# INTP, ISTP, or somewhere fuzzy in between?



## telling__you (Jun 11, 2013)

Hey everyone, 
I'm new to the personality cafe and am finding it fascinating.
I had no idea so many people other than myself were also fangirls/boys of personality types. Yay!

So to get to the point. 
*It has always been impossible for me to figure out if I'm an INTP or an ISTP. *

I've taken the official test, and the results indicated that I was an INTP, but with a weak Intuition factor. 
(If I recall correctly, my N score was a 9, compared to my considerably high Introverted, Thinking, and Perceiving scores.)
When I take shorter tests on the internet, I usually get INTP or ISTP; INTP a little more often, but barely. 

I identify with both the Intuitive side of the INTP and the Sensing side of the ISTP, probably due to my weak intuition factor. 

N-ish factors:
On one side, I enjoy complex thinking problems, philosophical debate topics, and mystical topics in general, if that's an indicator of anything (tarot cards, dream-reading, palm-reading, the lot). I also spend an unnecessary amount of time immersed in daydreaming. During these daydreaming sessions, I hatch up lots up far-fetched plans in my mind, without making any effort to actually bring them to life. I prefer weird, rambling novels to overly detailed ones. 

S-ish factors:
On the other hand, I strongly dislike long philosophical discussions that don't seem to have any practicality or realistic purpose(I need real-life examples!), and I feel deeply uncomfortable claiming something (even if it's something I believe in) without having some concrete proof to back me up. I'm pretty up-to-date with the trends of the real world, as long as it interests me: along with politics and human rights issues, I'm particularly interested in the pop-music industry, which almost always surprises people who get to know me. 

If I were to list my most important values, they would be:
- not to judge people
- to keep my inner peace and maintain harmony with my surroundings (yep, I'm a 9w1. No doubts here.) 
- to contribute my talents to whatever way the society can be improved
- to do the above while achieving a certain amount of social success

Hmmm, writing all this has confused me even more, 
but hopefully you lurking personality geniuses out there will be able to see my MBTI for what it truly is 

So, please be awesome and not leave my post response-less!


----------



## DarkRain (Nov 30, 2011)

Hello! Same thing happened with me! Anyway, saw this on another site:

"Where ISTPs and INTPs begin to differ are their supportive functions: ISTPs call upon Extroverted Sensing (Se), while INTPs call upon Extroverted Intuition (Ne). Since both functions are oriented towards the physical world, they are the functions with which INTPs and ISTPs take on information to assess with Ti. Extroverted Sensing is primarily used in the here and now, using the five senses to view the world as well as take action in it. Extroverted Intuition notices trends and patterns within the physical world, using these as a predictor to take action in the physical world. Sensing and Intuition, on the whole, differ, because Sensing is usually thought to be oriented towards now, whereas Intuition focuses on the future. These supportive functions usually develop fully within ISTPs and INTPs into their early to late teenage years.

INTPs and ISTPs also differ in their tertiary functions: ISTPs use Introverted Intuition (Ni), while INTPs use Introverted Sensing (Si). Tertiary functions usually develop in early adulthood, and don't see much use until then. For ISTPs, Ni represents connecting unrelated things and foreseeing certain trends. For INTPs, Si represents calling upon past information to assess present information, setting a standard in their minds for what works and what does not."

So in short, an INTP is more focused on future, and ISTP more on the present. Also an INTP would call on a lot of what they have experienced in the past to determine what works in the present situation


----------



## SystemEater (Aug 5, 2012)

Well, statistically, you're 3 times as likely to be a sensor than an intuitive, but that won't really help you much. So, I'd say that since you EVEN scored on the borderline suggests more heavily that you're intuitive rather than sensing. My reasoning here being: most functioning members of society are expected to be sensors to a certain degree in order to maintain basic routines and perform necessary duties.. no one is really expected to necessarily use many intuitive processes. So,naturally, there's pressure to be pulled into answering questions as a sensor. Scoring on the borderline therefore suggests stronger than average tendencies towards intuition, as I'm sure that the average response is quite far skewed towards sensing. Meaning, there may even be situations where you score as a sensor but have a higher probability of being an intuitive rather than the inverse situation being true. Also, being a "thinker" can confound your ability to detect your intuitive strengths at times, because many qualities which may seem to be sensor oriented, such as expecting proof or tangible results, may in fact be a product of having a more logically inclined mind that expects to understand how a system works. Hope this helped somewhat. I'm pretty sure you'll come to see yourself as an INTP. But, that's all up to you.


