PDA

View Full Version : INTJs - Serial Killers?


GoodToBeMe
06-05-2008, 04:41 PM
(I mistakenly posted this in the intro section. sorry)

I know this may sound strange but the more I learn about INTJs the more I think they are the perfect recipe to be serial killers. Fortunately, not I. Think of John Wayne Gacy and Ted Bundy. They definitely sound like they could be INTJs. An unbalanced or extreme INTJ unable to reconcile his inside world with his outside world could easily snap and go in that direction. Another good example: the unibomber. Defintely INTJ. Thoughts anyone?

azelismia
06-05-2008, 04:46 PM
(I mistakenly posted this in the intro section. sorry)

I know this may sound strange but the more I learn about INTJs the more I think they are the perfect recipe to be serial killers. Fortunately, not I. Think of John Wayne Gacy and Ted Bundy. They definitely sound like they could be INTJs. An unbalanced or extreme INTJ unable to reconcile his inside world with his outside world could easily snap and go in that direction. Another good example: the unibomber. Defintely INTJ. Thoughts anyone?


Intj traits are often confused with traits of psychopath. They are not the same. Any type is as likely to be a serial killer as another. I would posit that it's more likely for an F type to snap as they deal with things by feeling rather than logic. Killing lots of people for unnamed reasons is not a rational act.

Latte
06-05-2008, 04:52 PM
Any type is as likely to be a serial killer as another.

I'm not saying some are necessarily more likely to be serial killer than others, but your expression of certainty seems unfounded to me.
I would at least consider the possibility of factors in function setups that may prohibit such.

GoodToBeMe
06-05-2008, 04:59 PM
Good points. However, for the killer, the unibomber for example, it was not an unnamed reason. In his mind he was totally justified in his acts. To a normal person on the "outside" it seems random. But this person has a totally different (and twisted) reality inside of his mind. The intj is not content with just the inner world. The inner world must also be relected in the outer, which is why the intj will argue until the cows come home in order for you to see "the world" his way. After some time he may just smile at you and add you to the stupid column (along with score of others who also disagree with him) or, in the exteme case "force" you to see it his way.

azelismia
06-05-2008, 05:23 PM
Good points. However, for the killer, the unibomber for example, it was not an unnamed reason. In his mind he was totally justified in his acts. To a normal person on the "outside" it seems random. But this person has a totally different (and twisted) reality inside of his mind. The intj is not content with just the inner world. The inner world must also be relected in the outer, which is why the intj will argue until the cows come home in order for you to see "the world" his way. After some time he may just smile at you and add you to the stupid column (along with score of others who also disagree with him) or, in the exteme case "force" you to see it his way.


yes, but it's irrational. it's based on a feeling or some past wrong.





azelismia added to this post, 0 minutes and 55 seconds later...

I'm not saying some are necessarily more likely to be serial killer than others, but your expression of certainty seems unfounded to me.
I would at least consider the possibility of factors in function setups that may prohibit such.


psychosis is not a personality type trait. it's a mental illness.

GoodToBeMe
06-05-2008, 05:47 PM
"psychosis is not a personality type trait. it's a mental illness."

But serial killers (as well as the guy that suddenly goes "postal") always seem to have something in common. They are usually quiet, introverted types who keep to themselves. They usually express a "wrongness" with the outside world that they have to make right. It doesn't mean that all INTJs are potentional serial killers. I think it is just worth exploring if there is a corralation. Just like certain types are naturally better/more fit for certain occupations and naturally peform them better. Isn't it possible that certain types will also be more likely to engage in certain extreme, unhealthy behaviors than other types? The similarities are quite striking.

azelismia
06-05-2008, 05:48 PM
"psychosis is not a personality type trait. it's a mental illness."

