INTJ and Personal Development

[Ijz]

I'm just curious about this, but if you could name 3 areas of personal development that you have gone through, which would they be?

And how do these relate to you being an INTJ or specifically to the MBTI functions?

[Booko]

Ah, do you mean personal development like "learning how to work in groups"? Because I've certainly done a lot of that over the years, and it was a lot of work in several areas to learn how to do so.

[Paul V]

1st: Learning how to conceal my thoughts and emotions, and form effective defences and barriers.
2nd: Learning how to read people, and studying human nature.
3rd: Learning how to strategise, how to contingency plan, etc.

Their relations with MBTI:

1st: Allowed me to evolve from FP to TJ.
2nd: Allowed me to exercise my N.
3rd: Allowed me to realise I was unvoluntarily training myself to do what INTJs do best.

[Henry]

I'm just curious about this, but if you could name 3 areas of personal development that you have gone through, which would they be?

And how do these relate to you being an INTJ or specifically to the MBTI functions?

NF abilities seemed to develop while coming out of a very serious depression in my very early 20's. Usually am able to amalgamate diplomacy into overall strategy. Its still secondary, but diplomacy is important to me. When I get stressed, I revert almost entirely to NT thinking though, and diplomacy goes out the window.

Also am TRYING to learn to keep control of my temper. A lot of work though, and, much to my own and others' embarassment, I fail at this fairly often. I suppose this would be some sort of IF, but I'm more apt to call it trying to develop EQ or intrapersonal intelligence.

[Booko]

Also am TRYING to learn to keep control of my temper. A lot of work though, and, much to my own and others' embarassment, I fail at this fairly often. I suppose this would be some sort of IF, but I'm more apt to call it trying to develop EQ or intrapersonal intelligence.

I've had good success with anger by viewing it as the emotional equivalent of stubbing one's toe.

Usually when I get really enraged it would be about some unresolved emotion from an event in the past and what happened in the present just triggered it.

The real lasting solution was to find what it was in myself that needed improvement and fix that. Then I find I just don't get angry at things that used to get me angry quite easily.

Also, there's no point getting angry over things you can't change. Save your energy for something you can have an effect on.

Just my 2cents anyway, and good luck.

[Henry]

I've had good success with anger by viewing it as the emotional equivalent of stubbing one's toe.

Usually when I get really enraged it would be about some unresolved emotion from an event in the past and what happened in the present just triggered it.

The real lasting solution was to find what it was in myself that needed improvement and fix that. Then I find I just don't get angry at things that used to get me angry quite easily.

Also, there's no point getting angry over things you can't change. Save your energy for something you can have an effect on.

Just my 2cents anyway, and good luck.


Excellent advice. If only I could actually control it. Its deep-seated. I'm working on it, but it will probably take at least 6 months of intense work and a lifetime of keeping it in check.

[Hdier]

Allowed me to evolve from FP to TJ.

Are you implying that TJ is somehow superior to FP?

[RoqueBear]

Hmm...

1) A continuous and life long pursuit of education, learning experiences and social interactions.

Helps me to expand my T and my N dealing with ideas and people.

2) Leadership skills and situations.

I boarder between I/E. I typically find myself stepping into leadership roles, since I can jump between thinking and reacting well. Typically groups or areas like work that are structured suit me well.

3) Communication

The best ideas / experiments in the world, don't mean anything if you cannot communicate them. I am going to begin to learn my 5th language soon, this helps my N and T.

[AgentofGaming]

Are you implying that TJ is somehow superior to FP?

Well, I like that TJs can arrive at ideas with less bias and more conclusions.
However what someone sees as superior is completely relative.

[rwyatt365]

1) Learning to let other do things their own way; (i.e. to stop micro-managing and stop doing it myself when dissatisfied with others results). I've "suffered" from the INTJ tendency to go off into a dark corner and "make things happen" for a long, long time. When placed into a management position I quickly learned that this was not effective use of my time/talents, nor did other appreciate it (why, I don't know ;) ). It was a hard thing to learn and I can't say that I'm 100% successful at it.

2) Learning to ask for help; when I moved into being more of an IT-generalist I quickly was humbled by others that had more, and deeper, knowledge in specific specializations. I wanted to be "master of all" and finally realized that I was not. That's when I recognized that it was better to use other people's knowledge rather than try to cram it all into the limited space in my brain.

3) Learning not to back down; I don’t know if this is type-dependant or not, but when I was confronted with dominant/aggressive people I would turn inside and detach completely from the situation, I would basically retreat inside myself in order to avoid confrontation. That gave this type of person the impression that I was an "easy mark" and ripe for exploitation. Of course, that caused me to build up a lot of anger and resentment towards that person – not good for either. It's better to address that kind of aggressiveness with that person, in the midst of that situation – waiting, or redirecting anger or frustration isn't effective.

[The Ghost Agent]

TJ > FP? Screw that, lets go further. ANY T > F unless that person is an INFJ. Forsaking your rationality and surrendering to emotions(F) is far more inferior than someone who continues to utilize their brain.

[Paul V]

Are you implying that TJ is somehow superior to FP?

No, but Fs get hurt more, and Ps rarely finish what they start. They were aspects of my personality I didn't like, and I changed them.

[Hdier]

Paul V:
Ah, I am an F, and yet people are rarely able to hurt me (Insults thread). Also, see my last statement under your heading.

J's rarely gather enough information in order to make a good decition. Simply stating an extreme negative of the letter doesn't mak a very convincing argument.

The Ghost Agent:
Just becuase someone is an F doesn't mean they forsake rationality for emotion. Look at my last statement for Paul V.

Agent of Gaming:
What exactly do you mean by bias? The only way I am biased is by taking my morals into account. I will NOT go easy on someone becuase I know them or anything, or becuase I 'can't handle punishing such a young, cute child', or anything like that.

