desk.

LII distinctly separates personal life and work. She holds a strong feeling of responsibility in respect to her family and relatives. Being devoted to traditions, she seriously relates where others reject, worries about the aged parents, is obligated in seeing that her children obtain the proper development and education. In her domestic relations she’s not inclined to excessive displays sensitivity: the weakness of the ethical function prevents her from expressing her feelings, especially with other people.

Should one of her relatives require aid, including material, she will consider it necessary to render this assistance. However, does not freely handout money and in this sense she is rational. She loves to compose lists of necessary expenditures. She attempts to guarantee security in the case of possible future adversity; she saves for “the rainy day.”

In private life she values solitude and leisure time amongst family. She cannot simply loaf around when not at work. Loves intellectual forms of sport: chess, games. With pleasure is occupied by her collections and hobbies, by photography, by art… All her hobbies, as a rule, require devotion, and they must all make positive sense. May appear to be very private when an activity does not require another’s assistance, spending hours alone with a project she holds dear. If someone shows an interest in this she will willingly show him or her everything.

Many representatives of this psycho-type have good musical taste, love music, play musical instruments, and even write songs themselves.


Summary of Functions:
1. Ti: Thoughts carry an analytic nature. Knowledge is processed in accordance with conformity to laws. Erect a model, based on their experience, in their consciousness. Works scrupulously and meticulously, loves everything to be precise and in order, is very accurate in regards to details.
2. Ne: Attempts to penetrate into the essence of phenomena and events, seeks the core reasons behind what occurs, generates new ideas. Knows how to foresee the ripening of global developments, possible dangers that may result.
3. Se: Cannot comfortably express volitional pressure. Cannot act in ways deemed dishonorable or deplorable. Is not oriented well in the sphere of personal health and maintenance.
4. Fi: Must observe norms of morals and traditions deemed necessary. Behaves in a proper manner. Prefers intellectual contact to emotional contact. Holds self at a distance psychological distance from others. Emotional expression is restrained, often based on the norms dictated by society. Tries not to interfere/get involved in conflicts. Avoids emotional situations.


Professional Possibilities:
LII possesses all the criteria necessary for work in analytical research. The ability to dismantle complex questions, to view the problem in its entirety and clearly present personal speculations, makes LII a good instructor and scientist. Amongst LII are also encountered people in the arts, most frequently musicians.


Relations-
Potentially Favourable:
ESE (ESFj), EIE (ENFj), LSE (ESTj), SEI (ISFp)
Potentially Adverse:
SEE (ESFp), SLE (ESTp), IEE (ENFp), LIE (ENTj)

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------






(NOTE: I'm going to include the original version i worked with in a post below. There was many parts of this that I wasn't comfortable with, mostly due to the absence of INTjs in my everyday life . INTjs please feel free to edit things. Either post an edited paragraph in this thread that i can copy/paste or pm me.

[misutii]

ORIGINAL MACHINE TRANSLATED VERSION:

--------------------------------------------------------------------
Installation of the consciousness of the leading bloc THE LII: at the foundation of all of that occurring lie the defined conformity with the laies, which must be discovered (BL of — program function), for this it follows as it is possible more deeply to investigate the essence of the phenomena and processes (CHI of — the implementation of program).

Description of the activity of the functions of strong canals (leading bloc)

BL of — program function. At the foundation of ideology LII lies the idea about the interdependence of the phenomena of the surrounding world, its structure and laws, by which must be subordinated everything, which occurs on the Land.

Its thinking carries analytical nature, it is approached the knowledge of general conformity with the laies, investigating and analyzing facts. In its consciousness it erects such model, which would correspond to its experience, based on understanding of the essence of the surrounding phenomena. If it found and comprehended the global idea of — will be by it be guided strictly, even disregarding of the opposition of those surrounding. It by no means cannot be distracted from the fact that it considers as the principal work of its life. It can leave that initiated only when itself it will be convinced of its error.

Work for LII is frequently the principal work of life, many representatives of this psycho-type are literally fact that it corresponds to the nickname “of [trudogolik]” (MEMBERS).

LII loves in everything precision and order, it is scrupulous and meticulous. It it pleases itself to systematize, to expand everything “on the shelves”, previously everything to plan. LII it considers that all behavior of people, especially on the work, also must be subordinated to logic and definite system. It immediately notes illogicality and contradictions in the activities of people and, as far as possible, it attempts to introduce its corrections: can express in regard to this critical observation or will propose the help of — everything it depends on that, with whom it deals. Generally entire chaotic, unconsidered, disorderly it strongly irritate.

CHI of — the function of the implementation of program. In order to build the convincing system, which is obeyed the law of logic, LII it attempts to penetrate in the essence of objects and phenomena, it seeks the original reasons for that occurring. It does not can to live without the basic idea: if it was necessary to leave one (which occurs extremely rarely), it erects for itself another. In this case for it it is very important to be convinced of the validity of the values, which compose its interest: its ideology must have solid internal support.

Intuitive penetration into the entity of the universe constantly conducts it forward, but as soon as it grew over itself in understanding of one, another here draws it. Entire clear seems it uninteresting, and so clear. Only short time it is capable to admire by the obtained result, but already soon appears the sensation of the triviality of that done.

The ability to be dismantled at the intricate and complex questions, to reveal the main thing, to see problem “on top” is clear to present understood — one of the brightest positive qualities LII. If he comprehended well the essence of the problem of — it will not yield to opponents, it will deposit its positions to the end.

Very characteristic feature THE LII of — the ability to feel well the course of time (BI). It organically cannot spend it in vain. It works peacefully, without clear lower decks, it outwardly even seems that it is leisurely. But its ability to be concentrated, not to be distracted to the foreign objects leads to the high efficiency of labor (MEMBERS). As a rule, it is capable to indicate the real period of the termination of its work. Its obligation, precision are manifested also in the common life: if LII agreed about the meeting and did not arrive — it means, fell something serious.

Description of the activity of the functions of the weak canals

CHS of — the canal of the smallest resistor (KNS). LII it badly transfers volitional pressure. Men executive and being approached order, it, nevertheless, will not begin to execute the commands of authorities, from its point of view of incorrect.

LII also to be reconciled it will not begin with the injustice, but it will deposit its laws, even it can sometimes manifest sharpness and ardor, not expected for those surrounding (CHE).

