Redes de Apoyo

INTPs are curious about many things—not least of which are themselves. When I first learned about psychological type, I was eager to learn all about type INTP, and dove into the material available on the internet. After awhile, however, it all started to sound the same. Then too, something was missing:

where were the the juicy little numbers, the dark, edgy secrets, and all the typical weirdness of science that usually lurks somewhere if you dig deep enough? Alas, there was nothing for it. Having

exhausted the internet, I was forced to resort to reading actual research papers.

In this book we will investigate some of the more unusual facets of the INTP personality type as well as delving deeper into familiar type-based subjects. Some of results will be undoubtedly be unexpected, even bizarre. In this first chapter we will cover a hodgepodge of INTP information that will stand us in good stead throughout the rest of the book.

Are you ready to absorb raw information?

The Universe Within

The most abstract of the Rationals, INTPs are often found working at the cutting edge of thought as mathematical/political/economic/etc theorists. Theory, as opposed to application, is the domain of the INTP. They would rather come up with the math or principle than create the device or prove the theory.

That said, INTPs were the most overrepresented type in a group of inventors,⁵ so some of them can obviously carry out their ideas.

The INTP's greatest strength is their mind. Indeed, INTPs’ thoughts have a mind of their own. Many INTPs report not being able to fall asleep because their brain wants to keep processing a problem, leading to occasional insomnia. They cannot help but think things through, even if they want to stop.

Keirsey (1998a) described this thought style as “involuntary,” because once the mental machinery has been started there's no turning it off. Trying to solve an interesting problem is like having a song stuck in one’s head for an INTP.

Since INTPs have such a rich thought life, they are often content to observe without participating.

They’re happy listening to the conversation, watching, analyzing, and thinking. Since they are usually not involved or emotionally invested, INTPs remain calm. Even in crisis situations, they are

remarkably unflappable and keep their reserve.

One INTP of my acquaintance was in a car that ran off the road in such a manner as to apparently take the lives of everyone onboard. With characteristic detachment, the INTP observed aloud, “Wow.

Death.” Nobody died, but his companions later rebuked him, “You’re not supposed to say, ‘Wow, death’ before you die!”

But this detachment may take a back seat if the INTP gets involved in a controversy about their subject of interest. Deceptively mild, INTPs can become surprisingly sharp when debating theories and ideas they feel strongly about.

The habit of being perpetually lost in thought has its downsides, of course. INTPs are one of the most absentminded types, rivalled perhaps only by the INFP. The comedy staple of the grey-haired

professor with his head in the clouds and his nose in a book, deaf to the world and absurdly oblivious to his environment, is a classic INTP. But even INTPs who are young and can’t plead age-related

memory failings frequently forget/lose/ignore things.

5 Forsgren, 1990

“I didn’t notice,” the INTP will plead to a Sensor.

“How could you not have noticed?” the Sensor exclaims in disbelief. “It’s a giant pink elephant balloon.”

“I wasn’t paying attention,” the INTP protests. “I was thinking about something else.”

But the Sensor cannot even remotely comprehend how anyone could miss such an obvious

phenomenon. INTPs, for their part, find themselves stunned at how anyone could notice, let alone care about, the things which Sensors notice, i.e. which hairbrush currently has the least hair clogging its bristles. How can they possibly notice stuff like that? the INTP wonders privately.

An INTP heading towards the library may drive past the building because they were lost in thought.

Once they realize what has happened, they will turn around, rebuking themselves sharply for their absentmindedness, and form a resolution to pay closer attention in the future. Then they will mentally design a proximity warning system for their car that will make a noise when approaching a

preprogrammed destination, i.e. the library. But how to make it cheap and affordable? Meanwhile, they will have driven past the library again. Third time's the charm.

On the subject of library books. Beware of loaning things to an INTP. Though well-intentioned, the INTP’s cluttered personal space ravenously devours other people’s possessions, and even if the INTP doesn’t lose the item, it will probably take several tries before they can finally remember to bring it back.

