Convergent thinking begins with a diversity of ideas or facts and moves toward an answer, solution, or integration. Convergent thinkers often seek understanding by developing explanatory theories or syntheses. Grand unifying theories or “theories of everything” are attractive to these types.
Divergent thinkers proceed in the opposite direction. These types are less interested in rationally-articulated truth than creating something of artistic, aesthetic, or emotional interest. In other words, they prefer the beautiful to the true, being moved rather than being correct. Divergent thinkers celebrate diversity and feel little need to reduce it, as doing so may detract from the beauty and uniqueness of the individual.
Another type of thinking is analytical thinking. Analysis involves breaking something down into its constituent parts in order to understand those parts, how they interact, and how they might influence the behavior of the whole. This type of thinking shares one important commonality with convergent/synthetic thinking, namely, they both work with information that is already present. Synthetic thinkers seek to integrate existing information while analytical thinkers seek to break it down. Though synthetic thinking involves an element of creativity in imagining possible relationships between things, both of these types differ significantly from divergent thinking, which focuses on the creation of new ideas. As such, divergent thinkers envision what could be, rather than manipulating what is.
Nietzsche’s writings serve as a worthy example of an individual experiencing tension between convergent and divergent thinking. While his overall style is creative, non-formulaic, and aphoristic, some of his writings assume a more metaphysical or theoretical bent. One might suggest that Nietzsche possessed an strong preference for intuition, perhaps even a slight feeling preference, which was counterbalanced by his masculine tendencies toward convergent thinking and what he calls “the will to power.”
For more on these issues, you might consider the following posts:
Type Profiles: INTJ INFP INTP INFJ
Why INTPs and INFPs Seek, But Struggle to Find, Convergent Truth
Jon,
This is as good a place as any to “meander.” Now that you’ve expressed more of your own experiences, I can definitely see why you might feel ambivalent with regard to your type. Gender issues are difficult to exclude from any T-F discussion, complicating the issue for F-leaning males or T-leaning females. Most males, even feeling types, will not surpass female Fs when it comes to empathy. I’m sure if you keep exploring the type forums, different profiles, etc, you type designation will become clearer. Comparing your interests with those of the various types can also be useful. I also think that highly developed, healthy INTPs will be more attuned to their feeling side and thereby identify more strongly with INFPs. From what you’ve written, I wouldn’t be at all surprised if you are an INFP. Thanks for your thoughtful comments. -A.J.
Well…actually I’m kind of uncertain of my type right now, which is kind of confirmed by your “they are not certain that what is being percieved is actually there”. That’s very much me…I actually used to amaze my psychologist with how emotionally aware I was. Still, as I mentioned, I don’t think I have the typical “F empathy” (at least not since I was a child), which is why I’m leaning INTP.
Yeah, I agree…I think there is definately aspirational stuff going on. I have noticed I have always been attracted to ENFJ’s…which makes sense…Fe just gives off this wonderful aura I can never help but find myself drawn to. I find nothing more beautiful than the idea of self-sacrifice, and nothing more tragic than the destruction of a friendship.
And it’s funny that you mention INTP’s getting along well with INFJ’s…believe it or not, I have actually gotten along *better* with you guys! I always thought we had a lot more in common. (Or maybe it’s the INFP’s who don’t like INTP’s and the INTP’s just don’t notice, lol!)
And don’t sweat the generalizing…I mean I have a particularly strong dislike of stereotypes but honestly, how do you talk about types at all if you don’t generalize? Type itself *is* a generalization! Pidgeonholing and prejudice are the only real sins when it comes to MBTI, in my opinion…
Jon, Thanks for your comments. It can be quite difficult to decide between INFP and INTP. I think many INTPs mistype as INFPs because they are deeply interested in self-discovery, identity-seeking, and living authentically, traits which Keirsey attributes to NF types. As you say, INTPs can be quite emotionally aware, especially those who have long practiced attending to shifts in their inner states. I wish you well as you continue to work out your type. A.J.
Thanks, AJ. I have never been a fan of Keirsey’s descriptions of NT’s: they seem to be quite Vulcan-like and biased towards NTJ’s (odd, because he claims to be an INTP himself). I seek knowledge, yes, but also self-knowedge, including knowedge of emotions. As the great INTP Baruch Spinoza once said, “the greatest pride, or the greatest despondency, is the greatest ignorance of one’s self.” I *did* always identify with the INFP’s “feeling for the sake of feeling” tendency…I am a self-professed romantic and sentimentalist, and I really don’t care what anyone else thinks. But I don’t really indentify with their strongly felt value systems. Yes, there are causes I believe in and will stand up for; I have been passionate about the environment, for instance, since before I learned to tie my shoes. But they don’t occupy my mind as much as the quest for knowledge, aesthetic beauty, and peace.
“But INTPs don’t have the same intensely empathetic quality. The frustration I had with INTPs is that most of them seemed blind to psychological subtext. INFPs, on the other hand, can be paranoid at times when it comes to psychological subtext.”
I agree that few INTPs have the same empathetic quality INFPs do (I certainly don’t, even though I am a very emotional person at times), but I wouldn’t say we’re blind to psychological subtext…I can’t speak for all INTPs, but I’d say I AM paranoid when it comes to that sort of thing. I thought it was BECAUSE of my weaker grasp on feeling that I worried about such things. Ne all alone, with no F judging function to give it guidance, randomly generating millions of possibilities…many of them quite awful…
Hey Steve, Thanks for you comments and question. Yes, it is absolutely normal to use several of the thinking styles in various degrees. However, much like the personality preferences, most people prefer to employ one or two of these styles much more regularly and naturally than the others. -A.J.
I’m an INTP and I feel that I actually utilize each of these thinking processes. Obviously, I’m drawn most heavily to convergent thinking, followed by either analytical or divergent. While I do utilize analytical thinking from time to time, I’d venture to say that I probably use divergent moreso.
What I want to know is if it’s normal to actively use each of these thinking processes, albeit in various degrees? I’m capable of thinking of new possibilities, I’m great at synthesizing information, and I sometimes find myself analyzing particular information to come to better understand some type of problem or area of interest.
I always found fascinating the similarities and differences between INFJs and INFPs. On the INFP forum, several people joined thinking they were INFPs, but with further introspection and analysis determined they were INFJs. So, there were many detailed discussions comparing these two types.
INFJs and INFPs can understand eachother fairly easily, but there is a clear difference. In particular, some male INFJs can come off as extremely intellectual, way more than even an intellectual male INFP such as myself. The intellect of an INFJ is very focused and analytical. Both INFJs and INTJs have what to an INFP appears to be a rather plodding way of thinking.
What you say about INTPs and INFPs makes sense. It is definitely true that many INTPs can understand people and even have a desire to understand people. Afterall, many typolgy forums are dominated by both INFPs and INTPs. But INTPs don’t have the same intensely empathetic quality. The frustration I had with INTPs is that most of them seemed blind to psychological subtext. INFPs, on the other hand, can be paranoid at times when it comes to psychological subtext.
Especially in person, I would agree that introverted judging types are more apt to be perceived as intellectuals or elitists than perceivers. At least to some degree, this may relate to their ability to clearly and accurately articulate their ideas verbally, as well as their memory for details and timelines. In my experience, introverted perceiving types often show less adeptness in this regard and are more likely to throw out probing questions than to recount a detailed intellectual history of a given topic. The NJ mind is often more precise, sequential, and as you say “plodding,” than the random, synthetic, and saltatory minds of NPs.
Ah yes, the INTJ “air of certainty.” I couldn’t agree more. You observations are on par with my own here and your example from your own mind is telling for those unfamiliar with INP psychology.