To it it is difficult to be entered in the strict framework of the hierarchic structure, where everything is previously stipulated and there is no space for the creativity.

It is rational LII also in the material expenditures, frequently it implies a certain sum of money in the case, if meets anything unforeseen, but necessary. However, money not begin in vain to spend, — is thrifty (BS).

Its ideal of — the measured off and correct life, where there is a place and to work, and to happiness. Can very for long, now and then entire life, to adhere to one and the same order of day. If circumstances are formed so that order it is violated — it feels strong discomfort, by all forces is attempted to be returned into the measured off life, since, first of all, in this it finds internal support. Any disorder, chaos around themselves, be it in private life or on the service, take in extremely painfully.

To its health LII it relates as to the objective reality, which one should consider, but it does not entrust to its own sensations, completely relying on physicians (BS). If it falls ill, then are executed strictly all instructions of physician, it assumes the prescribed medicines, following carefully doses.

In the clothing LII it frequently adheres to “business” style, stressing, it is faster, its professional belonging, than specific features. It does not love pretentiousness and bright decolorations. Even girls of this psycho-type are constrained to stress their sexual attractiveness (BS).

BE of — normative function. Ethics of — weak function LII. In this area it adheres to norms and traditions, taken in the society. In “nonstandard” cases develops the care and restraint in order not to prove to be in the situation, in which it badly is orientated. Weakly examining emotional thinness, LII prefers not to interfere in the conflicts of — as far as possible it it is attempted to avoid them. To it it is very not easy by means of one contact alone to comfort man, whom it understood to mountain. It prefers to in such cases render some concrete assistance, or, if this is impossible, — simple to walk away and not to interfere. Outflows, lacrimal complaints it does not love, it does not suffer, badly he understands, that it is necessary to make and what to speak in similar cases.

Usually LII it associates on “distant” distance, familiarity it does not transfer. People, with which it to [nakorotke], never is much (in essence the friends of childhood and youth). In this the weakness of its ethical function also is manifested.

Following tradition, LII it is held as rule, it is correct, with restraint, it does not transfer caddishness itself never allows it. Frequently it carries out the impression of cold, impassive man, but this, is faster, the manner of behavior, but not the essence of his nature of — under the mask of restraint can be hidden the strained spiritual life and strong experiences. However, reticence does not permit for it to share by its misfortunes with someone another. It can for years carry offense in the depth of soul and with difficulty pardons offender (CHE).

LII develops the care, behaves with them with restraint with respect to the persons of opposite floor. Noticeably is revived in the conversation with the intellectual partners of — in this area it it feels itself sufficiently to well-grounded.

LII on the work and the house

To the leading work LII the aim is not. Administrative activity of — not its element. But if nevertheless LII is necessary it to be occupied — it it is attempted to put to use in everything objective criteria, it gives logical proofs in order to convince subordinates of the need for one or the other industrial approach. In the leadership it more greatly is inclined to the democratic methods, but in this case it is always very exacting. It cannot be entrusted to executive completely with its high standards of accuracy and precision of work. If gave commission necessarily it will try itself everything to check and to be convinced personally which everything is done as must and is brought to completion.

Man of system and order, LII adheres to his principles also in the organization of his work site of — everything which is necessary, in it under the hands, and there is nothing excess, which could prevent work. After work LII necessarily everything it will put in order, it will assume on the previously intended places, all necessary materials are accurately composed in its desk and on the flanges.

LII it sharply demarcates personal life and work. With respect to the family and the relatives it has a high feeling of responsibility. Being it is devoted to traditions, it seriously relates to the reject, worries about the aged parents, considers itself as that obligated to give a good education and formation to children. In the contact with the the domestic of — it is not inclined to the excessive sensitivity: the weakness of ethical function prevents it from expressing its feelings, especially on the people.

If someone of the relatives needs its help of, including material, it will necessarily render this assistance, but simple then money to the wind reject there will not be — it and in this it is rational. It loves to compose the lists of the necessary expenditures. He tries to guarantee itself for the case of possible future adversities, it deposits on “black day”.

In the off-duty time loves solitude or leisure in to family circle. It is simple to loaf, to dangle without the work of — it does not can. It loves the intellectual forms of the sport: chess, cartridge. With the pleasure it is occupied by collectivization, photograph, cultivation of colors, by artistic embroidry… All its entrainments, as a rule, require assiduity, and they all must make positive sense: it little draws, for example, the collectivization of identification tags. In such works, where to it is not required companion, he can be in private hours with its dear work. If to this someone manifests the interest of — it will willingly show everything which occupies it.

Many representatives of this psycho-type have not bad musical rumor, love music, play on any musical tools, and that write themselves.

[Not A Communist Shill]

The profile's very good, but not sure about these bits (it's probably just me):

Fi: The realm of ethics presents weakness for LII. In this area she adheres to the norms and traditions of society. May develop sufficient care and restraint so as to avoid such situations, in which she’s badly oriented. LII poorly measures the emotional climate, prefers not to interfere in conflicts and – as much as possible – to avoid such situations. Finds it difficult to comfort others. In such cases prefers to render concrete assistance, or, if this is impossible, to simply walk away and not interfere. Does not understand what to do, or what to say, when confronted by another’s tearful emotional outburst.

I'm not sure how true this is for me - I suppose it's true in practice, but in theory (i.e. the way I think) I can have quite fantastical and even sick ideas for society .

Should one of her relatives require aid, including material, she will consider it necessary to render this assistance. However, does not freely handout money and in this sense she is rational. She loves to compose lists of necessary expenditures. She attempts to guarantee security in the case of possible future adversity; she saves for “the rainy day.”

I hate being obliged to do something - if someone tells me that I 'should' do something, I automatically tell them to get stuffed (especially if I was going to help them anyway, of my own initiative). I prefer to help people who say they are struggling with something and say so, (or those who say 'you couldn't help me, with this, could you?) then my action seems like an act of charity . (I think that paragraph and other parts touch on this).

[UDP]

The profile's very good, but not sure about these bits (it's probably just me):

Fi: The realm of ethics presents weakness for LII. In this area she adheres to the norms and traditions of society. May develop sufficient care and restraint so as to avoid such situations, in which she’s badly oriented. LII poorly measures the emotional climate, prefers not to interfere in conflicts and – as much as possible – to avoid such situations. Finds it difficult to comfort others. In such cases prefers to render concrete assistance, or, if this is impossible, to simply walk away and not interfere. Does not understand what to do, or what to say, when confronted by another’s tearful emotional outburst.

