A couple of simple mental models:

• Introverts: People who protect existing boundaries
• Extraverts: People who expand existing boundaries

And:

• Introverted Processes for Extraverts: Urgently Protect Newly Expanded Boundaries by Providing Structure and Resources
• Extraverted Processes for Introverts: Capitalize on Consolidated Structure and Resources to Expand into New Boundaries

Questions:

Where are there firm boundaries and high walls in your:

(Examples)

• Work schedule
• Work politics
• Job description
• Creative life
• Planning process

…and where are there loose boundaries or completely free and open territories in the same? In which way do you share those boundaries with others, and how can you expand into them and enforce your own boundaries around them?

How do you rank those territories, in terms of interest to you? Imagine if you were building solid walls next to thousands of square miles of unclaimed territory, simply because no one has charted it yet. What process would serve you best there?

Some of this will sound aggressive, or political, or forceful, or even treacherous, to your intuition.

But the intuition in “resist-new-ideas mode” is also at high risk of overuse as an INTJ’s assessment process…again it’s about protection of what we already have.

Metaphor should assist here. What and where and who are the walls, fences, and castles? The villages? The villagers? What tools does an explorer need?

Filed in: Careers /40/ | Productivity /119/ | Goals /52/

I use the Geany editor for lots of text editing tasks, and I’ve developed a bunch of little actions within the editor that perform various functions. As per the title here, when I type the word “dicto” and press the Tab key, I get a list, like this:

cookbook
fatheads
bushings
regulator
basements
biofeedback
guessable
toileting
downpours
identifier

This is a list of words pulled at random from a dictionary file on my computer. These word lists are extremely valuable to me in creating new mental models or theories, or in refining and adding depth to existing theories or models. Here’s how I use the word list:

• I generate a list of 10-30 at a time.
• I take the list one word at a time, and ask how the concept of the word—not just the literal word—relates to the work I’m doing.
• I keep this very light—if there’s no connection that comes to mind within a few seconds, I’m on to the next word.

For example, take the word “cookbook.” It reminds me that, with regard to my latest theory (it concerns Information and Impression), I could come up with a sort of “cookbook” of applications of the theory. Even a small list of recipes could help make the theory more approachable.

Next comes “fatheads.” This is a magnificent word indeed. What makes someone a fathead? I want to look up the various meanings of this word, and see what concepts hide behind it. But for now—skip!

I jump quickly down to “identifier” (you can see I do not hesitate to waste entire sequences of words). My mind rests on that word, and it brings to mind a question. “What are some identifiers for Information? What about Impression?” These are very good questions that could help add some concision to my theory.

This is an example of the type of simple tooling (see last post) that I try to create. Something that’s easy to implement, yet which could have very high leverage.

I also keep a paper dictionary nearby for the same purpose, but this is faster when I’m already at work.

Filed in: Randomness /26/ | Ne /17/

I’d normally put this up in the links, but I think it’s worth emphasizing here. This (Ted!) talk by Ted Nelson is a very good one.

Direct Youtube link

I think it’s not too big of a stretch to say that Nelson is firmly grounded in the ENTP cognitive model. :-) We INTJs can learn a lot from this:

• Broad surveys and outside knowledge are interesting to us and can help us achieve breakthroughs (I’d call this the Ne-Te complex of functions)
• Grasping the underlying pattern, the eventual outcome, accepting it for what it is and creating a model for it (Ni-Ti) can help us engage in deeply meaningful work

Some other things to notice:

• Ted remarks on people who got stuck/lost making tools. Feynman made this same observation. There is a level at which tool-making and tool-refining becomes a low-leverage effort for a theorist personality. Too much high-leverage theory work is left on the table. What is that level for you? Personally I enjoy making cognitive tools and try to keep my actual hands-on tooling (software design, etc.) as simple as possible.
• Listen to Ted’s very formal style of speech. Contrast that with the typically informal INTJ style. There is something to be learned here.
• Listen to the way Ted folds in his personal memories of his past, stories of the past, and builds that into a model of who he is, or what kind of a guy he is. We INTJs can benefit from this, as an exercise and as a sort of bridge-building process as we communicate.
• Watch for the way Ted is very proprietary about what he has created himself, what he has named it, how it belongs to him, and that he deserves credit for it. He is calmly assertive regarding these factors, even though much of that work is still in the theoretical realm. You can also see this in his Xanadu videos on Youtube. This kind of assertion does not typically come easily for INTJs.
• Watch Ted’s periodic open and friendly facial expressions as he connects with his audience, and the way they serve as interludes or transitions that lighten the mood a bit while the focus shifts.

