Hacker News Reader

Comment by nicoburns | Hacker News Reader

> Because I think fast and that intp also matches me.

I would suggest that if you primarily think in a fast, intuitive manner, then INTP doesn't match you because that antithetical to what INTP means. Perhaps you are reading too much into the "type descriptions" which tend to be stereotypically and not particular accurate (or are being too trusting of questionaire test results). Many of the types are similar to each other, so it's common to see oneself to an extent in more than one description.

To be an INTP means that your dominant thinking process is "Introverted Thinking" which is slow, reasoned, logical thinking that places a high emphasis on internal consistency. And that this is backed up with a secondary thinking process of "Extraverted Intuition" which is fast, intuitive thinking, which an emphasis on ideas and creative, divergent thought patterns. Or at least, that this was true of you as a young person.

View on HN

> slow, reasoned, logical thinking that places a high emphasis on internal consistency

Seeing it written out like that really makes me understand why (unaware) hypocrisy annoys me so much.

But what about fast, reasoned, logical thinking that places a high emphasis on internal consistency? There is no need for slow there.

Think eventual consistency rather than strict consistency in the world view and the thinking can be blazing fast and keep the other properties. The only advantage to slow is that it avoids the short periods of inconsistency, but that also hurts it since it is harder to make big changes in the world model.

IMO if you're thinking in terms of eventual consistency then that's a very different outlook to the one described above. There is also:

- Extraverted Thinking which is also relatively careful, reasoned and logical but puts more emphasis on external validity than internal consistency.

- Introverted intuition which is faster, more intuitive mode of thinking which some people might see as logical but isn't really. It's logical in the way ChatGPT is logical: it works until it doesn't.

Note also that nobody is using just one of these functions. So it's normal to lead with an intuitive thought and then back that up with logic or vice versa.

But I stand by the idea that you either be fast XOR fully reasoned. You can still be "kinda fast" and reasoned (but you'll never be as fast as intuitive judgements that are close to instant), and you can be pretty accurate with fast intuitive thought (but you'll never be as assured as a more thoroughly reasoned position - sometimes your intuition will lead you astray).

> I would suggest that if you primarily think in a fast, intuitive manner, then INTP doesn't match you because that antithetical to what INTP means

Why? N stands for intuitive, and the rest have nothing to do with thinking fast or slow. P just means you don't judge quickly, P could still come up with tons of ideas and explanations quickly, they just don't judge one of those correct.

Because just treating the letters separately as personality traits doesn't really work. That's the theory that's been tested and found to be bunk. What is more interesting is translating the 4-letter codes into a "stack" of cognitive functions. See https://personalityjunkie.com/functional-stack-type-dynamics... for more information the concept of a "functional stack".

Additionaly, due to extravert bias, they got the P and the J the wrong way around when designing the 4-letter codes:

- "I" means your top function is introverted (this makes sense)

- But "P" means your top extraverted function is a "P" function (N or S) rather than a "J" function (F or T)

But as an introvert's top function is introverted not extraverted, and according to the theory J/P alternates down the stack, that mean's that an I..P type's overall top function is a actually "J" function. Specifically in the this case "Introverted Thinking" (often notated "Ti").

Introverted Thinking is actually slow in two ways:

- Because it's a J ("Judgement") function. Which just means it's either an F ("Feeling" or T ("Thinking") function. These correspond to the Slow thinking from Kahneman's Thinking Fast and Slow. That's what "Judgement" is.

- Because it's an I ("Introverted") function. This doesn't make it actually slow, it just makes it appear slow. This is because "I" functions involve a relatively long amount of internal coginition before seeking more input from the external environment (this is what it means to be an "I" function). Which will appear slower to the observer who can't observe the persons internal thinking processes and can only observe when they interact with their environment.

So you mean that someone can't be introverted, trust their intuition, think instead of feel and not be judgemental, without also having a slow thinking pattern? That seems like nonsense to me. Where would you place such a person if you argue that they can't be an INTP? Or is your point to show how badly designed MBTI is?