I'm not sure how true this is for me - I suppose it's true in practice, but in theory (i.e. the way I think) I can have quite fantastical and even sick ideas for society .

That part you quoted, Subterranean, is absolutely true for me. Especially in regard to what I underlined.
Many times I see no reason to say anything at all, and then when people seem to be expecting some sort of emotional response, it's just odd. Only through careful training and concern for others have I legitimately been able to ... be supportive in an effective way.

A note for others: LIIs have problems with this in part because (in my opinion, and personal experience), an LII would avoid making such a display or being put in such a situation at all costs. An LII would not prefer to make such a display that was so obviously in need of an emotional response from other people. So when other people act in contrast to this methodology, it presents a strange situation.


I also agree with this selection:

Should one of her relatives require aid, including material, she will consider it necessary to render this assistance. However, does not freely handout money and in this sense she is rational. She loves to compose lists of necessary expenditures. She attempts to guarantee security in the case of possible future adversity; she saves for “the rainy day.”

I hate being obliged to do something - if someone tells me that I 'should' do something, I automatically tell them to get stuffed (especially if I was going to help them anyway, of my own initiative). I prefer to help people who say they are struggling with something and say so, (or those who say 'you couldn't help me, with this, could you?) then my action seems like an act of charity . (I think that paragraph and other parts touch on this).

...just so you know, Subterranean, you are not disagreeing with what Filatova says in your statement.



PS: However, there are some LIIs (intuitive subtype?) that seem to openly ask for assistance and emotionally being there from other people. This reminds me of my room mate. He may be ENTp, but I doubt it because of his less than EP activity level. He very much seems like an 'infantile' type of person, and has often asked some other people to join him at a class, which reminded me disgustingly of a baby requesting its mother to join him for security.
I don't know what to say about those kinds of LIIs.

[misutii]

this was the most difficult one i've done so far. it took me way longer than it should have because I kept second guessing how to re-word the sentence to make it make sense and then sometimes i still felt like it didn't make sense

[UDP]

I only read Sub's post.
I'll look over the first two posts after I get some sleep.
Thanks for posting it and spending the time.

[Blaze]

right on seems like to me. seems like the intj's i know to a T. thanks misutii....looks like a lot of work, for sure

[UDP]

I read the whole profile today: it is UDP approved.
I almost wonder now if that is the most effective way of being myself.
I'm into leadership and progress, but I wonder if that is my station so to say. ...

LII does not aim for leadership positions. Administrative activity is not her element. If, nevertheless, LII must be occupied by such she will attempt to utilize objective criteria. She will provide logical reasons to convince subordinates of the need to undertake one approach over another. In leadership is more so inclined towards democratic methods, but is always very exacting. Due to her high standards of accuracy and precision, she cannot be wholly entrusted to an executive position. If given authority she will try, by herself, to check over everything, to personally convince herself that everything that must be done has been brought to completion.

I would definitely not pass up a position to oversee and make sure things were going in the right direction, however.

In regard to the underlined:
I think I understand what the point is supposed to be, but I think it would be more true that such is not a negative quality, but rather one that if is to be correctly implemented, must be properly delegated. One person can only do too much, and I believe any INTj (especially one who seeks to understand how things work...) could learn how to make that situation work also.

[Jonathan]

After work LII will put everything necessary in order, everything assumes its previously intended place; all necessary materials are accurately organized in and around her desk.

Here's a question for the LIIs around here. I have trouble squaring this statement (and others here) with the Reinin "reasonable" dichotomy. It seems that according to Reinin, "reasonables," who include LIIs, tend to not like to do everything "all in one go," but rather prefer to start on something and then stop to relax or do other things, and then come back to that thing, whereas "resolute" types tend to finish what they set out to do before going on to something else.

The contradiction for me is that in my observations, the kind of people who who easily put things away after using them are also the kinds of people who finish what they started before moving onto the next thing. In fact, it's hard to see how it could be any other way. People who hop from thing to thing naturally leave stuff out, because they plan to come back to it later.

How is this reconciled? Perhaps Reinin's dichotomy is wrong? Or LIIs have a way of keeping things in order without having to do things sequentially?

? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?

[UDP]

Your point is one I understand. It is a strange thing.

First, especially in a work situation, being professional and organized is important for an LII
I have learned to become much more organized at home, as opposed to my more sloppy youth. So my desk and room is organized much better than my room mates, and most others.

In terms of what you said about reasonables working on things from time to time, and not finishing them all at once, that actually is so for me. I don't understand why, but it does 'feel' better. I am in the process of figuring out whether that is something I should change or not.

[misutii]

I would definitely not pass up a position to oversee and make sure things were going in the right direction, however.

In regard to the underlined:
I think I understand what the point is supposed to be, but I think it would be more true that such is not a negative quality, but rather one that if is to be correctly implemented, must be properly delegated. One person can only do too much, and I believe any INTj (especially one who seeks to understand how things work...) could learn how to make that situation work also.

i agree that it shouldn't be interpreted as negative. I understand how it could be bad... like an INTj is put in charge of a shitty business where everyone is slacking off because there's no infrastructure in place.. but on the other hand if the company's healthy and people are ACTUALLY doing their jobs than an INTj's perfectionism would be a positive thing.

The main problem is that when other people don't do their work the INTj would be stuck picking up the slack on his/her own. Also if one person isn't fulfilling their responsibilities in a company there's a high likelihood that many others aren't either. It's in these kind of situations where the the INTj would suffer because he/she's now responsible for 5x the workload, which can't be dumped on other people because the other people have already proved to be incompetent and even if they did do their work the results would seem so poor and sloppy that the INTj would feel the need to re-do everything anyway.

I think that an INTj could make a really good boss/leader but they need competent deputies that they can trust

[UDP]

The more the LII suppresses that natural inclination for a 'job well done', the more he suffers, IME.

The main battle for an LII seems to be earing respect or recognition, as relations are its weakest field. An ESE would help very much, but the LII must also make sure he does his part.

[Not A Communist Shill]

After work LII will put everything necessary in order, everything assumes its previously intended place; all necessary materials are accurately organized in and around her desk.