It’s also just a fun video to watch, IMO. His grounding in the broad-ideas-connections work of Ne is clearly biasing his life’s work, but it also motivates his life’s work, and that’s healthy and good.

Comparative personalities: Richard Feynman, Buckminster Fuller, Rupert Sheldrake, Clifford Stoll, Tony Buzan.

Filed in: ENTP /9/ | Ne /17/ | People /74/

And here it is! After weeks of nervous planning and perfection and making sure I had the right microphone-arm-positioning, I collapsed on a couch this grumpy morning and spoke into the microphone on my tablet for 15 minutes.

It ain’t pretty, but it’s a start.

Direct MP3 Download | Archive.org Apocalyptic Contingency Storage Resource Container Reference Link

Listen along as I sort out my problems and discuss Jungian cognitive functions like extraverted thinking (Te) and introverted feeling (Fi) in concert with INTJ psychology.

Topics:

• Personality type patterns in dreams
• Using information from dreams to recover from a difficult or traumatic dream
• Being ourselves creates problems!
• Paying attention to sensation issues during difficult times
• Giving attention to “grump level” or “anxiety level” or “extraversion level” in order to inform immediate decision-making
• Communicating with extraverted feeling (Fe)-preferring types.
• Planning a recovery from a difficult experience
• Basing your plans on your INTJ values and interests to assist recovery

I still haven’t caught up on the sleep I lost (listen to the podcast for context), so, true to form, my day continues to steamroll along in a concerningly extraverted manner. Ah well. But the planning helped for real. I may not feel rested, but I certainly feel like I’ve made terrific progress today.

(Don’t) let me know what you think! I’ll try to include fewer bumps and scratches next time. I mean, it sounds like I’ve got my finger right up my tablet’s microphone hole…seriously what’s up with that? Oh, and my wife even tries to call me while I’m recording. And then sends me a Facebook message. LOL. But it was such a great message, right? Anyway, hope you enjoy the podcast. :-)

Bonus Music Link — this video CREEPED out my kids. lol

Filed in: Podcast /5/ | Therapeutic Practice /144/ | Relationships /78/ | Fe /20/ | Energy /120/

When I first learned about memory techniques, I was in university, and as usual, had picked up a self-help book at the bookstore out of curiosity. This book was like a digest of little tools for improving one’s memory. Not bad! I like digest-type books, and a super-memory was something I definitely didn’t have. I had criticized myself more than once for forgetting things. Why? Because it effectively makes you look really clueless and dumb, is why. Especially if you’re around people who remember day-to-day things pretty well!

The more I thought about it, the better the book sounded. What about just memorizing all of my school materials, instead of learning them? After all, that’s what some of my courses seemed to demand. In fact, I wasn’t fully ready to admit that the “learning environment” was so terrifically rote in nature, but it was true. The university as a place of learning was more like a “place of memorization,” in many ways. And I could certainly withdraw from the game, but why not give it a shot, play the game on its own terms! Poof, a course memorized! Grades up, more time for relaxation and fun!

My first memorizer-mission came along very soon thereafter. I had to take a pre-test for one of my film theory courses, and was given a thick study packet and a week to prepare.

The way it worked was, if you didn’t score highly enough on the pre-test, you were not allowed to take the course. But if you did score high enough on the pre-test, you could skip the mid-term exam! Kind of silly at a high level (I mean, it’s this head-in-the-clouds theory course after all), but not a bad deal at a very low here’s-a-carrot level. And what a perfect way to test out my new memory skills!