But serial killers (as well as the guy that suddenly goes "postal") always seem to have something in common. They are usually quiet, introverted types who keep to themselves. They usually express a "wrongness" with the outside world that they have to make right. It doesn't mean that all INTJs are potentional serial killers. I think it is just worth exploring if there is a corralation. Just like certain types are naturally better/more fit for certain occupations and naturally peform them better. Isn't it possible that certain types will also be more likely to engage in certain extreme, unhealthy behaviors than other types? The similarities are quite striking.


yes, that's also a trait of psychosis. it's a symptom. it can be a symptom of Introversion or it can be a symptom of madness. they are not the same thing though.

Latte
06-05-2008, 07:16 PM
psychosis is not a personality type trait. it's a mental illness.

Don't put words in my mouth. You can reread what I wrote if you didn't get it.

azelismia
06-05-2008, 07:35 PM
Don't put words in my mouth. You can reread what I wrote if you didn't get it.


I did re-read what you wrote, apparently my mindreading hat isn't working today.

From what I understand of psychology and personality theories, mental illness is quite independant of any personality type.

Aronnax
06-05-2008, 07:52 PM
"psychosis is not a personality type trait. it's a mental illness."

But serial killers (as well as the guy that suddenly goes "postal") always seem to have something in common. They are usually quiet, introverted types who keep to themselves..

That's patently false, there are extroverted serial killers, John Wayne Gacy (To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.) and being the most famous. Most serial killers are sociopaths and a common characteristic of sociopaths is extroversion.

Jakalwarrior
06-05-2008, 07:58 PM
That's patently false, there are extroverted serial killers, John Wayne Gacy (To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.) and being the most famous. Most serial killers are sociopaths and a common characteristic of sociopaths is extroversion.

Yup, that is what I was taught in school and what ive read. It isnt by the exact same definition of extroversion that we associate with the MBTI (Jungian stuff). Have to remember that psych is a mixed up science. I think the two version of E are probably closely enough related to assume that type of E would also be an MBTI E though.
I guess it is possible to be a serial killer without being a sociopath, aspd, or psycho (whatever the PC term is this week) especially since we dont tend to give a rip about society, just doesnt seem to happen though.

azelismia
06-05-2008, 08:09 PM
Yup, that is what I was taught in school and what ive read. It isnt by the exact same definition of extroversion that we associate with the MBTI (Jungian stuff). Have to remember that psych is a mixed up science. I think the two version of E are probably closely enough related to assume that type of E would also be an MBTI E though.
I guess it is possible to be a serial killer without being a sociopath, aspd, or psycho (whatever the PC term is this week) especially since we dont tend to give a rip about society, just doesnt seem to happen though.


I think it's more correct to just say mentally instable as there are a number of conditions that can lead to murder.

HackerX
06-05-2008, 08:55 PM
Intj traits are often confused with traits of psychopath. They are not the same. Any type is as likely to be a serial killer as another. I would posit that it's more likely for an F type to snap as they deal with things by feeling rather than logic. Killing lots of people for unnamed reasons is not a rational act.

Bingo. I'll have to see if I can drag up a similar post I made about this.

It's roughly related to what would be referred to as shadow types, and what happens when a particular type goes wrong/bad.

e.g. An INTP overwhelmed stops being rational and just shuts down, attacking anything in an emotional/feeling way.

Jakalwarrior
06-06-2008, 01:37 PM
Introvert = somone who is easily overwhelmed by social interaction and doesnt require much stimulation to stay content.

Extrovert = somone who likes social interaction and requires more stimulation to stay content

Psycho, ASPD, Sociopath = can never get enough stimulation and feels dead inside. Has no problem with social interaction and sees people as tools. Often seems like a pretty nice person.

I found this an interesting read.
Read through and see if it still sounds like an INTJ ;)
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Bit of an advertisement for themselves though, for companies to use their private investigation business when checking out business partners. Sort of a "watch out for the psychos! hire us to screen for you!"

