# ISTP v INTP



## lightswitch (Jan 17, 2010)

I am pretty sure I am an ISTP (spontaneous, adventurous, practical, very hands on, etc), but I do have a lot of INTP-ish traits. For example, I enjoy writing and sometimes I enjoy discussing or debating hypotheticals or theoretical ideas although I'm not that good at it. Do some ISTPs like this kind of thing? I read once that you are a percent of each letter and rarely purely one or the other. Is it possible to be 50% S and 50% N? If so, what would you be like? Sorry it is really late at night. I hope this makes sense.


----------



## Alice in Wonderland (Sep 7, 2009)

Well it depends on which type you actually are, ISTP or INTP to determin what you'd be like if you're 50% S, 50% N. To my knowlege there's really no such thing as being an IXTP. I think your either one or the other sort of thing.

So what your asking is what if an ISTP had a really well developed N, would be like or an INTP with a really welll developed S? Well I would, guess, and I'm not really sure about it, but because of how the functions are connected, they would be come closer to being like their shadow type. So I guess an ISTP with a well developed N would act a bit more out going and friendly the way an ENFJ would and same with INTP and ESFJ. That's my guess. :happy:


----------



## Mutatio NOmenis (Jun 22, 2009)

I think you're ISTP because you more frequenctly display the ISTP traits and the INTP traits. The best way to do this for sure is to make two bulleted lists of equal length; one for each type and count of the number of criteria that your fit for each. The typed which you match more closely is your type.


----------



## Grey (Oct 10, 2009)

I would urge you to judge yourself simply by actions - if that were the case, the types would be even more flawed than they are. If you're not quite settled on your type yet, I would urge you to take a functional approach. Have you taken a test on them before, or have any knowledge of the functions in general?


----------



## Functianalyst (Jul 23, 2009)

lightswitch said:


> I am pretty sure I am an ISTP (spontaneous, adventurous, practical, very hands on, etc), but I do have a lot of INTP-ish traits. For example, I enjoy writing and sometimes I enjoy discussing or debating hypotheticals or theoretical ideas although I'm not that good at it. Do some ISTPs like this kind of thing? I read once that you are a percent of each letter and rarely purely one or the other. Is it possible to be 50% S and 50% N? If so, what would you be like? Sorry it is really late at night. I hope this makes sense.


I agree with Grey except for the test taking (just something that she and I will always respectfully agree to disagree on:wink. This is your call, no one can make it for you. However what you have written so far gives me an indication that you are either reading too much into descriptions or you are stereotyping. 

I can't think of too many ISTPs who would say they don't do what you are saying. It has nothing to do with being INTP-ish. What is writing if not a tool and who is supposedly the best at tool usage? No one ever said that STPs including ESTPs do not like theory. We just want it to be applicable. As for the S/N, ISTPs have Ni as their teritary. Contrary to the stereotypes, it's not next to the weakest function, it's the third function (look up the definition of the word). This may give you some idea of what I am saying. You are the second person who has alluded to being an N-ish ISTP, and I am still not sure what that means.


----------



## Diekon (Jan 26, 2010)

> As for the S/N, ISTPs have Ni as their teritary. Contrary to the stereotypes, it's not next to the weakest function, it's the third function (look up the definition of the word). This may give you some idea of what I am saying. You are the second person who has alluded to being an N-ish ISTP, and I am still not sure what that means.


Thank you for this, and especially the link you provided. I've been looking for my type for a couple of days now, going from INTP which I tested, over INTJ to thinking about being an ISTP. This valuable piece of information in the link fit the pieces all together for me :
_*
"Similar Cognitive dynamics*_. ISTPs and INTPs have the same Leading Role process (dominant) of introverted Thinking and are likely to approach situations with an analytical perspective and like to know the principles of how things work. *The difference shows up in their Supporting Role processes (auxiliary). An INTP described his preferred work style as exploring problems and sub-problems (Ne), while his ISTP colleague described a tactical trouble shooting approach with a focus on getting the task done (Se)*."


I think the key to understanding the difference is in looking at the combination SE/NI and NE/SI. An ISTP will be constantly aware of his surroundings and have a much more detailed picture of it than an INTP. Because of that he will be able use his Ni to eliminated all sorts of possibilities at face value, eg as not practical and worth to look at. An INTP won't have that awareness of an ISTP, and will typically have to sit down and focus on pieces of evidence and branch out to all sorts of possibilities that need to be looked at, the analytical approach.

The problem is the difference between Ni and Ne isn't always clear, and probably often mixed up in the tests. I'd define Ne as coming up with all sorts of possibilties, eg divergent. And Ni would then be defined as have an natural awareness of the circumstance that narrows down the possibilities and gives one a feel for the future, eg convergent.

The testresults could also be skewed if one is scholed or is expected to work in the opposite mode. I've been thaught to use the analytical approach a lot in college and in work situations, and can use it if i need to, but it need to force myself. I'll switch to Ni whenever i'm not longer that immersed in work. 