I read over my new memory book and found the technique that I thought would work. Some techniques require memorization up-front just to learn the technique; those weren’t so great for me. But the techniques that got right into visualization seemed to work really well. The book also advised the use of sensory immersion, like imagining not only the tomatoes and cottage cheese that you needed to buy at the store, but that you were rubbing them all over your body and smelling your skin afterwards, or imagining that they were coming out of the grocer’s nose, first the cottage cheese, and then he screamed in pain as the tomatoes came out too, or whatever. (I mean: It really works, and if you just read that and tried to experience it, you, too, will probably always remember the first two grocery items I ever memorized.)

I sat down to prepare for the test, working my way through the packet. In my mind, I constructed a sort of amusement park ride, the kind where you sit in a cart on the rails, and it takes you through various rooms. Each room had something to do with film theory or theorists. (Levi-strauss was an easy room, very denim, as I recall). It was fun, easy to remember, and I headed into the test on a cold winter morning feeling relatively confident.

As it turned out, I had over-over-prepared. I had all but memorized the entire course. I took the pre-test and scored over 100%, nailing all of the extra credit essay answers by simple regurgitation. Not only would I not have to take the mid-term exam, but I would never struggle to answer a single question in the class.

When I got my test back, word of this exceptional score spread fast, and several of the other students looked at me like I was some kind of an alien from an advanced civilization. We had groaned about the class together, but now it was confirmed—my groaning had clearly been fake, and I deserved some ribbing.

And that was it! My freakish memory gift had arrived. Poof! Level-up.

But there were some consequences.

The downside: It’s still not a core gift. And what’s a core gift?

After that experience, I wanted to memorize everything. But the annoying part was, I still forgot lots of things. And it feels even worse to forget things after you have what you think is a powerful memory.

I forgot my course schedule, I forgot names, I forgot my homework, I forgot about my date with the friends from work and double-booked myself—I was still very much that awful, no-good, forgetful person. And instead of thinking, “OK, so this is not just a blanket fix-all gift,” I made a beginner INTJ’s mistake. I decided: “I need to memorize more.” After all, there were methods galore! The solution for my entire forgetful life was soon to come.

Well, it didn’t work.

As it turns out, improving the INTJ memory is an area that costs us extra CPU cycles. A lot of them. We INTJs typically invent systems that protect us from memory problems, rather than trying to fix ourselves and our poor memory. But we know that systems will never be a 100% solution (this is definitely true), so eventually all of us will have a go at fixing ourselves, in one way or another. And once we really swing hard toward areas like memorization, get ready: Exhaustion kicks in fast.

On top of that, there’s another dimension to it: No amount of memorization will ever seem like “enough.” Combine these two dimensions and you get a complete disaster in the making, if you’re not careful.

I believe my focus on “memorizing all the things” was one of the primary contributors to my complete breakdown as a senior at university. My expectations of myself were too high, and I was moving very quickly out of the territory of INTJ gifts, without even knowing that “INTJ gifts” were a thing that I had. I wore myself out, and when I no longer had legs beneath me, I fell flat. I couldn’t get out of bed in the morning, I couldn’t focus on my courses, and I wasn’t interested in anything at all.

Memory techniques helped me memorize things, sure. But I had no sense of priority, and suddenly gave all of my energy over to the most boring part of my university experience, without even considering what that would do to my engagement and interest levels, and even my sense of identity.

This is what it feels like to over-use a non-core gift. It is not meant for the duration. It’s not meant to support your life in significant ways. Your identity does not, and probably should not, depend on it. You may put some weight on its structure here, but not over there, because you will probably fall right through.

Lessons learned

I gave up on memory for many years after this. I didn’t really know how to set boundaries around it. It was hard, and even annoying to think about, and I wasn’t sure where my interest in it would stop. Would I somehow become a total weirdo who memorized everything? And did I really want that? I wasn’t sure. I just didn’t like thinking about it.

While studying the cognitive functions, I learned that Si, or introverted sensing, is linked to memory and recall. In fact, personality theorist Linda Berens formally refers to Si as “Recall” in her cognitive process model. For us INTJs, Si is the very last process in the hierarchy: Number 8. Difficult to use, always presenting a speed bump, getting in the way, creating problems.