Here's a question for the LIIs around here. I have trouble squaring this statement (and others here) with the Reinin "reasonable" dichotomy. It seems that according to Reinin, "reasonables," who include LIIs, tend to not like to do everything "all in one go," but rather prefer to start on something and then stop to relax or do other things, and then come back to that thing, whereas "resolute" types tend to finish what they set out to do before going on to something else.

The contradiction for me is that in my observations, the kind of people who who easily put things away after using them are also the kinds of people who finish what they started before moving onto the next thing. In fact, it's hard to see how it could be any other way. People who hop from thing to thing naturally leave stuff out, because they plan to come back to it later.

How is this reconciled? Perhaps Reinin's dichotomy is wrong? Or LIIs have a way of keeping things in order without having to do things sequentially?

? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?

If I'm working on an essay where I have to read and reference sources, I like to read the information slowly and reflect on it for a while, then I write the essay with only a few days left. If a source (or sentence on a page) isn't worth finding I won't remember where it is. I tend to keep the most relevant things in close proximity to my work space (or out of the bin) and have a vague idea in my head of where they are. I don't neccessarily put things away after using them - I sort of have an organised mess about my room - I visualise my room as me in the centre with various webs of related stuff around me (some of the webs cross, but I am able to distinguish + classify items by association with its web). So, I don't see things sequentially, I picture them around me with varying proximity.

[krieger]

Here's a question for the LIIs around here. I have trouble squaring this statement (and others here) with the Reinin "reasonable" dichotomy. It seems that according to Reinin, "reasonables," who include LIIs, tend to not like to do everything "all in one go," but rather prefer to start on something and then stop to relax or do other things, and then come back to that thing, whereas "resolute" types tend to finish what they set out to do before going on to something else.

The contradiction for me is that in my observations, the kind of people who who easily put things away after using them are also the kinds of people who finish what they started before moving onto the next thing. In fact, it's hard to see how it could be any other way. People who hop from thing to thing naturally leave stuff out, because they plan to come back to it later.

How is this reconciled? Perhaps Reinin's dichotomy is wrong? Or LIIs have a way of keeping things in order without having to do things sequentially?

I can only speak for myself, but for me the 'reasonable' and 'result' dichotomies, which both create the less organized kind of behavior are both markedly present, in which respect it is easy to mistake my workspace behavior for that of a stereotypical 'perceiver'. Also, I can generally think of things more interesting and constructive things to worry about that the organization of my materials, so they are mostly kept in a cosy disarray.

[UDP]

I would definitely not pass up a position to oversee and make sure things were going in the right direction, however.

In regard to the underlined:
I think I understand what the point is supposed to be, but I think it would be more true that such is not a negative quality, but rather one that if is to be correctly implemented, must be properly delegated. One person can only do too much, and I believe any INTj (especially one who seeks to understand how things work...) could learn how to make that situation work also.

i agree that it shouldn't be interpreted as negative. I understand how it could be bad... like an INTj is put in charge of a shitty business where everyone is slacking off because there's no infrastructure in place.. but on the other hand if the company's healthy and people are ACTUALLY doing their jobs than an INTj's perfectionism would be a positive thing.

The main problem is that when other people don't do their work the INTj would be stuck picking up the slack on his/her own. Also if one person isn't fulfilling their responsibilities in a company there's a high likelihood that many others aren't either. It's in these kind of situations where the the INTj would suffer because he/she's now responsible for 5x the workload, which can't be dumped on other people because the other people have already proved to be incompetent and even if they did do their work the results would seem so poor and sloppy that the INTj would feel the need to re-do everything anyway.

I think that an INTj could make a really good boss/leader but they need competent deputies that they can trust

I agree.
(Hmm, maybe that is another aspect of Fe dual seeking that I had not previously considered...)

also,
Maybe Filatova was just worried about what happened when Robespierre tookover... and didn't want that level of "precision" to get carried away and abused. (........)

[Jonathan]

I can only speak for myself, but for me the 'reasonable' and 'result' dichotomies, which both create the less organized kind of behavior are both markedly present, in which respect it is easy to mistake my workspace behavior for that of a stereotypical 'perceiver'. Also, I can generally think of things more interesting and constructive things to worry about that the organization of my materials, so they are mostly kept in a cosy disarray.

Yes, I'm becoming more&more convinced that the reasonable/resolute dichotomy makes statements about "typical j/p" behaviors much more complicated.
Interesting though that the descriptions of process/result sound so similar to reasonable/resolute:

Process (NTp NFj SFp STj):
1.Feel themselves 'immersed' in a process, and therefore have a difficult time multitasking.
2.Tend to view a process as a whole, indissoluble, and have a difficult time coming starting and stopping in the middle of a process, preferring to finish it in one go.
3.“I have a hard time stopping what I'm doing – like when I'm reading a book, but know I have to go to sleep. I'll continue right through the end of the chapter and several pages into the next before I finally stop. It's just that the idea of something ending kind of frightens me.”
Result (NTj NFp SFj STp):
1.Feel themselves on the 'outside' of a process, and thus easily multitask.
2.Tend to perceive a process through their estimations of its progress/results, and may not notice something is wrong until it shows up in these estimations.
3.“I feel like a juggler, with processes for knives. Each has a beginning and an end. The most terrible thing would be if a process never ended.”

But in this case, "result" doesn't feel so much like "p" to me; quite the opposite, since an unwillingness to put down a book or stop one thing or another seems so INp. Some of the wording is a bit strange; what on earth does it mean to be "'outside' of a process"? And why would someone who has a hard time stopping something be unable to multitask? (What a limited view of peoples' abilities...)

Anyhow, what all these responses suggest to me, though, is that perhaps Filatova's description of LIIs being super-organized and loving to organize and file things away is maybe a little exaggerated and not true for quite a number of LIIs (?).

I always thought, anyhow, that putting stuff away requires a great deal of S (unless it's all electronic). But maybe in a very organized state of mind one can do it without so much S.

Another thought: Do LIIs need to feel the support of others (e.g., Fe) to be this way (organized)?

[UDP]

I think it's more a matter of consciousness. My LII room mate, and formerly myself, is terribly unorganized and a slob. No awareness of S.
However, since I am more aware of it, and not so caught up in my own mind, I see "disorder", and putting it in order works better.