----------



## NothingHere (Apr 18, 2013)

Ignore the people above me. This is how you figure it out. If you have an ISTP's Se you will be most of these things.

-like challenges
-competitive
-like sports
-not submissive
-blunt
-knowledge is less broad and more relevant

So yea that's the main distinguishing factor. ISTPs are more aggressive than INTPs. ISTPs are like half jock.


----------



## telling__you (Jun 11, 2013)

Thanks for all of your answers!
Reading them and other posts on Sensing VS Intuiting on the site have helped me get a gist of things. 

It now seems pretty clear to me that I'm an Intuitor (although spell-check is telling me that it's not a word lol);
I read some posts about Sensor traits that and none of them really rang true to me. 
The basis of Se seems to be a keen awareness of your surroundings, 
whereas I'm the type of person that doesn't notice that Mom has planted a bunch of flowers in the front lawn until a week later. 

I think I may have been confused by the traits that I now recognize to have developed consciously during my teens, 
in order to function and not seem like an oddball all the time. 
Maybe this is related to my 9w1 desire to blend in and be in harmony with everyone and everything. 

Now that I think of it I also tried to develop my Feeling traits after being told by a lot of my close friends that I always seem a bit aloof and detached (and I was); it's worked partially, but it's still entirely clear to me that feelings aren't my strongest suit. 

So I guess from now on I'll see myself as an INTP, 
just not one that completely fits all of the stereotypes.


----------



## Draco Solaris (Apr 8, 2013)

Do you watch sports?



sniperpanda said:


> -like challenges
> -competitive
> -like sports
> -not submissive
> ...


INTP's aren't blunt? What?


----------



## telling__you (Jun 11, 2013)

Only on very rare occasions. The Olympics for example!
I do enjoy playing sports (it gets my mind off things) but I'm much too lazy to play regularly.


----------



## Draco Solaris (Apr 8, 2013)

telling__you said:


> Only on very rare occasions. The Olympics for example!
> I do enjoy playing sports (it gets my mind off things) but I'm much too lazy to play regularly.


I would then also lean towards INTP. Welcome to the club!


----------



## NothingHere (Apr 18, 2013)

Nezaros said:


> Do you watch sports?
> 
> 
> 
> INTP's aren't blunt? What?


ISTPs are blunt. Geez can't you read what I wrote. That list is for ISTPs.


----------



## Draco Solaris (Apr 8, 2013)

sniperpanda said:


> ISTPs are blunt. Geez can't you read what I wrote. That list is for ISTPs.


It seemed as if the implication was that those are traits ISTP's possess which INTP's do not, but yes, the one saying to ignore everyone else in the thread must be the intelligent one here. My apologies.


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy (Nov 22, 2012)

sniperpanda said:


> ISTPs are blunt. Geez can't you read what I wrote. That list is for ISTPs.


ISTPs are no more blunt than INTPs - which usually, in the healthy ones at least, isn't that blunt, with inferior Fe and what not. 

Anyways, @telling__you , I wouldn't pay any attention to anybody telling you "Type X does some behavior that is completely fucking unrelated to their cognitive function pairs." Liking sports doesn't make you an ISTP, nor does being 'more nerdy' make you an INTP. There is no difference of ISTPs being in-the-moment and INTPs being future-oriented. I would recommend you (and the other people in this thread) pick up Carl Jung's Psychological Types and try to refrain from the online type descriptions, tests and ridiculous stereotypes that come with them. 

Also, make a new thread with the Questionnaire 2.0 (stickied thread) filled out, and I'll try to make an accurate typing from that. And hopefully other people who know what they're talking about do too.


----------



## NothingHere (Apr 18, 2013)

ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


> Liking sports doesn't make you an ISTP, nor does being 'more nerdy' make you an INTP.


Actually it does.


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy (Nov 22, 2012)

sniperpanda said:


> Actually it does.