I kept this in mind and once again confirmed it as I studied for the amateur radio exams, attempting to memorize as best I could, all the way through three exam pools of over 1000 questions total. I gradually pushed that memory to the point where I was completely undercutting myself, even thinking “I have no interest in living anymore” as I figured out ways to memorize circuit diagrams and remember a variety of strings of numbers, but understanding, “OK, the test is just 2 days away…I’m willing to endure this level of exhaustion for just a little bit longer.” This is a long way from where I was in university—understanding the why this time around and gaining the ability to self-monitor in the context of that experience really helped me maintain a level of effort even in maximal discomfort.

Like the extreme marathon runners say, it really has a lot to do with race management. I definitely do not encourage pushing your memory skills to the “OK, I am about to give up on life” exhaustion point, but I’ve done it several times now and I’m glad I recognize the way it feels and manifests.

Coming back down to earth after the bigger feats, there is still that fun and exciting aspect. Recall for INTJs is really fun and interesting when it is approached and “played with” as a kind of hobby toy. Low expectations, used in short bursts. I personally find that to be a reliable model for working on, and with, recall.

So this last weekend, I memorized pi to 75 digits. I knew the 3.14159 part, and from those five digits I took it up to first 20, then to 35, and then finally up to 75 digits by 11 p.m. on Sunday night. It’s very subjective and visual; for example the number ‘26’ somehow represents my dad’s aunt Connie, and I can’t figure out why. It all plays out in my head like a movie. But I have learned to accept what my intuition feeds me. In “41971” I saw a WWI-era soviet tank in a winter environment, surrounded by tall, golden grass. In “69399,” a sort of yin-yang (as you might expect from the 69 pairing!) but with a strange organic lumpiness to it, with the colors blue, green, and purple combined in a way that I could never forget. Intuition is so fascinating.

Memorizing to 100 won’t be enough—I’ve already dreamed about 1500 digits, in fact—but it’s a next step. For play.

And still, I’m terrible at remembering things. Maybe I’ve already written this blog post before? I don’t even know, and I can’t be bothered to check at the moment—but I’m OK with that.

Filed in: Si /19/ | Memorization /5/ | Anxiety /32/

Figuratively and somewhat literally. Hm! This is the Casio FX-CG50 calculator, and maybe it’s a tad superficial, but I am smitten by this feature. Haha. Anyway Te is tellurium, which is “mildly toxic and brittle,” meaning that the element represented by Te is about what you’d expect of someone who over-uses the cognitive function known as Te.

Te (extraverted thinking) is associated with brittleness because it’s broad, rather than deep, casting a wide net for existing solutions, rather than building up a detailed, fits-like-a-glove solution, or engaging in elegant solution-design in the way that Ti, or introverted thinking, does.

Now let’s see…how would titanium represent solution-design thinking (Ti)…hmmm…

I am pursued by an interest in calculators and calculation, and I really enjoy exploring not only the interest itself, but its meaning in my life. I do get very good results from applying things like spreadsheets and other calculations to the various problems I encounter. pats subconscious mind on the head.

Years ago, I had no idea about extraverted thinking, and I didn’t know that calculation could be a natural gift for a person like me. I had no idea that I could really leverage it if I learned it well. At that time in my life I was really tilting hard toward the ESFP mentality: “Be cool, have fun, be artistic and draw on your emotions, make a huge impact above all else.” During that period I associated this kind of calculation-interest with 1) OCD, 2) nerdiness, and 3) boredom in math class. Aaaand that kind of thinking is pretty much one of the contributors to major INTJ life problems. Glad I know about it now! It’s never too late to start.

By the way I’m kind of a sucker for things made by Casio. Yesterday I was drooling over all the latest gear, from Casio electronic dictionaries to the Lesson Pod to the Millenium Falc…err I mean Trackformer Dance Gear. There’s no end to the cuteness.

Filed in: Te /36/ | Interests /111/

I’m going to start this post by communicating the simplest model for Fi, or “introverted feeling,” that exists and still applies here.

Introverted feeling is a cognitive function concerned with the question of “what feels good or interesting to me?”

That’s it. There are additional dimensions to Fi, but that’s a really solid and helpful one.

