New INTP Infographic!
Just finished this today! I hope any INTPs out there who come across this feel that it’s accurate. Let me know what you think or if you have any comments or suggestions! If you’re having trouble reading it, just click on it to see the complete full-size image.
All About INTPs
Subscribe to Our Newsletter
Want to discover more about personality type? Get the inside scoop with Susan Storm on all things typological, along with special subscriber freebies, and discounts on new eBooks and courses! Join our newsletter today!
I loved this one, too! You make really nice infographics. Really.
Thank you so much!!!
Nice one, Susan, although I’d appreciate it if you uploaded another version of the infographic in a higher resolution. Couldn’t read the details. :-p
Thank you! If you click on it, you should be able to see a really big version, but I’ll try to make the thumbnail photo larger. I know the big version is kind of hard to see on phones 🙂
Spot on! Thank you for these useful insights!
You’re welcome! Thanks for visiting 🙂 I’m not an INTP so I was hoping I wasn’t off on this!
The info graphic is mistaken. The tertiary function is EXTRAVERTED Sensing. We remember logical concepts–and the little else we can remember–by virtue of the introverted Thinking web of principles that govern our interior universe. We use our extraverted Sensing for empirical observation,and we also happen to be really good with hand tools, like our ISTP cousins. Jung was very clear: Only the dominant function operates in its own universe, while the other three operate in the other world for balance. Hence the irony: Extraverts have incredibly rich inner lives because they have THREE functions collaborating there. Likewise, Introverts live fully in the objective, exterior world because we have thee functions interacting with it. Please redo the graphic to match real typology. Or show me any I–P with introverted perception of any kind, or any E–J who can see anything in front of him, or any E–P who can show up on time consistently, or any I–J who’s any good with technology. Empirical evidence just doesn’t support that in-out-in-out reasoning, nor do any of the real MBTI experts teach it.
Hello, and thank you for commenting! I am definitely open to being wrong here and have actually spent a considerable amount of time trying to research what you’re talking about since reading your comment. I have always read in the books I’ve studied on MBTI that the cognitive functions are in-out-in-out as I showed in the infographic. I’ve never heard another example. Maybe I’ve been reading the wrong books, I’m not sure. Could you please let me know where I can find research that the real MBTI experts teach? Because I have read lots of articles and research by certified typologists that all have supported the Introverted-Extroverted-Introverted-Extroverted cognitive functions approach. Like I said, I’m not stubborn about this, so if there really is a different teaching about the cognitive functions than what I’ve read I’m very open to learning about it – I just haven’t seen it. I’ve read Jung’s work (although, oddly enough, not all of Psychological types) I’ve read Isabel Briggs Myers, AJ Drenth, Naomi Quenk, David Kiersey, Otto Kroeger, Dario Nardi, and I’ve listened to a lot of the podcasts that CPP.com has done. CPP.com actually is affiliated with MBTI and trains people to be practitioners and they support the in-out-in-out method. I’m not trying to sound like a know-it-all, because I’ve certainly had my moments of being unsure whether everything I’ve read about the theory is correct, but if you could point me in the right direction I’d be happy to re-evaluate things.
Thanks. This part of the theory–“Identifying the Hierarchy of Functions”–comes from the MBTI Manual, which we use to qualify to become Type interpreters. The only edition I can lay my hands on at the moment is the Third Edition, but on pages 30 and 31, it explains how the dominant function is balanced by three, opposite-facing functions, with the whole table of all the types and their respective functions.
I’m an INTP, so my introverted Thinking is balanced by extraverted iNtuition (aux), extraverted Sensing (tertiary), and extraverted Feeling (inferior). My extraverted Sensing manifests in my being extremely visual, but I don’t always have as much control over it as others might like. For instance, I’m really good with tools and my hands in general, and I’m constantly scanning the environment, so I see many things that those types with introverted Sensing don’t, BUT if you’re talking to me, and there is some movement over your shoulder or a sound, I have a hard time maintaining my focus on what you’re saying, and probably, I won’t remember a word of it.