It's often very confusing. I need to look for another job.


----------



## Functianalyst (Jul 23, 2009)

Diekon said:


> I think the key to understanding the difference is in looking at the combination SE/NI and NE/SI. An ISTP will be constantly aware of his surroundings and have a much more detailed picture of it than an INTP. Because of that he will be able use his Ni to eliminated all sorts of possibilities at face value, eg as not practical and worth to look at. An INTP won't have that awareness of an ISTP, and will typically have to sit down and focus on pieces of evidence and branch out to all sorts of possibilities that need to be looked at, the analytical approach.


What you are referring to is the filtering of information which in my understanding of type, will always be a judging function. We use Te,Ti,Fe,Fi to make decisions. ISTPs can also use Se to bring in information and based on that function will look at the facts and dismiss information that is purely theoretical.


Diekon said:


> The problem is the difference between Ni and Ne isn't always clear, and probably often mixed up in the tests. I'd define Ne as coming up with all sorts of possibilties, eg divergent. And Ni would then be defined as have an natural awareness of the circumstance that narrows down the possibilities and gives one a feel for the future, eg convergent.


Ne, as are all extraverted functions are present oriented. Ne cannot consider possibilities, see threads of meaning or make inferences unless actively engaging with the world. Once they are no longer engaged with the object or world, then you are not extraverting instead you are introverting. 

Jung says, "The remarkable indifference of the extraverted intuitive in respect to outer objects is shared by the introverted intuitive in relation to the inner objects. Just as the extraverted intuitive is continually scenting out new possibilities, the introverted intuitive moves from image to image, chasing after every possibility in the teeming womb of the unconscious."


----------



## Diekon (Jan 26, 2010)

Functianalyst said:


> What you are referring to is the filtering of information which in my understanding of type, will always be a judging function. We use Te,Ti,Fe,Fi to make decisions. ISTPs can also use Se to bring in information and based on that function will look at the facts and dismiss information that is purely theoretical.




You are probably correct if we want to stay as close as possible within the typology frame, and look at the functions seperately as Jung defined them. In practice i don't think there's allways a clear distinction, i'm more likely to notice a McDonald when i'm hungry. Filtering happens, and it's not allways because of conscious judging. It makes more sense to me if you look at the functions working together as a whole. I said Ne/SI and SE/NI, i should've said TI/NE/SI and TI/SE/NI.




> Ne, as are all extraverted functions are present oriented. Ne cannot consider possibilities, see threads of meaning or make inferences unless actively engaging with the world. Once they are no longer engaged with the object or world, then you are not extraverting instead you are introverting.





> Jung says, "The remarkable indifference of the extraverted intuitive in respect to outer objects is shared by the introverted intuitive in relation to the inner objects. Just as the extraverted intuitive is continually scenting out new possibilities, the introverted intuitive moves from image to image, chasing after every possibility in the teeming womb of the unconscious."


I can agree with this rendering. I think it's in line with what i have said.


----------



## Functianalyst (Jul 23, 2009)

Diekon said:


> [/size][/font][/color]
> 
> You are probably correct if we want to stay as close as possible within the typology frame, and look at the functions seperately as Jung defined them. In practice i don't think there's allways a clear distinction, i'm more likely to notice a McDonald when i'm hungry. Filtering happens, and it's not allways because of conscious judging. It makes more sense to me if you look at the functions working together as a whole. I said Ne/SI and SE/NI, i should've said TI/NE/SI and TI/SE/NI.
> 
> ...


Actually I was using the functions in combo (Ti-Se/Ti-Ne) to make my claim, but I don't think it has to go as far as teritary. Now that you have added the judging function, it makes sense. Yet in your McDonald does not seem to be type related since you are then filling a basic need to eat.


----------



## Promethea (Aug 24, 2009)

What I consider is -why- are you into the things you are into.. what is it that you get out of writing, political discussion, etc. People can have similar interests, but completely different motivations.


----------



## IThinkTooMuch (Mar 26, 2011)

Diekon said:


> _*
> "Similar Cognitive dynamics*_. ISTPs and INTPs have the same Leading Role process (dominant) of introverted Thinking and are likely to approach situations with an analytical perspective and like to know the principles of how things work. *The difference shows up in their Supporting Role processes (auxiliary). An INTP described his preferred work style as exploring problems and sub-problems (Ne), while his ISTP colleague described a tactical trouble shooting approach with a focus on getting the task done (Se)*."


It seems like on a good day, when I'm just messing around with whatever, I'm ISTP, but as soon as I encounter a real problem that catches my interest, my N will kick into gear and both my N and S will compliment each other quite well. I guess use my N to come up with potential ideas, and the S will judge to see if they might work, and then I go from there. I read a list of traits from each N and S, and I was basically mixing and matching.


----------



## dimane (Jun 11, 2011)

i found this link and it really helped me decide 
http://www.psychological-types.com/TB/E/dev/EN.pdf
http://www.psychological-types.com/TB/E/dev/ES.pdf


----------