In my observations, INTJs try to use Fi with too much (on average) of a far-ranging approach. “What sounds like a good job for the rest of my working life?” Is an example. There are two problems there: 1) Your interests, needs, and goals not only can change, but will change, and 2) It allows you to put aside the question of “but wait, there are all of these other things that I like.”

Prioritization “wins” too easily for INTJs, and we tend to discard some really interesting and great things while in that mindset. I’ve seen that problem break people over and over.

“What sounds like a good job for the foreseeable future?” is even a risky question. Your INTJ feelings and values are incredibly nuanced and flexible. Nailing those down “once every so-many years” is not going to be enough, in most cases.

Scope really matters when we try to solve problems. During times of stress, you might find that a shorter-term use of Fi is really helpful.

When I detect or foresee a lot of stress in my daily schedule, one of the first things I do is ask myself: “Aside from all the difficult things on my to-do list, what sounds fun today? What sounds interesting? Can I do anything fun while I do those difficult things? Can I intentionally add fun things to my to-do list, and even start with those items?”

Some examples:

• Yesterday, while getting my three kids ready for bed, which is an activity that’s full of little sensory tasks like “blow dry Lucy’s hair,” I added in some randomly fun sensory stuff, like listening to favorite songs. (When watching my kids, upbeat music at low volume in headphones often really helps me out)
• Today, while finishing up a big project (lots of little loose ends), I watched an old BBC documentary called Being Japanese. This documentary, incidentally, contains one of the best love letters ever, read aloud at one of the most painfully vulnerable times ever, and if you have a Fe-Si or a Si-Fe personality in your life (ESFJ, ISFJ), or another personality type with similar values (even INTP, ENTP, etc.) you should take notes on the contents of that letter (37:10). And also, poor Hiroaki! Wow, I felt for that guy.
• Recently while attending and running a huge meeting and feeling over-extraverted, I made a lot of new notes about theories and mental models I’ve been kicking around. I did this consciously, knowing it would help, which is different from “randomly letting my mind get carried away.” Carving out this time here and there during the meeting made me a much happier meeting attendee and organizer.

On other days I’ve invented role-playing games, arranged my office in a better way, meditated over my future, jumped on a trampoline, talked to people in distant locales via ham radio—all things that align with my values and interests.

Under severe stress, I’ll warn you: You’ll probably have to force that stuff into your day, but it will work and you’ll feel better.

Over time, some of those interests and little experiences I listed above will have a profound effect on my future. I love that open-horizon aspect! They may put me in touch with other people who change my life, or perhaps they’ll give me the mental clarity to make difficult decisions. Or maybe they’ll inform new directions in my work and work projects. You never know.

[These Fi-related items are also variously related to other cognitive functions—it’s a bit like trying to pull pumpkin seeds out of a pumpkin. You know what the individual seed is, and where it is, but it’s connected to other stuff too. So this is a very simple model for Fi, but I hope that aspect makes it easier to understand how Fi works.]

So next time you’re doing one of those personal exercises where you consider your “life values,” try going smaller in scope, instead of broader. Ask yourself what sounds interesting right now. What would be fun? Don’t feel guilty if you sit down to plan your entire life out and instead, you play your favorite video game again, or whatever it is. You may find that you actually get better big-picture, long-term results that way. Sometimes living life a day at a time for some period is really healthy and even the best possible option.

Filed in: Interests /111/ | Therapeutic Practice /144/ | Energy /120/ | Anxiety /32/ | Depression /12/ | Fi /35/ | Productivity /119/

Lately I’ve had an influx of INTJs here. You guys are awesome. Here is some recent feedback:

• I advised one of you to procrastinate your project until the last minute possible, and you let me know that this approach worked great. (I’m starting with the craziest piece of advice here, but sometimes crazy advice is good advice)
• I told another one of you that, like many INTJs, your activities and attitudes indicate that you are super competitive. This competitive drive will push you so far toward a sort of cold independence that you are likely to find yourself in an uncontrollably dependent situation as a result, longing for intimate companionship. You looked back at your past experience and said “holy ****, you’re right.” (This was fun feedback for me :-)) In the ensuing conversation we discussed what that meant and some possible next steps.
• Another one of you INTJs wanted my feedback about your medication. And: I’m not a doctor. You know that. But I gave you some new tools with which you can evaluate your medicating-system, as you work with your actual doctor. Tools for measurement, tools for analysis. You told me this really helped you. (The same approach helped me too; I’m no longer on medication for anxiety or depression, having been pronounced cured years ago)

