[HannibalLecter]

I'd say INTJ.

[pinkrasputin]

I'd say INTJs, too. But the REAL ones on this forum. Like the ones who were INTJ before they even knew what INTJ was.

[NeedsNewNameNow]

INTP

[HannibalLecter]

I'd say INTJs, too. But the REAL ones on this forum. Like the ones who were INTJ before they even knew what INTJ was.

So, just how many 'fakers' do we have?
When I first read the profile of an INTJ, I and those who knew me were amazed at how much it resembled me.

[Third Engine]

What do you mean by "intellectual"?

[Arioche]

So, just how many 'fakers' do we have?

Too many, it seems. Same with most types though, especially when it comes to N's.
As for intellectuals, depends on how you define it, I guess. (EDIT: Op, the poster above me got to it first! Kudos.)

[pinkrasputin]

So, just how many 'fakers' do we have?
When I first read the profile of an INTJ, I and those who knew me were amazed at how much it resembled me.

Well I am not sure about actual numbers, but I can say it's pretty easy to tell the real ones if you want to know. It's usually NOT the ones looking for negative attention. And it is NOT the ones worried so much about what other's think of them. But you probably know this.

The other way I know, is that they are usually the ones helping me with my homework. I love the way they answer my questions and give me drawn out responses. This is the way they let me know they care

[OrangeAppled]

INTP, if we're generalizing.

I've known too many rather shallow INTJs who I would not classify as "intellectual".

[Lucretius]

Einstein was an INTP.
PROOF'D.

[HannibalLecter]

Einstein was an INTP.
PROOF'D.

One man, regardless of who he was or how smart he was, is not representative of an entire category.