That's a wonderful argument. "Nuh-uh"

Please, do explain to me, how having dominant/inferior Ti/Fe and auxiliary/tertiary Se/Ni makes it likely for one to like sports.

Or how having TiNeSiFe makes it likely for one to fall into the societal stereotype for 'nerdy.'


----------



## NothingHere (Apr 18, 2013)

ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


> That's a wonderful argument. "Nuh-uh"
> 
> Please, do explain to me, how having dominant/inferior Ti/Fe and auxiliary/tertiary Se/Ni makes it likely for one to like sports.
> 
> Or how having TiNeSiFe makes it likely for one to fall into the societal stereotype for 'nerdy.'


It has to do with the Se function. Se deals with the real world it likes action and challenges and it usually makes a person more intense. Just look at ESTPs who are Se dominant. They are the definition of jock types who like to play sports. INTPs do not have Se they have Si so they will not like sports end of story.


----------



## Draco Solaris (Apr 8, 2013)

People who use Se are _more likely _​to appreciate sports than those who use Ne, but the correlation is not a fixed rule.


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy (Nov 22, 2012)

sniperpanda said:


> It has to do with the Se function. Se deals with the real world it likes action and challenges and it usually makes a person more intense. Just look at ESTPs who are Se dominant. They are the definition of jock types who like to play sports. INTPs do not have Se they have Si so they will not like sports end of story.


I used to be good friends with an ESTP who just finished his freshman year at MIT. Only sport he ever played in high school was bowling, so he could get an extracurricular in for nothing Then there's an ENTJ who I used to be close friends with than loved basketball, even though Se was his tertiary (least influential). 

Extroverted sensing is nothing more than perceiving concrete physical attributes in the world around you and then making internal abstractions (Ni) through its opposite pair. It is not a deciding factor of whether or not you have auxiliary Se vs auxiliary Ne. 

Saying "end of story" and "actually, it does," and my favorite, "don't pay attention to anyone above me," makes me think what I'm saying here won't register and I'm wasting my time, but I do recommend you pick up that book. Maybe buy it on your Mom's kindle or something, IDK, it's pretty fucking expensive if you have to get it shipped via amazon.


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy (Nov 22, 2012)

Nezaros said:


> People who use Se are _more likely _​to appreciate sports than those who use Ne, but the correlation is not a fixed rule.


People with dominant Se vs other people, but other than that I don't see it as a very strong correlation in the first place.


----------



## NothingHere (Apr 18, 2013)

ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


> I used to be good friends with an ESTP who just finished his freshman year at MIT. Only sport he ever played in high school was bowling, so he could get an extracurricular in for nothing Then there's an ENTJ who I used to be close friends with than loved basketball, even though Se was his tertiary (least influential).
> 
> Extroverted sensing is nothing more than perceiving concrete physical attributes in the world around you and then making internal abstractions (Ni) through its opposite pair. It is not a deciding factor of whether or not you have auxiliary Se vs auxiliary Ne.
> 
> Saying "end of story" and "actually, it does," and my favorite, "don't pay attention to anyone above me," makes me think what I'm saying here won't register and I'm wasting my time, but I do recommend you pick up that book. Maybe buy it on your Mom's kindle or something, IDK, it's pretty fucking expensive if you have to get it shipped via amazon.


Lol I like how you avoided the argument completely and tried to make it about something else. Despite your bullshit the fact remains INTPs do not like sports. Get that through your head. INTPs... do.... not.... like... sports. You are just butthurt because you think I'm rude. Well get over it. It doesn't change the fact that I'm right.

Anyways I'm not going to entertain someone who obviously doesn't have a clue what he's talking about. Peace out.


----------



## Draco Solaris (Apr 8, 2013)

sniperpanda said:


> Lol I like how you avoided the argument completely and tried to make it about something else. Despite your bullshit the fact remains INTPs do not like sports. Get that through your head. INTPs... do.... not.... like... sports. You are just butthurt because you think I'm rude. Well get over it. It doesn't change the fact that I'm right.
> 
> Anyways I'm not going to entertain someone who obviously doesn't have a clue what he's talking about. Peace out.


That was a fantastic impression of a butthurt twelve-year-old. Go ahead, do another!