I’m concerned about the rest of you, and I want to make sure you get the best help possible. The world does not always respond well to INTJs who need help. We are usually looking for information and we get frustrated when we get only empathy in return, or only someone else’s observational analysis of our thoughts. Or we are invited to get emotional, which is an extremely low-leverage tool for an INTJ.

So today, let me offer information about a few things that are going to hurt your chances of making progress. Stuff you can avoid, because INTJs are good avoiders.

And when you get a chance, flip back through some of my older posts. I often spend more time editing and updating old posts than I do adding new posts.

Intro to Anti-patterns

As an INTJ, I find that I sometimes learn more quickly from “don’t do this” messages than I do from “definitely do this” messages. In the tech world, there are lots of anti-patterns articles, and I sometimes find these really helpful.

(By the way: The corresponding risk in taking anti-patterns too seriously is that they become an excuse to avoid & shy away from new practices or new areas of work. So let’s use these avoiding-strategies to inform our actively-not-avoiding-life strategies; do we have a deal?)

Anyway, here are a few anti-patterns for you.

Anti-pattern 1: Closing yourself off to new experiences

For intuitive introverts, closing ourselves off to new experiences is really dangerous because it’s so darn easy. It’s easy to think rather than do, rather than think-and-do. A traditional weak point of the INTJ is actually experiencing things, as opposed to intuiting about them inside the INTJ mind. The more deftly you can balance the two (experiencing and intuiting), the more lucky you’ll be in life, the better your plans will work out, and the more patient other people will be with your criticisms.

Please don’t misinterpret me though: Intuition is still huge for INTJs. You should probably be using it more, and in better form, than you do currently. It’s a question of balance.

As an example, let’s say you’re in a corporate training meeting, and a trainer invites you to do some specific thing. As an INTJ, there’s a good chance your psychology will want to respond with, “well, I can see that thing really helping me out, but I can also see that it might be a waste of time because I’ll get a result like it did the last time I tried something similar”. It’s important to allow yourself to hold onto that thought, save it for later, and test out the suggestion in real life, rather than stopping because your intuition tells you to. If things don’t go well, let the trainer know! Get more feedback. But at least try it—again and again, if needed.

Your INTJ intuition is only as wise and well-developed as your past experience. So it’s really risky to rely on our intuition alone, unless you have literally experienced everything and everyone there is to experience. You simply don’t, and can’t, know it all. You can view this through the lens of the cognitive functions: Ni (introverted intuition) is concerned with visualizing outcomes beforehand, while Se (extraverted sensing) is concerned with actually experiencing the thing, diving in. These two functions are opposites, and each has its strengths in a given situation. In order to get the best from your problem-solving abilities, be sure to use them both, or make sure you’re not using one to the exclusion of the other. Plus, when you experience things through Se, your intuition grows in maturity and strength.

When you criticize something after you’ve experienced it, people will take your feedback more seriously. Also, there are many, many people of different personality types who are naturally biased to think that the INTJ’s tendency to foretell is kind of ridiculous and unnecessary. If you can’t take flexible position and tone down your intuitive language for them, they may decide they don’t like you. It would suck if that person could have been a good friend, or a key ally. One personality type, the ESTJ, is a really good example of this. INTJs can usually work pretty well with ESTJs, but we can also exert tremendously uncomfortable pressure on them (unknowingly) when we speak from our intuition to tell them how we see things turning out. Ni is a common ESTJ blind spot, and if they don’t know that, they may do just about anything to shut you out of their project or work space.

You never know exactly what’s going to happen, because each situation really is different, is a common way people of other types think about this stuff. And they’ve got a good point! Being aware that these people exist can help you be more successful in working with them. Even saying something like “I have some big hesitations, but let’s see what we can learn as we try it out” can help your workmates or family members protect their own vulnerable psychologies while you communicate that you are already receiving some potentially-helpful, if potentially negative, insights. Taking our own insights too seriously can cause unneeded trouble for INTJs, just like it can for any personality type.