Rebuking an INTP for absentmindedness is a hopeless gesture and will not produce any sort of change--though it may drive the INTP to hide their internal thought processes. (My family used to tease me about leaving items behind when going out to the car, necessitating multiple trips back into the house to get it all. I stopped saying goodbye; then they never knew when I actually intended to leave for real. I took a certain petty satisfaction in thinking that if I died in a car accident, they wouldn't realize until too late that they had never said farewell.)

Weird Sense of Humor

When small talk isn’t required, INTPs can make charming conversationalists, providing that they aren’t feeling too shy. Witty and drolly ironic, the INTP can humorously twist an incident or idea and make their listeners break up laughing.

INTPs have a well-developed sense of humor, though it can be a bit odd--sort of like the Far Side, but with more wordplay. Some INTPs enjoy telling jokes that require the listener to have eight years of math and speak fluent Latin--a sick pastime indeed. They revel in the fact that there are only a handful of people in the world who would get it.

On the other hand, some INTPs report that they keep all the hilarity contained in their heads; outsiders see nothing but a vaguely bemused expression or perhaps a smirk, if anything at all. These impassive Rationals may not show what is hiding underneath.

Like all Rationals, INTPs enjoy one-liners, tongue-in-cheek quips, dry witticisms, puns, and double entendre. Their sense of humor may take a satirical bent, or may tend towards the appreciation of the absurdities of life. As creatures of logic, Rationals spend a good deal of time observing their illogical fellow beings with amused bewilderment. They attempt to bring these inconsistencies to light in their jokes. Much Rational humor consists of simply stating unspoken irrational or bizarre human behavior

aloud so that the oddity can be plainly seen--and laughed at for its absurdity. A curious number of comic strips feature main characters that are Rationals; I have vague sense that NTs are overrepresented in the funnies.

The INTP sense of humor is less socially acceptable than for most types, and may even appall listeners with its irreverance. Unfortunately, the INTP may be oblivious to the fact that their jokes are in bad taste. If an INTP behaves this way and you want them to stop, be obvious about the fact that you dislike it. Remember, when dealing with an INTP you often have to be bonk-over-the-head obvious.

However, despite the occasional problem of poor taste, the INTP sense of humor is considered by many to be one of the most attractive features of the type.

It has been speculated that INTPs are not very good at telling actual jokes.⁶ But like everything, there are exceptions; it was said of Madison that “few men possessed so rich a flow of language, [or] so great a fund of amusing anecdotes, which were made the more interesting from their being well-timed &

well-told.” It may be, however, that typical INTPs simply don’t have the facial and vocal expressiveness for really good joke-telling.

Argumentation

INTPs also enjoy a good debate. One study measured type and argumentativeness⁷; it turned out that the four most argumentative types were all the Rationals. The ordering was like so: ENTJ, INTJ, INTP, ENTP. INTPs are therefore the third most argumentative type.

In light of this, it may be interesting to study INTP argumentation.

INTPs often find themselves standing alone as they defend their views, which are frequently likely to be “unusual,” to say the least. Because their views so often differ from those of the prevailing majority, and because it is almost a knee-jerk reaction for people to reject such views as absurd, INTPs will adapt sneaky strategies to bypass the gag reflex.

One tried and true technique is the Socratic method, which consists of asking question after question until others are finally forced to reason their way to the INTP’s own conclusion. This generally does a better job of convincing people than stating the truth flat out.

Person A: “There’s an entire mountain made of garbage now. If we don’t start recycling and using less packaging, we’ll be flooded in trash--like in Wall•e.”

INTP: “How many mountains are there in a mountain range?”

Person A: (Not expecting to have their remark taken seriously) “Uh...I don’t know.”

INTP: “Let’s say that there are a thousand mountains in a small mountain range. Now, how many years did it take to make that mountain of garbage?”

Person A: “I can’t remember, why?”

INTP: “Let’s just say 20 years, does that sound good?”

Person A: “Alright, sure...but--”

INTP: “So then, to fill up a small mountain range would take about twenty thousand years.

