fighting with myself.

[intertribal]

I take the Jung personality test every six months or so, and I haven't changed since high school. I do not consciously keep trying to get this result.  I didn't think I even liked certainty.  Kiersey's profile is actually my favorite description, probably because it's by Kiersey instead of some schmuck in psychology school:

INTJs are the most self-confident of all types, having "self-power" awareness. Found in about 1 percent of the general population, the INTJs live in an introspective reality, focusing on possibilities, using thinking in the form of empirical logic, and preferring that events and people serve some positive use. Decisions come naturally to INTJs' once a decision is made, INTJs are at rest. INTJs look to the future rather than the past, and a word which captures the essence of INTJs is builder-a builder of systems and the applier of theoretical models.

To INTJs authority based on position, rank, title, or publication has absolutely no force. This type is not likely to succumb to the magic of slogans, watchwords, or shibboleths. If an idea or position makes sense to an INTJ, it will be adopted, if it doesn't, it won't, regardless of who took the position or generated the idea. As with the INTP, authority per se does not impress the INTJ.

INTJs do, however, tend to conform to rules if they are useful, not because they believe in them, or because they make sense, but because of their unique view of reality. They are the supreme pragmatists, who see reality as something which is quite arbitrary and made up. Thus it can be used as a tool-or ignored. Reality is quite malleable and can be changed, conquered, or brought to heel. Reality is a crucible for the refining of ideas, and in this sense, INTJs are the most theoretical of all the types. Where an ESTP sees ideas as the pawn of reality, an INTJ sees reality as the pawn of ideas: No idea is too far-fetched to be entertained. INTJs are natural brainstormers, always open to new concepts and, in fact, aggressively seeking them.

INTJs manipulate the world of theory as if on a gigantic chess board, always seeking strategies and tactics that have high payoff. In their penchant for logic, the INTJs resemble the INTPs. The logic of an INTJ, however, is not confined to the expressible logical. Unlike INTPs, INTJs need only to have a vague, intuitive impression of the unexpressed logic of a system to continue surely on their way. Things need only seem logical; this is entirely sufficient. Moreover, they always have a keen eye for the consequence of the application of new ideas or positions. They can be quite ruthless in the implementation of systems, seldom counting personal cost in terms of time and energy. Theories which cannot be made to work are quickly discarded by the INTJs.

To understand INTJs, their way of dealing with ideas should be observed closely. Their conscious thought is extraverted and empirical. Hence, they are better at generalizing, classifying, summarizing, adducing evidence, proving, and demonstrating than are the INTPs. The INTJs are somewhat less at home with pure reason, that is, systemic logic, where principles are explicit. In this respect they resemble the ENTJs. The INTJs, rather than using deductive logic, use their intuition to grasp coherence.

However, I do not appreciate having as one of my suggested careers "dictator" - referring, I guess, to other INTJs: Caesar, Hannibal (both the original and Lecter), Peter the Great, Donald Rumsfeld, Colin Powell, JFK, Woodrow Wilson.  I take heart in someone's decision that Batman is an INTJ, as well as Clarice Starling and Gandalf, although I'm not sure about Mr. Darcy's inclusion, but then again, Jane Austen is an INTJ.  Maybe he's really an author-insert.  Nietzsche - cool.  Ayn Rand - not so much.  And so on.  Unsurprisingly, women get more flak for showing their INTJ tendencies than men (Q: Are female INTJs less feminine than women of other temperaments?  A: Female INTJs are just as feminine as they want to be.  They can be just as sweet and sexy as the next women if they feel like.  They are just opinionated and don't put up with stupidity for long.), which may reflect the distribution of gender in my list.

INTJ - "Mastermind". Introverted intellectual with a preference for finding certainty. A builder of systems and the applier of theoretical models. 2.1% of total population.

Take Free Jung Personality Test
personality tests by similarminds.com

Although the Enneagram results are sort of new to me.  Apparently most INTJs test as a Type 5, not 3.  I've always suspected that my locus of control is external rather than internal, which according to psychology texts is very bad.  Makes you think you're not in control of your own life, makes you more prone to depression, makes you fatalistic, makes you - if you were a dog in a lab - let yourself be electrocuted despite the open door (escape) because you don't believe that the door is really open. 

Main type	Variant

Take Free Enneagram Personality Test
personality tests by similarminds.com

But wait, according to being an INTJ, I should be internally, rather than externally, motivated.  The Scientist, it says.  But I am not a Scientist, and God is the ultimate INTJ. 

I do appreciate, however, some of Amanda Doerr's advice for "dealing with INTJs":
1.  Be willing to back up your statements with facts - or at least some pretty sound reasoning.
2.  Don't expect them to respect you or your viewpoints just because you say so.
3.  Be willing to concede when you are wrong.
4.  Try not to be repetitive.  It annoys them.
5.  Do not feed them a line of bull.
6.  Expect debate.
7.  Do not mistake the strength of your conviction with the strength of your argument.
8.  Do not be surprised at sarcasm.
9.  Remember that INTJs believe in workable solutions.
10.  Do not expect INTJs to actually care about how you view them.  They already know that they are arrogant bastards with a morbid sense of humor.  Telling them the obvious accomplishes nothing.

Comments

[royinpink.livejournal.com]

I think half of that (numbers 1, 2, 3, 4, 7) is just good advice in general, for anyone.

[royinpink.livejournal.com]

but i'm sure that shows my bias...

[royinpink.livejournal.com]

as to the "dictator" thing, all of these are horribly biased, depending somewhat on the website...i think the other one doesn't suggest dictator. but i thought its careers (for me) were boring. i liked some other websites, though most are vague and insist that i like "theory" and "systems"