Anti-pattern 2: Relying on other people’s ideas or theories too much

Relying on others’ invented ideas is a really funny kind of blind spot for INTJs. I hope to offer some training on inventing for INTJs soon. But really, if you read this far, you’re probably an incredibly creative person. And you’re also probably not inventing enough of your own theories. Or maybe you haven’t yet learned how to do that (there’s a method, and it works well).

Some of those theories can be really mundane, like “what’s a nighttime routine that would help me?” Other theories will shake the world, I guarantee it. Don’t miss out on those! You have a chance as long as you’re breathing, because these are INTJ gifts, they’re already built-in.

Usually when INTJs get into creative mode, they make this “one common mistake” (I smile here because I feel like I’m writing ad copy, but really this is sincere): They make art, instead of making new self-technology.

Both of these are creative undertakings. So do both. Art is awesome and I love to make art myself. But I have learned that art can also be an avoidance tool, or it can keep us from developing other creative extensions, things that help us really feel like we’re on top of the world.

When you make art as an INTJ, do you just copy others’ work all the time? No way! You want to make your own thing. Maybe you do a bit of copying here and there, or use it as inspiration. But the goal is to create your own stuff.

The same goes with your work processes, your life strategies: If you can learn to make them your own, you’ll move faster and more effectively. You’ll realize your favorite self-help books are no longer as effective because you’ve moved beyond that stage and your own technology is superior, because it was designed by you, to fit you.

Take a look at How to Think Better as an INTJ. It’s very much related.

(One way I can tell an INTJ spends a lot of concern on others’ ideas: They recommend lots of books to me. I love it, but I want to see it balanced with another set of personal tools.)

As an idea- and theory-giver myself, I try to use that energy to help INTJs become more independent.

Anti-pattern 3: Soliciting too much feedback from people whose psychology is far different from your own

I hate it when I hear about this: An INTJ goes to someone of another personality type, and that person tells the INTJ “in order to be happy, you need to…”

Guess what the answer is?

“…be like me.”

They don’t actually say those words to the INTJ, but that’s the substance of their message. Maybe an ENFJ tells you to do things that an ENFJ is good at, or an ESFP tells you the solution is more badminton, or something. It happens lots. (There’s no reason to be upset with those individuals about this, it’s just a thing that happens to all of us)

Sadly, the world is full of people who have pushed themselves to be like just about every other type except their own. I know many INTJs who fall into this category.

Some of this is healthy: We seek balance. But some of us shoot way beyond the mark, and instead of balance we emerge with an incredible debt of stress and stressors. Pushing yourself to be an extravert in some context can leave you with one heck of a big introversion problem on your hands, even if you are an INTJ.

So: When you solicit feedback, see if you can use a mental model (like a personality type model) to help you measure and lend that feedback a proper amount of gravity, or no gravity at all. I find most of the personality type models, from MBTI to the Enneagram to Socionics to Temperament and Interaction Styles to DISC, are very helpful with this.

Conclusion

That’s all for now. Get in touch if you want to talk more! The customized advice is always better, but I hope this article has been helpful.

Filed in: Energy /120/ | Goals /52/ | Relationships /78/ | Productivity /119/ | Openness /49/

Buckminster Fuller’s works have always been a favorite of mine. Fuller coined the term “livingry,” when describing a high-leverage method “to make the world work for 100% of humanity, in the shortest possible time, through spontaneous cooperation without ecological offense or disadvantage of anyone.”

“This new family of artifacts leading to such comprehensive human success I identified as livingry in contradistinction to politics’ weaponry. I called it technologically reforming the environment instead of trying politically to reform the people.”

—Buckminster Fuller, Grunch of Giants

Personality type, and especially Jung’s cognitive functions, give us a much wider lens on the concept of “technology” than the common folk definition—much of which even today echoes the old idea of the useful arts. Technology, when analyzed and zoomed in upon, includes a wide range of even intangible products that may never see a physical manifestation. Foucault’s Technologies of the Self is one example of a lens on that portion of technology. Models like Foucault’s are helping humans construct a more nuanced (read: educated) view of what “technology” actually means.