6 James, 2000; Keirsey, 1998a 7 Loffredo & Opt, 2006

How many mountain ranges are there in the world?”

Person A: (seeing the coup de grace coming and attempting to deflect it) “But I don’t think it’s a good idea to just store up trash.”

INTP: (coup de grace) “Considering the remaining surface area of the planet and the amount of time it would take to fill even a fraction of that surface area up with trash, it seems obviously that the fears of the world being filled up with garbage are greatly exaggerated.”

Person A: (irritably) “So you don’t think that we should worry about recycling then?” (Person A misrepresents INTP’s viewpoint)

INTP: “No, I didn’t say that. In fact, I’m a member of the Recycling Committee and I vote Green.”

Person A: “But you just said--” (Person A can’t understand why the INTP has seemingly argued against their own cause.)

INTP: “The mere fact that I disagree with the mountain of trash scenario does not imply that I think recycling is a bad idea.”

For the INTP, the point is to ascertain pure truth, even if leaving an untruth standing would actually help their cause. This may frustrate allies, who mistakenly come to believe that the INTP does not support their point of view.

An INTP in debate about a subject they know well is like a chessmaster who is one mental step ahead of their opponent. They will lay traps in the form of seemingly innocuous statements, wait for their opponent to agree with them, then snap the trap closed and prove their point.

In the example below, an INTP uses their knack for staying one logical step ahead to enlighten a person who has fuzzy, anthropocentric ideas based on faulty information.

Person A: “So you really think aliens exist?”

INTP: “Why wouldn’t they?”

Person A: “Well, it just doesn’t seem likely that intelligence could evolve twice. I mean, what are the odds?”

INTP: “How many stars are there in the universe?”

Person B: “I don’t, billions?”

INTP: “There are billions of billions. And that is only in the part of the universe we can see. So actually there are tons more. Thus the odds are actually quite good that one of those billions of billions of stars could have a planet that could host life.”

Person A: “Well, I could see animals. But I mean sentient life--you know, the kind that can talk.”

INTP: (lays trap) “Do you think that the ability to talk defines sentience?”

Person A: “Sure. What else?”

INTP: “In that case, humans are not the only sentient species on Earth.”

Person A: (baffled) “What do you mean?”

INTP: (snaps trap) “Since gorillas and chimpanzees can both speak in sign language, they are sentient by your definition.”

Person A: “But they’re animals!”

INTP: “Animals who can talk. If not one, but three Earth species are able to communicate, then why should it be any different on another planet?”

Another thing that INTPs will do is present each link of their chain of reasoning separately, i.e. “Do you agree with proposition A?” “Do you think B is valid?” “Do you believe in statement C?” The other person will cautiously agree to each individual item, not really understanding what the INTP is getting at. Then finally, when all the prerequisites have been proven, the INTP connects the dots and reveals the whole: “Very well, since you believe A, B, and C, then you must believe in D.” This revelation is often greeted by a stunned look or an immediate protest, “Wait, I never said that--” The INTP will then review A, B, and C and ask how exactly the logic is faulty. Squirming will commence.

One fictional account of this technique has the NT’s opponent say, “My friend, you seem to entangle me with invisible threads, then you will all of a sudden cry out, ‘Caught!’” This is an apt description of the process.

The role of the INTP as devil’s advocate bears reviewing. It often annoys people how INTPs argue against things that they actually believe in. Keirsey (1998a) has suggested that INTPs do this to look for what truth there might be in an opponent’s position. I think that an INTP also wants to refine the terms of the argument into a set of definitions that are as accurate as possible from the perspective of both parties. They wish to ensure that statements are universally true, with any exceptions noted.

For example, here an overly logical INTP notices an inconsistency in Person A’s declaration and feels impelled to enlighten them by playing devil’s advocate, meanwhile totally missing or ignoring the probable emotional context of Person A’s statement:

Person A: “Children aren’t supposed to die before their parents.”

INTP: “Hm, but what of the child mortality rate in third world countries? It’s a normal occurrence there.”

