The Strategist (Introverted Intuition + Thinking)


The Strategist’s mind combines intuition and logic for the strategic purposes of calculating the risks and resulting preferred strategies in approaching life, the future, and the unconscious. They tend to appear detached from the physical world, despite their practical thinking. Their areas of expertise typically surround the sciences, philosophy, psychology, mathematics, robotics, chess, and occasionally the arts (such as filmmaking or fiction).

The Strategist’s view on the world covers both a far and small reach. The focus is on calculating and intuitively assessing risks and future developments based on trend and pattern cognition from past events, so that past mistakes won’t be committed again. These future (risks) calculations start within their own personal life, but may extend to politics and more worldly affairs. Typically, the Strategist’s predictions in the realm of sciences and politics are quite accurate (though they may fall short in the field of human interactions, where the Psychoanalyst is more skilled.) Despite this foresight, the Strategist is somewhat cut off from the tangible, physical world around them. They lack physical presence and the understanding of how to pressurize their opponents effectively. To do so, they primarily rely on logical extrapolations, factual evidence and intuitive insights. Such insights may concern the nature of humankind, or more abstractly and objectively the nature of the world at large. Many Strategists support these insights with mathematical calculations, data collection, and/or philosophize over what they have “seen“ to be true.

The Strategist is concerned with following a life of minimized risks, downfalls, personal ruin, and avoidable harm. Their practical logic and business acumen usually aids them in avoiding life-altering mistakes. Typically, every action of theirs is well-calculated and predetermined by logic. This results in either quite a structured, diligent, productive approach, or in contrast a life fraught with physical inactivity. The Strategist has the tendency to delay carrying out an action or employing force, even though they require and would welcome it. It usually takes them more time than for the average person to mobilize their forces and strength. This usually shows up in their personal life as a great hesitance to create certain kinds of relationships, both platonic and/or romantic.

The Strategist may go through periods in their life where they try to look after their health, physical appearance, or delight in physical sensations, but often times these periods are quite short-lived, lack in proficiency and deeper personal interest.

Even though the Strategist is commonly quite interested in social and political dynamics, they often appear to be surprisingly cold, detached, and visibly unemotional in interactions with other people. Their faces are rarely or awkwardly animated, “stone-faced”, and they may feel pressured or bothered by social conventions of showing and employing emotional affect, in order to steer people – that is not their strong suit.

This weakness in outward emotionality can be contrasted by a deep inner vault of personal sentiments. The Strategist’s intuitive insights and inner feelings may result in impressive works of art, which are often carried out with the help of advanced technology or dealing with science-fiction themes. In this area, the Strategist may resemble the Aesthete.

The Ego of the Strategist:

  1. Introverted Intuition
  2. Extroverted Thinking

The Super-Id: Introverted Feeling, Extroverted Sensing

The weakest: Extroverted FeelingExtroverted Sensing

The strongest: Introverted Intuition, Introverted Thinking

Correlations: INTJ (MBTI), ILI (Socionics)

There are 3 specific subtype variations of the Strategist.

Those variations can be grouped into Ni (Introverted Intuition) subtype and Te (Extroverted Thinking) subtype.

Ni subtype Strategists share one or several of those traits:
Stereotypically introverted; more inwardly emotional; more artistic; more philosophical; less physical/”embodied”.

Te subtype Strategists share one or several of those traits:
”Ambiverted” (can be mistaken for an extrovert); more practically-minded; more business acumen; more active; more scientific/mathematical.

A Strategist who falls into both categories more or less is mostly likely the No subtype kind.

Besides the above, other variations are:
More principled and perfectionistic (Type 1); more detached and niche (Type 5); more vigilant (Type 6).

Most compatible: (Coming soon), The Strategist, The Aesthete, The Entrepreneur

Least compatible: (Coming soon)

Note: Of course there are strategists who possess a different personality type, so please do not assume that all strategists in the world fit this personality type! I call the Introverted Intuition + Thinking personality type “The Strategist” not only because they are usually strategical, but also because this personality structure personifies the archetype the best. The best strategists in the world will have this personality type.

Last Update: 27-08-2020


  1. Why would the author of this page confuse people with new definitions of Socionics types, like Strategist and Psychoanalyst, etc., when the creator of the Socionics, Aušra Augustinavičiūtė already have given names for the types and described them in her books. (For example “strategist” described here is “Balzak”) This TVT typology with just new names to the types is just a soft copy of the Socionics typing system and may be seen as plagiarism. Since I am myself INTP/Balzak type, this is just unprofessional to me, that someone like “personality coach” would plagiarize another system and give it it’s own name.


    • People who are well-versed with Socionics have accused me of “mixing” the systems in a way that is not acceptable, hence I should coin the “mix” of both a new system. “Typevolution Taxonomy” was not even my own name creation, someone else suggested it to me, and I ran with it.

      In MBTI circles and even in Socionics circles, it is common practice to give one type several different names. For example, Reinin calls IEI “Tutankhamun” in his own book.

      My articles feature Socionics and Carl Jung related links, so I don’t see how it classifies as plagiarism in the strictest sense. But I can see why one could see it as such.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s