In what might be called a “unified” cognitive function model, (thanks to Richard Owen for the wording advisement there) all humans continually gain leverage by the creation of technology. The seeds and keys to design are built into all of us. Of course, there are multiple differentiating angles on this, including:

• The type of technological leverage that benefits a given individual (of a given personality type, for example)
• Duration of leverage for that individual, or for the group
• Other questions of time: Periodicity, etc.
• Depth of meta-technological perception: Do I know I’m creating technology?
• Depth of refinement of a given technology
• Level of engagement with technology as a sought outcome vs. other aspects of humanity, given an individual or group’s needs or education level

We humans can be described as fractals of information metabolism and each of us, just like the various fractal orientations and perturbations of a given fractal set, seem to contain certain prominent fractal features that can be described as “the portion of our lives representing energy spent on the development of technology.”

At a high level, like any other portion of the fractal, this technological portion of the human fractal is concerned with the interplay of combinations of personal and social judgment (Fi, Fe, Ti, Te) with combinations of personal and shared or socially-bonded perception functions (Si, Se, Ni, Ne). But still, this technology-designing feature of our fractal existence has a form to it. That form is typically shaped by Ti in large part, but zoom in or out a bit and all of the other functions are seen operating at lower or higher frequencies with a different amplitude.

The more refined a technology becomes, the more it adapts from e.g. “mostly Se leading to Ti as I figure out a way to catch this greased pig” to a more balanced product of the refining process to which other functions contribute. It gains inputs and outputs for all of the functions, so to speak, or it finds its way into a chain of technologies with other levels of connection to specific human systems. If you have to catch a greased pig every day, perhaps you begin to develop a more nuanced method that could be said to leverage functions like Fi and Ni in order to build a more sustainable approach.

A good human technology, or we might say “good livingry” can withstand this kind of filling-out. The technology curve is at one level an “observation,” but at another level it’s a template, or a “suggestion”: Nurture human technology such that even “laggards” (what a poor word to use) find themselves adopting it, even if it was controversial in the past. Personality theories of relation and information metabolism, like Socionics and spin-off Cognietrics provide leverage which could possibly be adapted toward the enhancement of information flow and adoption regarding new technology. For example, Buckminster Fuller had a bit of a novelty problem—could a knowledge of the refinement and winnowing-down aspect of a function like Ni have helped him, or helped others around him to make more educated decisions that would allow for “primed adoption” of his new technologies?

When we compare the concept of technology to the concept of human nature (which, for the most part is stubborn and only seems to change over time given applications of technology), and add aspects of personality technology, I think that we, in a mindset similar to that of Buckminster Fuller, will reasonably conclude that:

- Technology is a key driver for human evolution
- It’s a built-in feature of the human system—“all are susceptible to its charms”
- Technology doesn’t need to be a physical product, or even software. Technology can even be a simple, mentally-held framework
- It becomes more effective the easier it is for humans of different backgrounds to adopt
- And for heaven’s sake, it doesn’t naturally result in Skynet except in some balanced-against-another-amazingly-good-technology form, as any human product would

Bringing this back to INTJs: As a group, we get a lot of positive, motivating energy from the development of technology. Pursuing technology with a nuanced, analytical view that allows for adaptation as a crucial aspect of adoption (fitting our product to humanity instead of forcing it), perhaps we really can help change the world.

Filed in: Intuition /62/ | Ne /17/ | Energy /120/ | ENTP /9/ | Technology /41/ | Essays /52/

My coaching website is structured behind the scenes to become a monster of links and resources and resources with links over time, but for now I’m squeezing in little updates here and there when I can. Here are some recent additions, for those who are considering coaching:

• What to Expect from Coaching
• Examples of Coaching Outcomes

If you find my blog useful, you’ll really, really benefit from the experience of live coaching. Or so I’m told.

Plus, the summer months are a fantastic time to work on yourself, maybe get that body you always wanted through some guided focus on your INTJ strengths. (I started writing that as a joke, but it actually worked for me …hmm.)

Filed in: Coaching /27/