INTJ

The best way to explain that is probably to describe the classic NTP vs. NTJ debate. Note that when I use the terms "subjective" and "objective" here, I mean them in the sense of "pertaining to the subject/self" or "pertaining to the object/not self." I do not mean them in terms of fact vs. opinion.

iNtuition in Jungian terms is an information-gathering function that looks for different abstract patterns and perspectives. Thinking is a decision-making function that evaluates the information and applies structure to it. NTPs apply Thinking internally and iNtuition externally, and NTJs do the opposite.

The most common argument between the two goes something like this:

NTP: I have observed a pattern between seemingly unrelated external contexts (Ne), and from this I have inferred a set of logical relationships (which are consistent/elegant in theory but may or may not work in reality, hence the subjectivity of Thinking here), which necessitate and fully explain the structure of the underlying system (Ti.) Einstein was probably an INTP.

NTJ: There is no empirical evidence or test to prove this pattern, so your observation is meaningless until tested and quantified objectively (Te), and furthermore it's ridiculous to expect reality to behave according to any one consistent paradigm (Ni.) Nietzsche was probably an INTJ.

The NTP requires internal structure--because he applies Thinking internally, he needs one consistent model of clearly and specifically defined relationships in order to understand an idea. But because he applies iNtuition externally, he is capable of generating a lot of new approaches and quickly adapating them to new situations without much preparation.

The NTJ requires external structure; because he applies Thinking externally, he refuses to accept external information until it's empirically validated by demonstrable results and can thus be predicted accurately. For this reason the NTJ requires much more careful preparation in order to deal effectively with the outer world. Since he applies iNtuition internally, however, he is not attached to any one particular paradigm or framework and thus can utilize simultaneously conflicting interpretations, while the NTP has to condense them into one consistent internal model before dealing with them.

The NTP's approach resembles rationalism; the NTJ's resembles empiricism.

The miscommunication happens because Ti (from the NTP) wants to mold all information into very clearly defined blocks and then use Ne to build new combinations of the blocks, but Ni (from the NTJ) questions the practice of arranging the information into blocks by forcing arbitrary definitions on it in the first place--it reasons that the more we force theoretical definitional specificity, the less broadly applicable our results become (and Te insists on useful, broadly applicable, quantifiable results.)

Ti is very good at figuring out precisely what would happen under one very specific set of theoretical circumstances (hence the NTP love of puzzle solving with no regard for useful application), but Te doesn't see the point in that if it can't be applied to some useful external goal. Te looks for universal laws which apply across many (if not all) possible conditions.

For an easy example, NTPs will almost always argue hypothetical logic to death, just for the sake of consistent accuracy (Ti.) They will leave no stone unturned, as Ne will try every new possibility just in case something interesting happens.

NTJs will rarely bother with an argument if they don't see any clear advantage that would be gained from convincing you (Te.) They recognize that no two people's perspectives will ever be exactly the same (Ni), so they would not gain any tangible advantage from trying to fix your understanding (Te.)

So NTJs will focus their time on the ideas that seem most likely to generate results, while NTPs will try every random combination of ideas just on the off chance that something novel and unexpected comes up.

I can go into more background on what all those terms mean if you care. Naturally, I myself am an ENTP, so I enjoy sharing this kind of information just for its own sake. Ti enjoys structurally appealing systems whether or not they have any objective external application.

One more example: When one ENTP friend and I play Chess, we don't actually play through the game linearly so much as explore different ways the game might be played. An NTJ is less likely to care about strange and unlikely sets of hypothetical circumstances if they rarely/never actually come up in practice.

NTP: Under xyz bizarre hypothetical game conditions, [novel outcome] would occur! Let's figure out all the implications of that...
NTJ: Who cares? Those conditions never actually happen. They're not going to help you win a Chess game, which is the objective goal here.

INFJ (micro grinder disclaimer)

good post set. i read it in 3 min and i have to go now, so i might have to re-read it later. i think i understand the differences between the types in general (theory vs. empiricism), but i still struggle with the idea of internal/external thinking/intuition. thinking is 'external' because it's about other people? that can't be it (since most thought doesn't have to do with people at all), but i don't grasp what it is.

edit:
my next guess is that by "external" you mean "focused on big picture" and by internal, "focused on details"?

re-edit: but then i have no ****ing clue what internal intuition could possibly be. intuition about details? wat?

Very interesting, setoverset. Appreciated.

So this could explain why I always have these never ending discussion, where I think I'm right obviously, with a friend of mine about poker he's ENTJ I'm ENTP.

We never see eye to eye and we always get stuck where I'm telling him that game-theory wise I needed to shove there because I can't be exploited blablabla. And he then always says yeah see you're always beat there. He always tells me after the result .

