I know there’s a lot of theory out there about INTPs and though I may not be 100% INTP I’m damn well close and though each INTP is her/his own and cannot be put in a single category, I do tend to contest with some of the major conclusions made about INTPs. Such as being a pedantic rule-follower who keeps correcting people when they make grammatical mistakes. I don’t think I could be farther from it, since I tend to make up my own words and constantly mix up proverbs. In core alignment to the INTP this just doesn’t make sense either; being stagnant. If we hate absolutes, being ‘grammar Nazis’ (those buggers grate me as much as they amuse me) are the last things we want to be, am I right?!
I believe that language – if anything! – is multifaceted, complex, dynamic and guided by change and context. There are certain guidelines, sure, especially in writing, but even those are gradually adjusted and rearranged. Time and change does that. To everything. It shouldn’t be seen as wrong, but wonderful and human how language can be used. Always viewed and discussed critically, of course, but still, it is just so very fascinating when people spice things up in that way, I find.
Also, I think most INTPs are truthseekers but rather than seeking the truth we believe – like Allen Ginsberg said it: “I don’t think there is any truth. There are only points of view.”
There’s never one answer, but several and everyone is legitimate. That’s why most INTPs also are agnostics since we can neither deny nor confirm the existence of a god, several gods or no god(s) at all. We’re the curious in-betweeners, so to speak, who like to question rather than answer.