Also, for situations where you need something fast, having things organized is helpful.
And, the more you do, the more active you are, the more organized you need to be.
You can not be involved in anything and afford to be a slop, because there is no need for organization so to say.
But the more you want to do, the more you MUST be organized (at least for me).


So organization is part of the process.

Also, if you incorporate organization into , and order, and perfection, then it works out all the more.
IF you take a liking to discipline and see the value of it, then order becomes more important in your eyes.

[Exodus]

The more the LII suppresses that natural inclination for a 'job well done', the more he suffers, IME.

I would agree with that. As much as I make myself out to be a slacker, it's an uncomfortable role. However, I think the best solution is still to eliminate jobs that you never really wanted to do in the first place. But of course if you have no choice it's probably better to do a good job than a crappy one.

[Not A Communist Shill]

But in this case, "result" doesn't feel so much like "p" to me; quite the opposite, since an unwillingness to put down a book or stop one thing or another seems so INp. Some of the wording is a bit strange; what on earth does it mean to be "'outside' of a process"? And why would someone who has a hard time stopping something be unable to multitask? (What a limited view of peoples' abilities...)

I think this means being able to see the beginning + end of a process at the same time, i.e. being outside the loop or not being involved with the events\details of one particular moment (in that process\sequence). So, in that description, it says process-oriented people need to carrying on reading a book, they can't stop without knowing how it ends - they need to keep running to stay in the same place (to keep them satisfied). Result people know how they are going to act in a given situation before the event happens (they consider the event as largely unpredictable however) - so they don't worry (as much) about what's going to happen next or at the end - they live as they mean to go on, rather than assessing new data in the moment.

[Jonathan]

I think this means being able to see the beginning + end of a process at the same time, i.e. being outside the loop or not being involved with the events\details of one particular moment (in that process\sequence). So, in that description, it says process-oriented people need to carrying on reading a book, they can't stop without knowing how it ends - they need to keep running to stay in the same place (to keep them satisfied). Result people know how they are going to act in a given situation before the event happens (they consider the event as largely unpredictable however) - so they don't worry (as much) about what's going to happen next or at the end - they live as they mean to go on, rather than assessing new data in the moment.

It's interesting when you put it that way; if you put it like that, then I identify with result orientation, though I can't imagine any N person would want to be stuck in the details without having a view of the whole.

On the other hand, I also identify with "process" in the sense that I often have a certain momentum to what I'm doing, and then I want to keep doing it. It's not that I want to know how something ends (I can skip to the last page), but it's more that I sometimes get "on a roll" (except that other times I jump back and forth between things). I imagine most people would probably identify with both sides of each dichotomy if they really thought about it.

[Not A Communist Shill]

I think this means being able to see the beginning + end of a process at the same time, i.e. being outside the loop or not being involved with the events\details of one particular moment (in that process\sequence). So, in that description, it says process-oriented people need to carrying on reading a book, they can't stop without knowing how it ends - they need to keep running to stay in the same place (to keep them satisfied). Result people know how they are going to act in a given situation before the event happens (they consider the event as largely unpredictable however) - so they don't worry (as much) about what's going to happen next or at the end - they live as they mean to go on, rather than assessing new data in the moment.

It's interesting when you put it that way; if you put it like that, then I identify with result orientation, though I can't imagine any N person would want to be stuck in the details without having a view of the whole.

On the other hand, I also identify with "process" in the sense that I often have a certain momentum to what I'm doing, and then I want to keep doing it. It's not that I want to know how something ends (I can skip to the last page), but it's more that I sometimes get "on a roll" (except that other times I jump back and forth between things). I imagine most people would probably identify with both sides of each dichotomy if they really thought about it.

I identify with the process one the most, I think (which is 'wrong' for a INTj) - I don't like the bit in Result which says 'they do not notice something is wrong with the process until it shows up in their estimations of it' - but then again, that might be me - I'm not sure what this means - surely an estimation or an inkling is easier to form than accurate measure of something? I think possibly it is talking in the long term - e.g. a result type doesn't notice something is wrong until it is wrong by pre-determined (personal) criteria, whereas a process type is more in flux, and can amend these criteria in the moment of crisis. (Sorry if that doesn't make sense - I may have to rewrite it ).

[UDP]

Logical-Intuitive Introvert
LII – INTj – Robespierre (Analyst)

Installation of the consciousness of the leading bloc: Reality is defined by its conformity with laws, which must be discovered by the LII. Through this it’s possible to more deeply investigate the essence of phenomena and processes.

Absolutely

[Logos]

Logical-Intuitive Introvert
LII – INTj – Robespierre (Analyst)

Installation of the consciousness of the leading bloc: Reality is defined by its conformity with laws, which must be discovered by the LII. Through this it’s possible to more deeply investigate the essence of phenomena and processes.

Absolutely

I definitely agree and this may very well be one of the central concepts surrounding our understanding of the LII. But perhaps the one thing which may need to be further understood from this excerpt is by what is meant by "laws." Since the LII is concerned with the "essence of phenomena and processes," it may then be understood that the term "laws" is perhaps to mean universal, deeper, or unchanging truths that underlie reality and are not necessarily defined by the limitations or current understanding of that reality.

[Phaedrus]

Logical-Intuitive Introvert
LII – INTj – Robespierre (Analyst)

Installation of the consciousness of the leading bloc: Reality is defined by its conformity with laws, which must be discovered by the LII. Through this it’s possible to more deeply investigate the essence of phenomena and processes.

Absolutely

I definitely agree and this may very well be one of the central concepts surrounding our understanding of the LII. But perhaps the one thing which may need to be further understood from this excerpt is by what is meant by "laws." Since the LII is concerned with the "essence of phenomena and processes," it may then be understood that the term "laws" is perhaps to mean universal, deeper, or unchanging truths that underlie reality and are not necessarily defined by the limitations or current understanding of that reality.

The problem is that, when formulated that way, LIIs are not clearly different from ILIs, and perhaps not from the other NTs either. If someone could describe the LII's relation to that concept in a way that does not apply to ILIs, it would be a good thing indeed.

[Logos]

The problem is that, when formulated that way, LIIs are not clearly different from ILIs, and perhaps not from the other NTs either. If someone could describe the LII's relation to that concept in a way that does not apply to ILIs, it would be a good thing indeed.