He seems to be often stuck in black and white decisions because of passed observations donkeys never min-raise without the nuts for instance whereas I feel like I never make those presumptions.

ps. good read setoverset, give us more.

ESTJ

The primary difference between extroversion and introversion is that extroverted functions depend on external conditions for meaning, while introverted functions completely ignore it, focusing on personal subjective meaning. It's not so much big picture vs. details as extensive vs. expansive...introversion is more extensive, while extroversion is more expansive. Introversion focuses more deeply on one idea at a time, while extroversion focuses less deeply on a wide variety of different contexts at once.

Example of Ne vs. Ni: Ne users want other people to pick up on the patterns and connections they've found. Everything is interrelated and they want to explain to you why, because they're often not really sure if their ideas are good until they hear what other people think about them. When an Ne user makes fun of you, he wants you and others to know it because he's doing it primarily to impress the surrounding audience--Ne needs external validation.

To Ne, the patterns are out there in the external world waiting to be found, pointed out and shown to others. When an Ni user makes fun of you, he usually doesn't want you to know you're being messed with, because the fact that he personally appreciates it is enough. The private laugh that he gets from your incompetence is what he values. To Ni, the patterns don't really exist externally; they're just a function of personal interpretation (like everything.)

Example: Isaac Newton seems like he was probably an INTJ. He invented calculus to solve a problem he was working on in college, and didn't bother to tell anyone about it for 20 years. To Ni, it makes sense to me and that's good enough--Ne would be out there showing it to others and adapting its ideas to their reactions.

Ni is focused more on how you personally look at things...Ni users have a habit of solving problems by just shifting the way they interpret them. The strength of Ni is that sees many different ways things could be interpreted, and is not attached to any one particular model or viewpoint. Ni considers everything purely up to interpretation--we can't assign truth value until external context has been defined. "Having to do community service sucks? Just look at it as an opportunity to get a lot of exercise!"

Ne wants to actively get involved and experiment at random with the outer world; Ni just wants to change the way you interpret information.

Ne people (xNxP types) are usually much more comfortable with overtly expressing themselves creatively and getting others to appreciate it. Ni people (xNxJ types) may be extremely creative with the way they conceptualize things, but Ni's ideas are so personal and unique to one's own perspective that they're very hard to express in meaningful terms that others will understand. (Often when I ask an INTJ to explain his ideas, he responds that putting them into words would ruin the point.) Ne is typically much better than Ni at expressing its ideas in terms others will understand, since it deals with connections and possibilities that can be externally illustrated and validated by others.

So, for an example of these two attitudes we can look at song lyrics. Ne songwriters will write puzzles and hidden meanings into their lyrics that they want people to figure out--they won't state the meaning literally (as S types would be inclined to do), but they will provide enough context clues that you can figure out what they were thinking when they wrote it, because they want you to get the full meaning. Example: John Lennon (INFP), you can read his lyrics and figure out what he's talking about, if you're paying attention and know the context.

Ni songwriters will often write really abstruse lyrics that couldn't possibly make any sense to anyone else without a direct explanation from the writer. He gets the meaning and that's good enough--no need to share the ideas with others unless Te/Fe sees a good strategic reason to do so. Example: Thom Yorke of Radiohead (INFJ.) It just doesn't matter to Ni if anyone else gets the connections it sees.

I'll cover Ti and Te more next time.

good stuff set

and this really describes me, so many times I hear someones (usually misguided) opinion, and think to myself there is just really nothing to be gained from trying to change this person's mind so i'm not going to waste my time/energy

INTP

Great posts setoverset, they have really helped me understand the concepts.

I think that naturally I'm very INTP but the more poker I play/the better I get at poker the more INTJ I become.


I found this to be very true in my experience. I used to be good at expressing my ideas in terms that others will understand easily, however I've been finding it harder to do so the more I play poker. This could also be due to the fact that I spend less time practising expressing my ideas nowadays as I've graduated uni and am playing full time.

good post indeed

ISTP

56 1 62 56

ENTJ
napoleon

INTJ
Introverted Intuitive Thinking Judging
Strength of the preferences %
89 56 50 33

INTJ

ENFP lol im a rare breed

ISTP

11 12 38 44

Extraverted Intuitive Thinking Perceiving
Strength of the preferences %
44 50 1 44

ONE THINKING PERSONALITY EH

also felt that this wasn't accurate, and needed more options

INTP. It pretty much got my suggested jobs spot on too (pro poker player wasn't there unfortunately).

BTW, I'm not a pro poker player, I'm a low-stakes fish, so you can leave this out of your stats.

hey nuggetz, when are you going to quantify these results?

+

ENFJ

ESFP

triple A