My husband, on the other hand, is an ENFJ, and so HIS Sensing is introverted. He can remember all sorts of things, like what people say to him, facts, dates, and here’s the real gift: He can do calculations in his head. (I’m NEVER safe with dates, times, or sums. Numbers are WILLFUL!) He also has a very keen sense of social expectations, the result of the interaction of his dominant and tertiary functions: He remembers and follows the “rules” because it makes the life of the Community go more smoothly. When he loses something, he doesn’t just look around for it (scan the room, as I do), he closes his eyes and tries to imagine where it could be–this is the interaction of his introverted iNtuition and Sensing–but I can hide Christmas presents right out in the open because he only “sees” what “should be there.” One of the great luxuries of my life, however, is that he (again) uses his combined introverted perceiving functions to read MANUALS. I can’t bear to–I just dive into whatever gadget and fumble my way through with my combined extraverted iNtuition and Sensing. When I can’t figure it out, he reads the instructions and tells me.
Name any type, and I will give examples of how all of this works. What’s your type?
— Stephen
Oops! never mind–I just found it: INFJ.
Introverted iNtuitive types (INTJ, INFJ) are exactly the same in the orientation of their functions, so they look a lot alike with some important differences: Introverted iNtuition, Extraverted (T/F), and Extraverted Sensing. The part one recognizes first is that double-sided dominant/fourth function dynamic. They KNOW the essence of anything, and the look to create some physical expression of it in their environment. Sometimes, that’s art: It’s not just that they “see” the subject of their work, but they can actually SEE it in detail that other types usually don’t. Extraverted Sensing types can see accurately, but they don’t always have the DRIVE to pull the universe out of the raindrop for all to see.
I–J types in general–INTJ, INFJ, ISTJ, and ISFJ–all have BOTH extraverted Thinking and extraverted Feeling, which means that they are especially good at pulling their worlds into order. Schedules, instructions, rituals, and routines all help to make the exterior world consonant with their interior worlds. But I digress…
Because these types have only introverted iNtuition inside, they can struggle in a few, particular areas. 1. Their ideas come out as “whole” objects, and they need to present them as “whole.” They don’t analyze their ideas because without introverted Thinking, analyzing things just seems to disrupt the holism of the idea. They want to appreciate a piece of art for what it holds and how it affects them: They don’t want to to see it all broken down into explanations of what makes it powerful. That process can just kill its integrity. For this same reason, 2. They tend not to be “technical,” and by that I don’t mean “technology” so much as understanding the techniques of something, unless it becomes very, very important to them–and even then, they’re not likely to put it all into words, which would be #1 above.
They also don’t have introverted Feeling, which is the ability to identify with someone else or someone else’s joy or pain. With extraverted Feeling, they can be compassionate, but they don’t really put themselves inside the other’s experience, which is what introverted Feelers do.
So, as an INFJ, how do you experience your Thinking? Do you tend to be drawn more to the interior side of logic, analysis, categorizing, clarifying, theorizing, and system building? Or are your more comfortable with planning, organizing, budgeting, accomplishing tasks, and keeping things moving along?
Stephen
Thank you Stephen for responding and giving me so much information to ponder over and process. I have to admit, it’s a lot to think about, and I don’t want to give a quick response because I’m still trying to think it all through. I am a little confused though, because every single thing I’ve ever read about INFJs or the MBTI still goes with that in-out-in-out approach. I do not do well with Extraverted Thinking. In fact, any cognitive functions test I’ve taken I score very low on Extraverted Thinking. This is because, from all the research I’ve done, INFJs use Introverted Thinking, whereas INTJs use Extraverted Thinking. I actually love to analyze things, take them apart, and understand all the pieces. In fact everyone who knows me says I get lost in my thoughts analyzing things.
