> > I think Brunnen-G was objecting more to the rather, uh, *utilitarian* summary description in "Portrait of an Architect (iNTp)", as given by David Keirsey (the guy who created the test). That disconcerting term he uses for this personality type, "architechtonics", seems even more bizarre given that Keirsey describes himself as INTP!
> >
> > Anyway, from what I gather about the Rational/Architect archetype, the INTP is not exactly a structural-engineer/scientist type of person; but is more someone who is deeply thoughtful with the ability to focus intensely -- to the point of being oblivious to the immediate surroundings. INTPs love languages and wordplay and logical games, in short, complex systems (that includes viewing the "solving" of computer-oriented systems as a form of play). Perhaps *this* description might go down better with the presumed INTPs on the forum...? :-)
>
> I tend to agree with you there, about the profiles on Keirsey's page being quite vague. ("Architechtonics"? Oh-kay.) It's probably because he wanted to sell more copies of his books, and thought it would be easier that way... ;-) TypeLogic's description of the type seemed much clearer to me in comparison.
>
> And yes, your description of the INTP type is fine, thank you. Just curious; was that one of the types you tested as, by any chance?
>
> -- codeman"ya never know..."38

No, that's something the Keirsey never gives me. Both my Dave and I check out as Guardians (ISJ), although half the time I'm also an Artisan Crafter. What's curious is that after I pray, or ponder for a prolonged period about pressing biopsychosocial issues, I then score as a Champion which, insofar as I can see, is the exact opposite of a Guardian. Strange! I suppose this might suggest it's possible to model many different kinds of 'selves', dependant on the situation at hand.

Wolfspirit