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy (Nov 22, 2012)

sniperpanda said:


> Lol I like how you avoided the argument completely and tried to make it about something else. Despite your bullshit the fact remains INTPs do not like sports. Get that through your head. INTPs... do.... not.... like... sports. You are just butthurt because you think I'm rude. Well get over it. It doesn't change the fact that I'm right.
> 
> Anyways I'm not going to entertain someone who obviously doesn't have a clue what he's talking about. Peace out.


I addressed the only points you made about ISTPs liking sports and about your definition of Se. That's not what I call avoiding the argument. Maybe you could point out where I didn't address a part of your argument? My bullshit facts are not bullshit. That's how Jung essentially defined Se and it is supported by most of the Jungian typology community. I don't think you're rude, I think you're probably really young. 

I don't know what else to say, because the rest of your post is you just repeating the thesis of your argument, saying you're right, and saying I don't have a fucking clue as to what I'm talking about. :/ Not exactly very constructive. I would also recommend this book to you: Logically Fallacious: Bo Bennett: 9781456607524: Amazon.com: Books along with something else that has to do with debate and/or non-aggressive communication.

And I'd like to add that you very hypocritically ignored everything I said in that post.


----------



## NothingHere (Apr 18, 2013)

ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


> That's how Jung essentially defined Se and it is supported by most of the Jungian typology community.


Reality > Jung and typology community

Books can only take you so far learn to think for yourself. Trust your eyes not a book. Reality gets the last say on these things.


----------



## Draco Solaris (Apr 8, 2013)

I honestly can't tell if he's trolling or just an idiot.


----------



## telling__you (Jun 11, 2013)

Hmm, let's not be unnecessarily aggressive, guys. 

In any case, 
I've created a thread with the questionnaire as you recommended, ThatOneWeirdGuy, 
so if you'd be willing, see if it makes my type any clearer!


----------



## The Wanderering ______ (Jul 17, 2012)

sniperpanda said:


> Reality > Jung and typology community
> 
> Books can only take you so far learn to think for yourself. Trust your eyes not a book. Reality gets the last say on these things.


I'm laughing my ass off cuz I can't tell if you are being serious or if you're trolling, but dude you are trolling hard.


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy (Nov 22, 2012)

sniperpanda said:


> Reality > Jung and typology community
> 
> Books can only take you so far learn to think for yourself. Trust your eyes not a book. Reality gets the last say on these things.


I've observed it myself before I discovered MBTI or Jung, and apparently so has Jung and the community. How can you even decide which one is true if you haven't read anything written by Jung on this?


----------



## NothingHere (Apr 18, 2013)

The Wanderering ______ said:


> I'm laughing my ass off cuz I can't tell if you are being serious or if you're trolling, but dude you are trolling hard.


People often mistake me for a troll. I suppose to you guys it looks like it. What is really happening is that I'm like a 100 levels above you guys. You can't even process what I'm saying because it's coming from such a higher place that your brain explodes. I know MBTI inside and out on a way deeper level than what you know. I have low tolerance for people with simple minds. Try having an independent thought for once in your life it won't kill you.



ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


> I've observed it myself before I discovered MBTI or Jung, and apparently so has Jung and the community. How can you even decide which one is true if you haven't read anything written by Jung on this?


I know what jung said and it's incomplete. He is describing a brain function. A brain function is a beast in itself it is open to interpretation to what it can do. You guys have your perspective all screwed up. You think jung's theory is where the importance is when really jung is just describing something that exists in reality. Reality determines what is real not jung.

It's not like a brain function is some sort of solid object that can be seen and described. You can only see the effects of it and the full extent of it's effects might never be known. It's like trying to describe Ni. Ni is a mysterious function. You can try and describe some stuff about it but you will never know if it's the whole picture or not.


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy (Nov 22, 2012)

sniperpanda said:


> People often mistake me for a troll. I suppose to you guys it looks like it. What is really happening is that I'm like a 100 levels above you guys. You can't even process what I'm saying because it's coming from such a higher place that your brain explodes. I know MBTI inside and out on a way deeper level than what you know. I have low tolerance for people with simple minds. Try having an independent thought for once in your life it won't kill you.
> 
> 
> I know what jung said and it's incomplete. He is describing a brain function. A brain function is a beast in itself it is open to interpretation to what it can do. You guys have your perspective all screwed up. You think jung's theory is where the importance is when really jung is just describing something that exists in reality. Reality determines what is real not jung.
> ...