I did a little more research into the whole cognitive functions hierarchy that you talked about. Jung did believe that our dominant function was either introverted or extroverted with the other three functions in the opposite direction – as you were saying. The Myers-Briggs manual quoted Jung in their book. However, from the research I’ve done, it looks like it’s an area where lots of people disagree. I’ve probably scanned over three or four books and a handful of web sites looking into the hierarchy of functions and the directions and attitudes of each one after reading your post, and all I can find is that it’s an area of disagreement. I’m definitely going to try to think about it and see where I stand, but at least from my own experience and what I’ve noticed in others, I’ve always found that the tertiary function being the same as the dominant function has made sense. For example, I see my ESTJ mother in law using Ne far more than I’d ever see her using Ni. I see my ISTP husband using Ni and rarely Ne. I enjoy using Introverted Thinking, but have an incredibly hard time using Extraverted Thinking. In fact, most of the current typologists that I study and read all follow this same approach. This isn’t to say it couldn’t be wrong – I just don’t know as of yet. From my own personal experience, it’s seemed more accurate than the idea of three opposing directions following the dominant function.
Another thing that confuses me is your analysis of Extraverted Feeling. Extraverted feeling makes it very easy for me to identify and ‘absorb’ other people’s feelings, yet it makes my own feelings much more foreign to me. I have a hard time identifying my feelings and processing them, but it’s very easy for me to put myself in another person’s shoes and pick up on their emotions. This is something I have always read is part of being a Fe user, and this doesn’t match up with what you’re saying. I believe that Fi users are also extremely empathetic, and very in touch with the feelings of themselves and others, but that they are more subjective in terms of emotions.
I probably could have explained this all better but I have three kids needing my attention now so I have to pull myself away. I’m definitely very curious about the insights you are providing, I’m just not 100% sure I agree with them or not. I’ve just got to think about it and research more and analyze before I decide.
Maybe u learnt to use Se and u prefer it but most of INTPs i know (include me) use Si.
I am not sure that all people in particular type use and prefer the same processes but imao
default processes are the most efective. I am strongly influenced by Fi but it leads me to upset and no-life.
If we’re talking Jungian Psychological types and the original MBTI extension of them, then only the dominant function operates in its preferred orientation. The theories which produced the idea that the tertiary function operates in the same realm as the dominant function came later and is not part of the theory that Katharine and Isabelle Briggs Myers developed.
So, you may experience your functions in a particular way, but the original theory defines the type dynamics as stated above, and in my decades of MBTI work, I have *never* seen a tertiary function operate in the same realm as the dominant.
Stephen
If we’re talking about Jungian Psychological Types and the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator as proposed, researched, and published by Katharine Briggs and Isabel Briggs-Myers, then the dominant function, by definition, operates alone in its preferred realm. The idea that the tertiary function operates in the same realm as the dominant came later and is not part of the original theory. I would be interested in seeing the research that supports that view, however.
So one may experience one’s own functions in a particular way, but the original MBTI theory says that the dominant function needs three oppositely-oriented functions to provide it with balance. In my decades of MBTI experience, I have *never* seen a tertiary function operate in the same realm as the dominant.
Stephen
Some more IN-J examples of extraverted Thinking. I studied poetry for a couple of semesters once. The first semester was taught by a “technical” poet–which means that he really loved poetics. We scanned verse, we learned all the nomenclature of the different meters, and we analyzed poetry using a whole range of perspectives. I *LOVED* that. My next semester, however, the professor was an INFJ, published poet, and her specialty was unmetered, unstructured poetry. She said that sometimes the idea of a poem would just come to her completely, and she’d have to stop whatever she was doing and get it all down.
Now, she and I had a difficult working relationship: Whenever I offered my introverted Thinking perspective, she usually brushed it away. So one time we were looking at a poem about an old trailer out of which operated a prostitute, named Roxanne, and in this poem, she entertained a middle-aged man, who was sort of mangy, on a bright red, faux-leather couch. And the professor asked the fateful questions: What makes this poem powerful?