ILI: Reality defines the perception of (objective) truths.
LII: Universal (or subjective) truths define the perception of reality.

Reality is defined by its conformity with laws, which must be discovered by the LII. Through this it’s possible to more deeply investigate the essence of phenomena and processes.

This may be the part where the ambiguity lies. For the ILI and the objectivists, laws are defined by their conformity with reality and objective truthfulness. For the LII and ILE, reality is an experimental playground for the application of subjective truths, laws, and ideas which are deemed to be universal and not reliant upon grounding in a factual reality. For the ILE, the focus may be more on playing and logically constructing the inherent possibilities which exist within reality, but for the LII the focus is on defining reality based upon these possibilities.

[Phaedrus]

ILI: Reality defines the perception of (objective) truths.

This is correct and also a pretty good way of phrasing it, I think.

LII: Universal (or subjective) truths define the perception of reality.

This is also correct (= I think I understand what you mean and I agree with it), but for me the two concepts universal and subjective are almost contradictory.

For the ILI and the objectivists, laws are defined by their conformity with reality and objective truthfulness.

Correct.

For the LII and ILE, reality is an experimental playground for the application of subjective truths, laws, and ideas

Perfect. If we phrase it in this way I totally agree. I think it explains the difference between NT Subjectivists and NT Objectivists very clearly. But at least when it comes to the LII this is only clearly explained in MBTT and Keirsey descriptions of INTJs. In the socionic LII descriptions the difference between LIIs and ILIs is blurred, and one almost gets the impression that everything we are discussing now is a LII domain.

which are deemed to be universal and not reliant upon grounding in a factual reality.

It is not clear to me what you mean by the word "universal". If you mean the same thing as "subjective" I understand what you mean, but, as I said, those two words have totally different meanings when I use them. If you mean something else I don't know what it is.

For the ILE, the focus may be more on playing and logically constructing the inherent possibilities which exist within reality, but for the LII the focus is on defining reality based upon these possibilities.

Very good!

[Logos]

LII: Universal (or subjective) truths define the perception of reality.

This is also correct (= I think I understand what you mean and I agree with it), but for me the two concepts universal and subjective are almost contradictory.

Not universal in the sense of applying to the universe, but ideas which can almost be plugged-and-played into any period of time as they are not limited by the factuality of the universal reality (for example, the ideas of Marxism will probably not be threatened by future scientific inquiry in quantum mechanics). But for the ILE and LII these universal ideas are almost defined by the state of the present () and from what could be in the future state in time (). They are ideas made universal by their subjectivity and their future potential. More about that in the next bit.

An Aside: While thinking of the differences between and I thought of two possible ways to view it, but both could arguably apply to what I am going to say depending upon how you construct your argument, so keep that in mind. If and were lines on a graph, is a subjective line of best fit to a series of points of reality (in terms of either or ); it is very linear, but the direction of the line is defined by the current understanding of surrounding points. instead plays a game of connecting the dots that jumps from one point of reality to the next; it is rather non-linear, and the shape of the line is defined by how one chooses to connect the points.

which are deemed to be universal and not reliant upon grounding in a factual reality.

It is not clear to me what you mean by the word "universal". If you mean the same thing as "subjective" I understand what you mean, but, as I said, those two words have totally different meanings when I use them. If you mean something else I don't know what it is.

I suppose this idea of what composes a universal truth is in part one of the sources of conflicts between the LII and ILI. When I say universal, I mean to say that it is an idea or set of ideas that is not dependent upon being defined by the reality from which it came, such that these ideas can be applied in numerous cases. I suppose for an ILI, a universal truth would amount to an observable or factual truth which has become apparent from historical experiences. So an idea's factuality is what in effect makes it a timeless or universally holding one. But again, since the LII is creating a way to subjectively view reality such that the facts do not matter. These are ideas which exist apart from fact but thrive in potentiality and the logical coherence of the system.

[UDP]

Logical-Intuitive Introvert
LII – INTj – Robespierre (Analyst)

Installation of the consciousness of the leading bloc: Reality is defined by its conformity with laws, which must be discovered by the LII. Through this it’s possible to more deeply investigate the essence of phenomena and processes.

Absolutely

I do not know how to respond to what you two wrote at this time.

What I took away from misuitii's quote was:

the LII must seek to discover the laws, as in and of itself he has no real concept of what reality really is. By trying to figure out laws, and incorperate more laws, the real reality shows up. The LII knows there is a real reality, but it is hard to find, and every tool, every law and perspective and technique is something the LII must discover on his own, otherwise he won't assimilate and incorporate it into his system and world view.

[Logos]

I do not know how to respond to what you two wrote at this time.

What I took away from misuitii's quote was:

the LII must seek to discover the laws, as in and of itself he has no real concept of what reality really is. By trying to figure out laws, and incorperate more laws, the real reality shows up. The LII knows there is a real reality, but it is hard to find, and every tool, every law and perspective and technique is something the LII must discover on his own, otherwise he won't assimilate and incorporate it into his system and world view.

That is by no means incompatible with what Phaedrus and I were discussing about the LII.

[Phaedrus]

LII: Universal (or subjective) truths define the perception of reality.

This is also correct (= I think I understand what you mean and I agree with it), but for me the two concepts universal and subjective are almost contradictory.

Not universal in the sense of applying to the universe, but ideas which can almost be plugged-and-played into any period of time as they are not limited by the factuality of the universal reality (for example, the ideas of Marxism will probably not be threatened by future scientific inquiry in quantum mechanics). But for the ILE and LII these universal ideas are almost defined by the state of the present () and from what could be in the future state in time (). They are ideas made universal by their subjectivity and their future potential.

Thanks, Logos! For the first time I feel like I am understanding how an INTj thinks in a way that is perfectly consistent with my own understanding of Socionics and the differences between LIIs and ILIs.

which are deemed to be universal and not reliant upon grounding in a factual reality.

It is not clear to me what you mean by the word "universal". If you mean the same thing as "subjective" I understand what you mean, but, as I said, those two words have totally different meanings when I use them. If you mean something else I don't know what it is.

I suppose this idea of what composes a universal truth is in part one of the sources of conflicts between the LII and ILI.

Yes, the word "universal" could be a key word.