Now that I think about it, the place where I work now required me to get 3 letters of reference... I wonder if they thought I was a bit "off" . I am not impulsive, I have some empathy, I dont see people as tools. Maybe its because I had a shaved head and was a bit quiet? Ima have to ask the next person they hire if they had to do the same lol.

Uberfuhrer
06-06-2008, 02:03 PM
But the thing about serial killers is that they are usually sane and generally methodical. They are also often fantasy-oriented, so much so that they are eventually done in by sensory compulsions. This is quite consistent with INxJ type development.

It's an INxJ who is most likely to fantasize about sensory experiences (Ni perceives its inferior Se desires in the unconscious); in some people, this fantasy is the desire to murder.

azelismia
06-06-2008, 02:22 PM
But the thing about serial killers is that they are usually sane and generally methodical. They are also often fantasy-oriented, so much so that they are eventually done in by sensory compulsions. This is quite consistent with INxJ type development.

It's an INxJ who is most likely to fantasize about sensory experiences (Ni perceives its inferior Se desires in the unconscious); in some people, this fantasy is the desire to murder.


yet none of the famous examples by your own account is Inxj? I don't think it fits. Sane is used in that the person is aware of what they are doing, not that their mental patterns are rational. Killers are irrational by nature. They appear cold and calculating but actually are driven by great rage. that is not rational at all. it's entirely emotionally based and driven. that's not to say that an NT cannot be a serial killer.. but it spans all types. I don't think it appeals to NT's more than other types. infact, I'd think it woudl appeal to the SJ (revenge, and sadism) and NF (revenge and sadism) more than NT (Tactical) as there are plenty of other ways to fulfil tactical desires that are less messy and have lower consequences. violence is by it's very nature not a thinking action.

Jakalwarrior
06-06-2008, 02:59 PM
I agree, I think if an INTJ were a serial killer it would be because they had decided to be or had some sort of brain damage / tumor etc.. driving them crazy. Remember that guy that climbed the tower and sniped all those people? didnt they find a big fat tumor in his head and find out he had been telling people he was hearing voices and wanted help.

Mozzes
06-06-2008, 03:01 PM
Myers-Briggs' theory is probably a part of positive psychology - it's concerned with the development and actualization of healthy individuals. Sociopathy is abnormal psychology. They're about as far apart as you can get on the psychological spectrum so I don't really know what sort of valid parallels can be drawn.

Uberfuhrer
06-06-2008, 03:03 PM
I think it's pretty irrational to resist your desires.

sriv
06-06-2008, 03:04 PM
I think it's pretty irrational to resist your desires.

Too much desire is irrational. To be able to control it is a strength.

azelismia
06-06-2008, 03:07 PM
I think it's pretty irrational to resist your desires.


it depends on what those desires are and if they make sense. it's irrational to resist your desires if they make the most sense to follow. it's rational to resist those same desires if they are not. If someone makes cuts me off in traffic and really pisses me off, is it rational for me to follow my infantile desire to hit back at them, or to shake it off and continue driving safely?

My answer is to shake it off and continue driving safely. the consequences are too great to be justified and even if I did hit back out of a moment of aggro, what good does it do me? (or anyone) none really. The person that cut me off has their own problems and I don't need to make those problems mine.

Uberfuhrer
06-06-2008, 03:08 PM
Myers-Briggs' theory is probably a part of positive psychology - it's concerned with the development and actualization of healthy individuals. Sociopathy is abnormal psychology. They're about as far apart as you can get on the psychological spectrum so I don't really know what sort of valid parallels can be drawn.

And yet, I am inclined to believe that the principles of MBTT are universal.

Because in reality, healthy and unhealthy, normal and abnormal, are made up concepts.

Mozzes
06-06-2008, 03:12 PM
But the thing about serial killers is that they are usually sane and generally methodical. They are also often fantasy-oriented, so much so that they are eventually done in by sensory compulsions. This is quite consistent with INxJ type development.

It's an INxJ who is most likely to fantasize about sensory experiences (Ni perceives its inferior Se desires in the unconscious); in some people, this fantasy is the desire to murder.

