usaully quite good. its all relative though. ya, i doubt an ESTJ or ISTP is going to come up with some ground breaking theory, but i do know a fair number of ISTP or ESTJs who are engineering majors in higher level maths....
though i agree that there is a "math intuition". Im good at math when someone gives me rules of how to always approach a type of problem...im horrendous at looking at a random problem and following my "math gut".
You're probably right. I'm actually a mathematics major with a focus on Statistics. I love statistics. It seems practical to me. Theory based courses are a bit more of a struggle to me. I love to problem-solve in general, so once I can grasp the steps of solving an equation, I'm excellent at it. Again... theories... blegh. -Definitely- not coming up with a ground breaking theory any time soon :P
Math is a tool to be used by Te. Te wants to go from A to B.
Math is a system to be understood by Ti. Ti wants to know all the ways to reach B from A.
I don't think that Te just uses math as a tool and Ti just understands the system. They both understand the system quite equally. I do notice that Ti is better at using shortcuts by identifying similarities within the system, and Te is better at understanding why certain functions are used.
Originally Posted by zago
Te may be good at following steps, but probably not coming up with new theories.
Can't say I agree with that.
Both can bring novel aspects to math, since Te can adopt its understanding of functions and apply it to other forms of math, and Ti can improve upon an existing system by making simplifications. It's Ne that actually comes up with a new theory, not Ti.