When I say universal, I mean to say that it is an idea or set of ideas that is not dependent upon being defined by the reality from which it came, such that these ideas can be applied in numerous cases. I suppose for an ILI, a universal truth would amount to an observable or factual truth which has become apparent from historical experiences. So an idea's factuality is what in effect makes it a timeless or universally holding one. But again, since the LII is creating a way to subjectively view reality such that the facts do not matter. These are ideas which exist apart from fact but thrive in potentiality and the logical coherence of the system.

As usual, you LIIs have a tendency to phrase things in a way that is unnatural for me as an ILI, but I think you explain it better than any LII has done before. At least I can say that I finally get it. This is a great accomplishment. You have opened a door for me to the internal thinking world of an LII. It is a big step forward in mutual understanding. And I agree with everything you have said here.

An Aside: While thinking of the differences between and I thought of two possible ways to view it, but both could arguably apply to what I am going to say depending upon how you construct your argument, so keep that in mind. If and were lines on a graph, is a subjective line of best fit to a series of points of reality (in terms of either or ); it is very linear, but the direction of the line is defined by the current understanding of surrounding points. instead plays a game of connecting the dots that jumps from one point of reality to the next; it is rather non-linear, and the shape of the line is defined by how one chooses to connect the points.

This makes sense, although I usually prefer other ways of describing things than in graphs. I think it is correct.

[Logos]

I read the whole profile today: it is UDP approved.
I almost wonder now if that is the most effective way of being myself.
I'm into leadership and progress, but I wonder if that is my station so to say. ...

LII does not aim for leadership positions. Administrative activity is not her element. If, nevertheless, LII must be occupied by such she will attempt to utilize objective criteria. She will provide logical reasons to convince subordinates of the need to undertake one approach over another. In leadership is more so inclined towards democratic methods, but is always very exacting. Due to her high standards of accuracy and precision, she cannot be wholly entrusted to an executive position. If given authority she will try, by herself, to check over everything, to personally convince herself that everything that must be done has been brought to completion.

I would definitely not pass up a position to oversee and make sure things were going in the right direction, however.

In regard to the underlined:
I think I understand what the point is supposed to be, but I think it would be more true that such is not a negative quality, but rather one that if is to be correctly implemented, must be properly delegated. One person can only do too much, and I believe any INTj (especially one who seeks to understand how things work...) could learn how to make that situation work also.

This is also worth replying to as well. I think that there are serious positive or negative outcomes of just about any type in a leadership position.

In regards to the LII in leadership, I do not think that the perfectionism always manifests itself so overtly as to be a cause of strain in a group or organization. For example, the tactical and details aspects of planning may have no appeal for the LII, so they may delegate to others to cover those aspects after informing them of the goals which the LII is working towards. And if the LII is in charge of a group of motivated individuals, they may step up their own leadership within the organization, which allows the LII the ability to back off of the administrative element a bit such that they act as the leader with bureaucratic responsibilities (the necessary evil), overseeing the work of others, and strategy development. So in other words, the LII leader may simply act more as a counselor than a dictator. Honestly, I think that the position which would best suit a LII is that of a 2nd in command in the hierarchy. It is a position which affords itself voice as an analytic counselor but without the more bureaucratic requirements of primary leadership.

[krieger]

Ti: LII’s ideology is founded upon the idea of the interdependence of phenomena in the surrounding world; everything that occurs is subordinate to laws and structure.

Her thinking takes an analytic nature. She gathers knowledge and, investigating it, analyzes the facts. She understands the essence of a situation by creating a model for this knowledge in her consciousness that corresponds with her experiences. She’s guided by the universal ideas she’s found and comprehended, regardless of others’ opposition. By no means will she be distracted from what she deems the principal purpose in her life and will only forsake something she’s started if convinced, on her own, of its error. Her work frequently becomes the focal point of her existence.

LII loves precision and order in everything; she is scrupulous and meticulous. Finds pleasure in systematizing, organizing everything “on the shelf.” Everything is done according to plan. Considers that the behaviour of people, especially at work, must be subordinate to a logical and definite system. Immediately notes the illogicality and contradictions present in the actions of people and, as much as possible, attempts to introduce corrections: depending on whom she’s dealing with can express criticism or propose assistance. Generally is irritated by chaotic, disorderly, inconsiderate people.

Ne: In order to build a convincing system, compliant with the laws of logic, LII attempts to penetrate into the essence of objects and events; seeks the underlying reason for the occurrence. Cannot live without a basic set of beliefs; if it is necessary to abandon one (such occurs extremely rarely), she’ll formulate another. In such cases it is very important to be convinced of the validity of the values, which compose her interest: her ideology must have solid internal support.

She’s drawn foreword by intuitively penetrating into universal matters, but as soon as she’s satisfied with understanding one, is drawn to another. What she already wholly understands is very clear and seems uninteresting. She’s only capable of admiring the result she’s obtained for a short time, for soon after appears a sensation of triviality for what she’s done.

One of the LII’s most positive qualities lies in the ability to dismantle intricate and complex questions, to focus on the important points, to view the problem “from above” and clearly present this understanding. If she comprehends the essence of the problem well enough she will not yield to those that oppose her, will always promulgate her position.

A very characteristic feature of the LII is the ability to sense well the course of time. She cannot naturally spend it in vain. She works peacefully, from afar appears to do so leisurely. Her ability to concentrate, to not be distracted by external interference, guarantees her efficiency with work. As a rule the LII is capable of determining when the job is done. Her precision manifests itself in her personal obligations: if LII agreed to be at a meeting but never showed up – it means that something serious befell her.


Description of the Weak Functions:

Se: LII poorly conveys volitional pressure. Though she may find herself in an executive position wherein orders are relayed, she will not execute the commands of superiors, which in her view are incorrect.

In reconciling with others LII will state the rules rather than beginning with the injustice at hand, may sometimes express sharpness and ardor, which catches others by surprise.

She finds it difficult to be placed within the strict framework of a hierarchic structure, where everything is previously stipulated and there is no space for creativity.

LII maintains rationality in material expenditures; frequently she’ll stow away a sum of money in the case of an unforeseen situation. Will not spend money in vain – is thrifty.