I certainly think the MBTI as a questionaire and the encoding of types into 4-letter codes is badly designed. But I think the interpretation of underlying theory based on cognitive functions and functional stacks is both elegant and compelling.

Taking your description naively, such a person would likely be an INTJ. Which has a functional stack of (in order of most to least used thinking processes): Introverted Intuition - Extraverted Thinking - Introverted Feeling - Extraverted Sensation.

I realise that doesn't make much sense if you are used to applying the 4-letter code to persons directly. But as I mentioned above, I don't think that is a good way of doing things. It makes more sense if you take the 4 letter codes as simply being an opaque shorthand encoding for functional stacks (with the individual letters in the code not having meaning on their own, only indirectly through their correlation to a functional stack). E, I, N, S, T, F, P, J then become properties of thinking processes and an "extraverted person" is simply someone who primarily tends towards using one of the four extraverted thinking processes (Fe, Te, Ne, Se). They may or may not present like the everyday understanding of how an extravert presents (e.g. sociable and chatty). Typically people who have a "Extraverted Feeling" (Fe) dominant function closely fit this stereotype, but other types extraverts often don't.

Ok, that makes sense, but you should probably clarify that you have a nonstandard view of MBTI when you say that people can't be the personality type they describe themselves as.

If someone did the test and got INTP, then I think it is fair for them to describe themselves as INTP. You might say that the test was wrong, but as I said that isn't how most see MBTI.

It's actually not that non-standard. It's how the majority of people who are into MBTI / jungian type view things (where I've linked MBTI to Kahneman's Fast/Slow thinking is non-standard, but a cognitive functions + functional stack view is not).

It's also what the more advanced "Step III" version of the official MBTI test is based on. But that that assessment isn't just a simple questionaire: it can be only be conducted by a trained assessor and the cost of training course runs to thousands of pounds, so most people don't have experience of it, and it ends up being the simpler naive model that most people learn about.

I guess I have to take the test again. My old job had our types in the description of our team slack channel. I just remember being one of three extroverts on a team of 12.

But the way this person describes things is how I am precisely, when it comes to discussion on philosophy, politics, and so on. Debatable topics.

Slightly less so when I already know something or we are in a design/brainstorming session, I am more assertive.

I'm skeptical of the emphasis on the alphabet sorter.

Then again I see you have responded to some similar criticism of it below so I'll try to remember to read it when I'm not supposed to be managing a project.

I have a very deep purely logical based Argumentation style.

I can and often explain on a logical level my point of view.

I just don't need much time to do so because I constantly think about everything

The way I kind of view it is that I am a very slow thinker, but I've overdeveloped the skill of self-investigation. So I can "think fast" by asking myself very good questions that quickly cut to the core of where my answer would come from. There are often questions or problems (especially in the world of engineering) where the best thing for me to do is something else and let my subconscious do some work on it. It's not that I couldn't solve it using "fast brain", it's just that using "slow brain" (often diffuse thinking) is more energy efficient.

I think what it actually means is that personality type definitions are meaningless. I'm the same as above. I'm about as introverted as they come, but I also spent a years working in tech services that included sales. It's a skill like anything else. My brain works very fast and more importantly, I know what I know and what I don't and just got very good at articulating that without hemming and hawing. It's not intuitive thinking as much as it's reasoned extrapolation.

> I'm about as introverted as they come, but I also spent a years working in tech services that included sales. It's a skill like anything else

I like to think of MBTI-style types as describing as describing the baseline at which your personality started before it was influenced by life experience such as working in sales for several years. That will have changed your personality but it doesn't affect your type.

If you expect an MBTI type to describe your personality as-is then you're going to be disappointed. This is also why the questionnaires are so inaccurate because they tend to ask about behavioural patterns which are influenced by life experience. You can get a much more accurate typing if you ask about why you act in a certain way, but that's hard (impossible) to do with a fixed set of questions.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com