INTJ vs. INTP: How To Tell Them Apart
@Jumpback, based upon the comparative descriptions discussed in the above article, I am definitely an INTJ. The clearest distinction is my extraverted thinking and my lack of feeling. According to this article INTPs are more expressive of emotions. I sometimes detatch emotionally as a protective mechanism, and feel no emotions. For example, both my mother and father died suddenly and I never experienced any emotion. The suddenness I believe had something to do with my response. When my wife has a crisis or becomes frustrated, my initial response is to try to solve her problem. This causes her to become angry because she wants someone to listen and console her. I truly do not understand her reaction.
Also a few years ago I took the MBTI, and in doing so I received the following graphic depicting my personality. Their graph shows that I am only slightly more judging than perceiving. However, my extreme high thinking position and virtually no feeling, and my extreme introversion, seem abnormal. In my opinion this screams out Aspergers. I doubt that most INTJs would look this way.
How does this compare to your personality?
I am definitely INTP on the link.
It’s strange in what you are saying in “extreme high thinking position and virtually no feeling, and my extreme introversion, seem abnormal. In my opinion this screams out Aspergers. I doubt that most INTJs would look this way.” was basically what I had written about myself and people around me in a post that decided not to send, though we are clearly not the same personality type
When I take these MBTI tests I test as very clearly I, N and P, but closer to the middle on F/T. But I am not exactly sure that I agree with the whole thinking versus feeling paradigm.
But I do feel a lot of emotion about things, just not usually for awhile after hearing about things. Like whenever I have heard about a death I just feel nothing until later.
My ex-girlfriend would get upset about her horrible job and come home and cry. I first would want to offer solutions, but then I realized she just wanted to be told everything is ok.
—
Maybe I am in enough in the middle to explain both sides and be helpful:
Like maybe emotional reactions are very general reactions, taking in a whole lot of data together in a way which would be difficult to create an algorithm for. Like someone sees a pretty blue car on a car lot and thought is like just “I want this car.” There is logic in the decision, but it’s tiny bits of logic or something all mixed together to make a quicker decision. But if more fact based logic is employed it’s like they are asking too much, there isn’t space for X, etc, etc. But the downside of logic is someone might talk themselves into buying an ugly looking car that chicks don’t dig or something
Or like if someone is upset it might not be like a point by point reason for being upset that makes logical sense, it’s a mental shortcut which artificial intelligence would have a lot of difficulty with. It isn’t all weighed things against each other about why one should feel bad that someone has died, it’s a general shortcut thing mixing in endless things about being appreciative of this relative and scared about ones own mortality and the sadness of the shortness of human life and endless other things just mixed together.
Like, in a way, emotion is logical, because it can be so efficient, but then it isn’t obviously logical, because it’s very difficult for the person explaining emotions to explain
Like my take is that biological life forms haven’t developed processing power fast enough to always be logical and deal with the real world in real time, so they have developed these shortcuts.
And then there is this completely different thing where evolution has caused us to be tribal and being tribal involves being accepted and validated. And I think that being validated it is a big thing.
So consoling emotional people is more about validating and tribal acceptance and less about facts and data and solving problems
Like person feeling emotion is often confused because their head is relying on few data points and they have a biological imperative to be validated and accepted. Or something along these lines