Well, obviously. It's an abstract concept. But just like you somehow inferred that INTPs don't like sports (or maybe thats what defines it for you), we can infer the generalities of how an Ni-dominant user is most likely to act by how he processes information.

And honestly: How old are you? Please don't be so aggressive and dogmatic toward people.


----------



## NothingHere (Apr 18, 2013)

ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


> Well, obviously. It's an abstract concept. But just like you somehow inferred that INTPs don't like sports (or maybe thats what defines it for you), we can infer the generalities of how an Ni-dominant user is most likely to act by how he processes information.


INTPs don't like sports that's just a fact. It's not a generality. It's by design. People are uncomfortable with being boxed in and labelled so they can't handle what I'm saying. I'm not here to sugar coat it for you. INTPs were designed for something else besides sports. Ni users have their own design as well.


----------



## The Wanderering ______ (Jul 17, 2012)

sniperpanda said:


> What is really happening is that I'm like a 100 levels above you guys. You can't even process what I'm saying because it's coming from such a higher place that your brain explodes.


Correction sir! Since you are 100 levels above me it is YOUR brain that explodes.


sniperpanda said:


> I know MBTI inside and out on a way deeper level than what you know.


Oh really?


sniperpanda said:


> I have low tolerance for people with simple minds. Try having an independent thought for once in your life it won't kill you.


Trust me I have a lot of independent thoughts and whats wrong with being simple minded? Human beings are made to do much but eat, drink, fight, shit, and of course reproduce.


----------



## SystemEater (Aug 5, 2012)

sniperpanda said:


> INTPs don't like sports that's just a fact. It's not a generality. It's by design. People are uncomfortable with being boxed in and labelled so they can't handle what I'm saying. I'm not here to sugar coat it for you. INTPs were designed for something else besides sports. Ni users have their own design as well.


 I mean, if your goal is: "can I convince a bunch of people on the internet that I'm not taken seriously in life and therefore act confidently in a medium where I have nothing to fear"... then, well, objective completed.


----------



## NothingHere (Apr 18, 2013)

SystemEater said:


> I mean, if your goal is: "can I convince a bunch of people on the internet that I'm not taken seriously in life and therefore act confidently in a medium where I have nothing to fear"... then, well, objective completed.


I don't give a crap about any random person on here. I just reflect reality and people get butthurt. The end.


----------



## SystemEater (Aug 5, 2012)

sniperpanda said:


> I don't give a crap about any random person on here. I just reflect reality and people get butthurt. The end.


If by "reflect reality" you mean: are a reflection of your own desperate need to appear detached to compensate for being overrun with feelings of inadequacy and powerlessness...then yes. Odd choice of phrasing though. I'm presuming you're quite young. Don't worry, at this rate, your brash defiance will slowly erode to slow burning resentment. That's not a good path, despite how fearless you may feel at this stage of the game. Trust me on that one.


----------



## immortalhaldir (Oct 26, 2011)

sniperpanda said:


> Lol I like how you avoided the argument completely and tried to make it about something else. Despite your bullshit the fact remains INTPs do not like sports. Get that through your head. INTPs... do.... not.... like... sports. You are just butthurt because you think I'm rude. Well get over it. It doesn't change the fact that I'm right.
> 
> Anyways I'm not going to entertain someone who obviously doesn't have a clue what he's talking about. Peace out.


Sniper, you're so good at derailing threads. And then leaving everyone annoyed and walking away. It's so much fun to watch. 

Everyone else, this is an example of what we call ISTP bluntness.


----------



## The Wanderering ______ (Jul 17, 2012)

immortalhaldir said:


> Sniper, you're so good at derailing threads. And then leaving everyone annoyed and walking away. It's so much fun to watch.
> 
> Everyone else, this is an example of what we call ISTP bluntness.


I'll be honest. I only joined this thread because I wanted to see how far Sniper would go before he fell. I didn't expect him to cave so soon.


----------