Sorry for all the redirections, but I hate repeating myself.

[robin.]

My goal is to get from an IxTJ to an xxxx.

I think that the ultimate form of self-development is to take what you've been born with, and then try to get as much of the benefits from other types as possible. I would eventually like to have all the tools/benefits that the other types share. I mean, why not?

Of course, there are certain things I'd like to keep, such as my natural ability to think about my emotions before unleashing them to the world. But I'd like to be able to feel comfortable being more emotionally vulnerable, with I think is more of an F trait. I think there's a lot of things we can learn from the different types, and I'd like to know how to incorporate the best things with what I already have so that I can use whatever I need when the situation calls for it.

[PhotoJim]

1. Education. I returned to school at age 30 and completed an undergraduate degree, then completed a graduate degree, as well as attaining a professional designation.
2. Tact. I've always been a bit on the blunt side, and had to learn how to temper what I say so as not to offend people (unless I really intended to offend :) ). There are tactful ways of telling people things without creating offense.
3. Motivation. I'm still working on this one.

Jim

[Paul V]

Paul V:
Ah, I am an F, and yet people are rarely able to hurt me (Insults thread). Also, see my last statement under your heading.

J's rarely gather enough information in order to make a good decition. Simply stating an extreme negative of the letter doesn't mak a very convincing argument.

The Ghost Agent:
Just becuase someone is an F doesn't mean they forsake rationality for emotion. Look at my last statement for Paul V.

Agent of Gaming:
What exactly do you mean by bias? The only way I am biased is by taking my morals into account. I will NOT go easy on someone becuase I know them or anything, or becuase I 'can't handle punishing such a young, cute child', or anything like that.

Sorry for all the redirections, but I hate repeating myself.

That's exactly what having an F means. You probably won't grasp this concept because you have a very high T. From what MBTI tells us, F people make decisions based on feelings, as opposed to people who use logic instead. Making decisions based on emotions means that you are more open to your emotions, and even if you developed a thick skin, it still means you'll suffer more when it comes to matters of the heart.

Also notice that I specifically said that they were aspects of my personality that I didn't like. I am a sensitive person, and if I allowed my emotions to rule me, then... I probably wouldn't be alive right now. And the P thing was purely a practical decision. I know P has its benefits, but I decided I prefered to be a J, because I need to be able to finish what I start. It's something of tremendous importance to me.

[Hdier]

No, what I was objecting to was (s)he was implying that F's don't use logic at all. I understand that F's will generally use objectivity (which doesn't necessarilly mean emotions, per say) in order to make decisions. That doesn't mean that F's don't use logic, just that it doesn't come as naturally to them, and the logic is generally laced with the objectivity (placing more emphasis on morals than you logically should).

[Paul V]

No, what I was objecting to was (s)he was implying that F's don't use logic at all. I understand that F's will generally use objectivity (which doesn't necessarilly mean emotions, per say) in order to make decisions. That doesn't mean that F's don't use logic, just that it doesn't come as naturally to them, and the logic is generally laced with the objectivity (placing more emphasis on morals than you logically should).

It's a he, I know him. And get used to it, he's blunt like that. Overly aggressive at times, but usually effective.

Errr... no? F's don't use objectivity, that's the whole point. They use subjectivity. Your argument that they use logic might hold water, albeit they don't use a flawless, perfect one, that is. But an F, being objective? That's not an F. Feelings are by definition subjective. Perhaps what you meant was that they have a sense of selflessness, which allows them to see what needs to be done, and do it. That's also a Feeling thing, and that's something Thinking probably shares as well.

An INFJ and an INTJ might arrive to the same conclusion "I must sacrifice myself for my children" (for example), but from very different paths. An INTJ might think "It's the only logical thing to do if I want them to survive", and an INFJ might think "I love them. I'd rather die than let any harm come to them".

Of course I don't say "They will think either of the two options", it's very likely that both reasons come into play, but I'm showing you the similarity between those two judgments.

[Hdier]

Sorry, I meant to say subjective rather than objective. I keep on getting those two words mixed up.

No, my point was that F's, even with a low T, can, will, and do use logic, albeit flawed because of the subjectivity. For example, even with my high T when I use logic, if my morals are violated (for example, if the person is a rapist/murderer/etc) then I will either ignore or manipulate the logic in order to gain the outcome I want to achieve (me attempting to stop the Big Evil Guy). However, if my morals don't come into play (which they usually don't), then logic will prevail. I think that each F has some point(s) where his/her F comes into play, and that is where (s)he uses the 'F' to make decisions. Granted, most F's won't use logic very easily or well, however they can and will use it. They simply don't automatically revert to it.

[Paul V]

Sorry, I meant to say subjective rather than objective. I keep on getting those two words mixed up.

No, my point was that F's, even with a low T, can, will, and do use logic, albeit flawed because of the subjectivity. For example, even with my high T when I use logic, if my morals are violated (for example, if the person is a rapist/murderer/etc) then I will either ignore or manipulate the logic in order to gain the outcome I want to achieve (me attempting to stop the Big Evil Guy). However, if my morals don't come into play (which they usually don't), then logic will prevail. I think that each F has some point(s) where his/her F comes into play, and that is where (s)he uses the 'F' to make decisions. Granted, most F's won't use logic very easily or well, however they can and will use it. They simply don't automatically revert to it.

Of course, you're right. I never said Fs didn't use logic.

Rationality =/= logic.

Rationality has certain connotations that go beyond logic, like objectivity, for example.

[Hdier]

I didn't mean to imply that you said that F's didn't use logic, but my original point was that The Ghost Agent was at least implying that, and his point was what I was objecting to.