Well, having been a French language and literature, I knew exactly where to begin: Roxane. Roxane, as one may remember, is the romantic love interest of Cyrano de Bergerac, but it is about a period in French culture when the elite–“le Precieux”–were all about avoiding the ugliness of the common world, like plain, ordinary words for things. They would have meetings where they spoke their own precious language, informed by Greek classics, and were all very “spiritual” together. Now, Roxane’s REAL name was “Madeleine,” which is the French version of “Magdalen,” which pious legend (incorrectly) labeled the prostitute who washed Jesus’ feet with her tears.
So, here we have Roxane, the Magdalen, entertaining this man in the ugliness of the common world, yet in the delusion of richness, on the vivid red couch. That, I concluded, was what made the poem powerful, that it pulled on all of their literary, historical, and deeply-rooted underworldly allusions.
To which she replied, “You know, maybe the prostitute’s name was just ‘Roxane’ and that’s all.” (I was annoyed because I had answered her question.)
So then came another day and we were reading through another poem in class, and she was going on about how this word rhymed with another and she really liked how these lines flowed together. I said, “They’re supposed to: It’s a Sonnet…” (Not my proudest moment)
But it does illustrate that my introverted Thinking mind just did not line up in any way with her introverted iNtuitive mind, BECAUSE she extraverts her Thinking.
Don’t get me wrong: There are plenty of IN-J poets, who in their times wrote highly structured, highly formal poetry, but as I said before, they learned the poetics because it was very, very important to the poetry they were writing.
Stephen
Without knowing you in person, it’s hard for me to comment. I can usually feel someone’s type within a few interactions, and words are tricky. For example, the idea of “The Big Picture” means opposite things to extraverted and introverted iNtuition. for introverted iNtuition, it means zooming in on the essentials of the situation, making the essential bigger than all the rest. For extraverted iNtuition, it means pulling ‘way back to see all of everything at once, making all the parts tiny so that it can see the whole. Both are important, but as I say, they’re opposite. “Analysis” also means different things to extraverted and introverted Thinking.
For extraverted Thinking, “analyzing” a situation means identifying the things that would have to be dealt with in order to reach a goal. For introverted Thinking, analysis is the act of gathering and sorting data to reveal abstract patterns and relationships. So we’d have to explore different kinds of analysis and other logic activities–like “taxonomy,” an introverted Thinking field, if ever there was one.
Likewise, introverted and extraverted Feeling may say the same words, but it’s likely they mean really different things. Extraverted Feeling has trouble drawing boundaries around its own feelings, especially when others with deep emotional needs are present because the Feeling is out with the others. “How can I know how *I* feel until I know how *YOU* feel?”. Introverted Feeling is pretty clear about what it’s feeling at all times. Here’s a good test: Extraverted Feeling is sensitive to the “good of the whole” while introverted Feeling is sensitive to the needs of the individual. So, an ENFJ has no trouble seeing that often the individual should change for the good of the community, while the INFP is confident that it’s the role of the Community to change to accommodate one person.
I have to say that I’m an MBTI purist, and so while Keirsey may have interesting things to say about his Temperament theory, it’s very limited in its ability to capture the richness and nuances of the types. NTs are really, really different, depending on the whole type, and in fact we can be anathema to each other. ENTPs and ENTJs really have a hard time finding common ground and often make each other nuts. The ENTJ wants to set down roles and responsibilities and achieve commitments to which people can be held “accountable.” ENTPs, on the other hand, have a hard time committing themselves to things because they know that the context may change at any moment. Pick any two letters shared among types and you can make similar generalizations to make certain points.
So tell me the situations in which you are analytical. What problems are you trying to understand or articulate? What are the data you’re examining? What systems are you trying to build? How does your web of principles and concepts shape your analysis?
Stephen
Ti doesnt works quickly ! It works slowly except simple questions and problems, much slower than most of others cognitive procesess although it provide precision and fool proof. If I(NTP) want to find quickly solution then I need to bypass Ti.