Her ideal of happiness is in a regulated and proper life, where work and play are separated. Can for a very long time, sometimes an entire lifetime, adhere to the same daily routine. She feels very uncomfortable when circumstances violate her routines, in such cases will focus her resources on retrieving order, since it is in such routines that she finds internal support. Disorder and chaos, whether in her private life or at work, she experiences painfully.

In regards her health LII relates to the objective reality, but she does not entrust herself to her own sensations, completely relying on physicians. When she falls ill she strictly adheres to her physician’s instructions, obtaining the prescribed medication, administering the correct doses.

In regards to clothing LII frequently adheres to a “business” style, stressing more so her professional position than any specific features. She does not care for pretentiousness and bright accessories. Is constrained in expressing her sexual attractiveness.

Fi: The realm of ethics presents weakness for LII. In this area she adheres to the norms and traditions of society. May develop sufficient care and restraint so as to avoid such situations, in which she’s badly oriented. LII poorly measures the emotional climate, prefers not to interfere in conflicts and – as much as possible – to avoid such situations. Finds it difficult to comfort others. In such cases prefers to render concrete assistance, or, if this is impossible, to simply walk away and not interfere. Does not understand what to do, or what to say, when confronted by another’s tearful emotional outburst.

Tends to associate from a distant psychological distance; does not express familiarity well with others. Thus, as a child and as an adult, she fails to develop and maintain many friendships. In this the weakness of the ethical function manifests itself.

LII follows tradition. Is proper and exercises restraint, does not succumb to deplorable expressions of behaviour, but this is not the essence of her nature – under the mask of restraint is often hidden a strained spiritual life, influenced by intense experiences. However, her reserved nature does not permit her to share her misfortunes with others. For years she may carry an offense, in the depth of her soul, only with difficulty pardoning the offender.

LII develops relations with caution, behaves towards others with restraint and respect. Is noticeably enkindled by intellectual conversation – in this area she feels herself sufficiently well grounded.

Bolded the parts of the description that absolutely do not apply to me.

[UDP]

For me they are quite relevant.

[Exodus]

You could probably chalk this up to subtypes. But the description's emphasis on INTj perfectionism borders on ridiculous - few INTjs are like that. The Weisband one similarly focuses too much on INTj "justice".

[UDP]

"Potential Maximization"

that is what interests me most.

[Exodus]

On the description:

Finds pleasure in systematizing, organizing everything “on the shelf.”

Most definitely. (I have a ridiculously complex hierarchy for my flash drive, for instance.)

Generally is irritated by chaotic, disorderly, inconsiderate people.

What she already wholly understands is very clear and seems uninteresting. She’s only capable of admiring the result she’s obtained for a short time, for soon after appears a sensation of triviality for what she’s done.

These are subtle points, nice.

I'm not sure about attributing a "basic set of beliefs" to Ne. Probably more Ti.

Her ability to concentrate, to not be distracted by external interference, guarantees her efficiency with work.

I am very easily distracted by external things. IME this is a consequence of Si in the Super-id; Ne-ego types need someone to take care of that for them. However, INTjs have very little *internal* distraction, which is a very different thing.

she will not execute the commands of superiors, which in her view are incorrect.

She finds it difficult to be placed within the strict framework of a hierarchic structure, where everything is previously stipulated and there is no space for creativity.

Also good.

Her ideal of happiness is in a regulated and proper life, where work and play are separated.

Mm, maybe.

Can for a very long time, sometimes an entire lifetime, adhere to the same daily routine. She feels very uncomfortable when circumstances violate her routines, in such cases will focus her resources on retrieving order, since it is in such routines that she finds internal support.

I feel stuck in a routine if it feels uninteresting or stagnant.

She holds a strong feeling of responsibility in respect to her family and relatives. Being devoted to traditions,

Not really.

She cannot simply loaf around when not at work.

That depends on what you mean...

Loves intellectual forms of sport: chess, games. With pleasure is occupied by her collections and hobbies, by photography, by art… All her hobbies, as a rule, require devotion,

Definitely. (I wouldn't mention photography, it's too specific.)

and they must all make positive sense.

A little exaggerated. "INTjs are always absolutely logical and disciplined" my ass.

Many representatives of this psycho-type have good musical taste, love music, play musical instruments, and even write songs themselves.

As opposed to, say, ENTps? Probably.

Fairly good description overall, though it suffers from certain stereotypes.

[Exodus]

On the description:

Finds pleasure in systematizing, organizing everything “on the shelf.”

Most definitely. (I have a ridiculously complex hierarchy for my flash drive, for instance.)

Generally is irritated by chaotic, disorderly, inconsiderate people.

What she already wholly understands is very clear and seems uninteresting. She’s only capable of admiring the result she’s obtained for a short time, for soon after appears a sensation of triviality for what she’s done.

These are subtle points, nice.

I'm not sure about attributing a "basic set of beliefs" to Ne. Probably more Ti.

Her ability to concentrate, to not be distracted by external interference, guarantees her efficiency with work.

I am very easily distracted by external things. IME this is a consequence of Si in the Super-id; Ne-ego types need someone to take care of that for them. However, INTjs have very little *internal* distraction, which is a very different thing.

she will not execute the commands of superiors, which in her view are incorrect.

She finds it difficult to be placed within the strict framework of a hierarchic structure, where everything is previously stipulated and there is no space for creativity.

Also good.

Her ideal of happiness is in a regulated and proper life, where work and play are separated.

Mm, maybe.

Can for a very long time, sometimes an entire lifetime, adhere to the same daily routine. She feels very uncomfortable when circumstances violate her routines, in such cases will focus her resources on retrieving order, since it is in such routines that she finds internal support.

I feel stuck in a routine if it feels uninteresting or stagnant.

She holds a strong feeling of responsibility in respect to her family and relatives. Being devoted to traditions,

Not really.

She cannot simply loaf around when not at work.

That depends on what you mean...

Loves intellectual forms of sport: chess, games. With pleasure is occupied by her collections and hobbies, by photography, by art… All her hobbies, as a rule, require devotion,

Definitely. (I wouldn't mention photography, it's too specific.)

and they must all make positive sense.

A little exaggerated. "INTjs are always absolutely logical and disciplined" my ass.

Many representatives of this psycho-type have good musical taste, love music, play musical instruments, and even write songs themselves.

As opposed to, say, ENTps? Probably.

Fairly good description overall, though it suffers from certain stereotypes.