Define sanity. Sanity typically just means the ability to bear legal responsibility for one's actions. I wouldn't take that to mean the same thing as psychological normality. Serial killers are almost always anti-social as defined by the DSM-IV and psychopaths as defined by the law.

You should check out The Mask of Sanity by Hervey Cleckley. It describes how many deranged individuals mimic normal behavior in public to fit in. Kind of scary stuff actually.

Aronnax
06-06-2008, 03:13 PM
I think it's pretty irrational to resist your desires.

Not at all.

Delayed gratification is very rational and requires you to resist desires.

Uberfuhrer
06-06-2008, 05:47 PM
it depends on what those desires are and if they make sense. it's irrational to resist your desires if they make the most sense to follow. it's rational to resist those same desires if they are not. If someone makes cuts me off in traffic and really pisses me off, is it rational for me to follow my infantile desire to hit back at them, or to shake it off and continue driving safely?

If it will make you feel better, then sure it's rational. It doesn't really make sense not to. But keep in mind, too, that the INTJ is not a type governed by pure reason.

Also, putting restraint on desires because of fear of consequences or things like that are things that INxJs do. They are generally not confident in their ability to use their inferior Se impulses effectively, so they will bottle them up and live those impulses in their mind. There comes a time when rational control of these impulses is not enough, and so they build up and become explosive.

Now the ESxP response to the environment would be the exact opposite; Se will make an immediate response to external stimuli. If an Se types gets pushed, its instinctual mode is to push back impulsively. If an INxJ gets pushed, he will take it inward and brood upon either fantasies, or if balanced by Te, come up with a logical strategy to satisfy the instinctual function of Ni.

And this is just one of many scenarios of how the INTJ psyche tends to operate. So while this strategic mindset could be used for criminal acts, it could also be used for an art project or an invention.

Just as destructive acts of violence aren't inherently rational, creative acts aren't inherently rational, either.

Violent acts in of themselves are likely caused by Se, namely because its nature is about acting in the here-and-now for constant psychological gratification. Not to say that many Se types are violent, because here-and-now stimulation is attained through ways that are not violent. The means of the here-and-now stimulation is more dependent on individual needs.

But when Se is inferior, this experiential desire exists mainly in the imagination of Ni. So when Ni operates by itself, it is concerned purely with fancy of living the imaginary Se experiences. But when Te is engaged, the Ni type begins to plan ways of attaining that psychological gratification of the inferior. The INxJ's need for immediate psychological gratification is not nearly as constant as the ESxP's, which could be the reason that so many serial killers have a "cooling off" period. But although the INxJ's need for this here-and-now gratification is not as constant, it is often more intense.

Again, this also depends on individual needs. While most INTJs will not likely see killing others as the source for psychological gratification, the basic mindset of the ones who do is pretty much the same.

Much in the same way I have illustrated the way NJs and SPs act in the killing "profession," the same will be held true to SJs and NPs.

The SJ is interested in maintaining peace and security -- the SJ mindset is for stability. And so the SJ criminals tend to be the kind who go to the extreme lengths of killing others who threaten their idea of peaceful establishment.

The NP, on the other hand, is the type who dreams up a new idea for what he perceives as peace. This idea of peace may not be shared with everyone, so in pursuit of a vision of security and a better world (for either others or themselves).

Also, the difference between the mindset of Se and Si is like the difference between freedom and security. All S-dominant types are directly dependent on the stimuli of what is real or perceived to be real. The difference being is that the SP tends to intensely live the sensation while the SJ tends to savor the sensation.

We all have these instinctual impulses for physical freedom or security (depending on which direction your S is directed), and to some degree, we are all governed by them. But when S is inferior to N, those physical desires, whatever they may be, exist as a vision which the N is desirous of.