Person A: (stunned that anyone would say such a thing) “You don’t think it should be like that, do you?”

INTP: “Of course not.”

Person A: “But you just said--”

INTP: “I didn’t say I approved of it. I merely noted that there is nothing out of the ordinary about children dying before their parents in most parts of the world.”

The INTP has corrected the arbitrary opinion “not supposed to die” and replaced it with the truth

“nothing out of the ordinary about dying” while adding a qualifier, “in most of the world.” The statement is now objectively true in a universal sense.

(Now the INTP will get to hear the rest of the story about the terrible tragedy that has befallen Person A’s heretofore unmentioned acquaintance. Person A will be glad that the INTP is so good at listening, but the INTP will feel awkward at the requirement to express sympathy.)

As has been noted, other people frequently misrepresent or oversimplify the views of INTPs. The INTP may be forced to say, “No, you’re the one who said that. All I said was that...” INTPs choose

their words carefully, each word having a precisely chosen weight and meaning, with appropriate qualifiers added so as not to imply an incorrect generalization. Other people, of course, treat words in the most casual way, flailing them everywhere in gross oversimplifications and violating the rules of logic with blissful abandonment. And then they have the nerve to accuse INTPs of being “nitpickers.”

In fact, it is often the case that arguments would not exist if the terms had been defined correctly beforehand. People say the same words, but the words don’t mean the same thing. Does anyone take an advertisement at its word when it claims that a product is proven to be the “BEST!*”? What the advertisement actually means is that a study of the product and two competitors' products found that in 6 out of 10 measures of quality, their product was superior. But you won’t know that unless you read the long explanation described in tiny print at the bottom of the box. You can’t truly evaluate the advertisement’s statement until you know what the term “best” means.

For an INTP, every term used in a debate has a little asterisk on it indicating that the true meaning is probably quite complicated. Thus, before any real discussion can be undertaken, the terms must be compared and a common definition agreed upon by all parties. Often, by the time the terms have been defined, the disagreement has entirely disappeared.

Say for example an INTP with a dog is having a discussion with a person who makes broad generalizations and does not qualify their statements.

Person A: “I hate dogs.”

INTP: “Oh?”

Person A: “It’s so annoying how they jump up on you and slobber.”

INTP: “But that’s a sign of poor training.”

Person A: “Sure, but they’re all like that.”

INTP: “Not really. Only the large, poorly trained ones are like that. What you actually hate are large, poorly trained dogs.”

Person A: “Well, I guess that’s true. I don’t mind the little ones so much, when they don't bark all the time. When I was a kid...”

Note how the INTP narrowed the definition down to its true scope, from “dogs” (gross generalization) to “large, poorly trained dogs” (true definition). By undermining an opponent’s terms, an INTP strips away the very foundation on which the other's argument stands. The INTP knows that to get to the root of the matter, one must go for the definitions.

As a final note, while INTPs enjoy calm, civil debate, they do not like fighting. Emotionalism, anger, and baseless declarations made without facts--an INTP dislikes such arguments, which are seldom productive for either side.

Politics

What do INTPs like debating about? Well, there's politics. Did you know that type and politics are related? Sensing is correlated with a more conservative political stance, while Intuition is correlated with a more liberal political stance.⁸ In addition, Intuitives reported having higher political interest

8 Macdaid in Boozer & Forte, 2008

than Sensors.⁹ INTPs are thus likely to be politically interested liberals.

Another study¹⁰ found that TJ (Thinking, Judging) was associated with the American Republican party and F was associated with the American Democratic party. It was also found that NTPs are more likely to vote Independent. So INTPs are most likely liberal Independents. In addition, other researchers found that the Democrats were associated with FP.¹¹

Boozer and Forte (2008) measured “political alienation,” which they described as “discontent or

Boozer and Forte (2008) measured “political alienation,” which they described as “discontent or

In document CUIDADORES INFORMALES DE PERSONAS DEPENDIENTES EN CHILE. (página 192-195)