Basically, irrational behavior happens when the type owner does not balance his dominant function with their auxiliary function. So a type may use a rational function (T or F) to justify instinctual desires of either S or N. But the T type will use a systems-based rationale, while the F will use a humanistic-based rationale.

Having said that, either the F or T type will make a rational decision. The F makes the decision in terms of humanity and compassion, while the T uses principles and logic. But when these functions are slave to an irrational function of either S or N, the rationale of either rational function becomes crude and inconsiderate.

Also, a rational function acting on itself can be very irrational. And so the rational function needs to engage a rational function so that it could be more open-minded. A classical example of this would be an ExTJ preacher using principles to moralize conventional Si norms or individual Ni visions. So they will use their Te to demean others. The ESTJ may use crude rationale to demean others who do not follow an established code. While the ENTJ may use crude rationale to demean others who do not live up to their vision.

Likewise, the ExFJ may become irrational and corrupt by using Fe with the best intentions for the good of humanity, but in the end, without their balance of their auxiliary function, they are ultimately destructive. The ExFJ is, by nature, very selfless and community oriented, so much so, that they may become self-sacrificing. For example, the ESFJ will provide others with physical needs such as food and drink. Or the ENFJ will provide others with the more abstract needs of others, such as psychological development. So while the ExFJ may mean well, they, in the end, become irrational, because they are not looking out for themselves as much.

Remember, when we describe Rational in terms of the NT temperament, it's merely just a technical term. If the NT type is irrational or unstable, then they will more likely use principles to justify instinct. (It's also noted in Please Understand Me II that the NTs tend to be vengeful in ill-conceived ways.) The Idealist is also described with a rational function of F. So an irrational NF will likely use a sense of humanity or selflessness, but when imbalanced, they will destroy themselves or their world.

Although not explicitly stated in the SP and SJ temperaments, themselves, they, too, will use rationale (either systematic or humanistic) to justify desires.

When I typed serial killers a few posts ago, I was more typing them based on their associated behavioral traits, which is not really a true indication of what people are really like. To avoid confusion, I deleted that post to avoid confusion. I wanted to emphasize not the behavior, but the inner psychological workings -- I'm basically imagining the cognitive functioning of your classical, stereotypical serial killer.

Likewise, to make the INxJ seem less evil, I'll make the ESxP evil, too: the is a thrill killer (who kills for the pure enjoyment of being in action) is quintessential of that type.

This is, of course, not to say that INTJs are serial killers or that serial killers are INTJs, but the mindset of them, along with the classical literary villains, point to an INTJ mentality. While most INTJs are probably decent human beings, it certainly is an INTJ mentality that makes for the most interesting villain.

Remember, too, that INTJs use Fi as their tertiary function, so the reasoning of Te is more feeling- or cause-based. Likewise, the INFJ uses Ti, and could use pure reason to justify Fe's humanistic bent. But even Fe's humanistic bent could be perverse.

So since even psychos are human beings, they are all bound by these cognitive processes, regardless of what is perceived as healthy or unhealthy, normal or abnormal. (And my personal opinion is that animals are bound by them, too, just at a more primitive level.)

All types do either good or evil in their own ways. Though I have stated that good and evil are made up concepts, serial killing is just one kind of perceived evil, and the psychological functioning of many of them can have influence toward a specific type. Personally, I don't have an opinion of what is good or evil, normal or abnormal, or healthy or unhealthy, beyond what I subjectively consider, and I tend to keep that to a minimum.

44sunsets
06-06-2008, 11:46 PM
I know this may sound strange but the more I learn about INTJs the more I think they are the perfect recipe to be serial killers.

INTJs would in theory make excellent serial killers, but in reality I think they wouldn't stand out with any particular prominence. You can get all sorts of serial killers with various personalities. From what I've read, most serial killers and other assorted psychopaths are probably Sensing types, purely because they make up the majority of the population.

A lot of serial or spree killers are actually quite sloppy and undisciplined, and it's just pure chance that they don't get caught sooner.