Ok, so what are the differences in Ti and Te approach to maths?
I wonder if Te is all about equations, and playing with those stupid symbols, and getting closer and closer to figuring out what x equals on the paper an so on.. while Ti is about understanding the principle, and is better at finding solutions to complicated math problems.
You know, I'm somehow good at math, but I can't stand those long equations and symbols, following through this complicated mess step by step, and writing it down. While I can do really well with creative problems, when it's not about rote, prolonged counting of Xs and Ys, but about finding a good and hefty solution, sticking to it, and solving problem instantaneously. What I need to put down is maybe one sketch and two numbers I work with. And yeah, I'm heavy Ti but crappy Te.
Now how do you see the differences between Ti and Te and math? Or maybe other functions vs. math? Go on
User Tag List
Thread: Maths and Ti vs. Te

04112009, 03:20 AM #1
Maths and Ti vs. Te

04112009, 07:01 AM #2
I tried to raise this same question a while back:
http://www.typologycentral.com/forum...itemath.html
I was still sorting the differences between them, and responses seemed to be mixed.
Now, I have reached the conclusion (which i had already suspected) that the handling of numbers aspect of math is Te, and understanding the principles is Ti. T
Ti deals in both subjective principles, as well as universals, and understanding how numbers work is universal.
Te deals in agreed upon concentions, so employing the decimal system, square roots, and all the other stuff you would see on a page of formulas, and then following the agreed upon rules of how to compute the numbers, is Te.
1 + 1 = 2 is universal, is you mean taking one item, adding another, and then you have two. The way this is written, is not universal, but is an agreed upon convention. It can be changed, by using binary, for instance, in which it becomes 1 + 1 = 10. Realizing that certain numbers of of objectys can be evenly divided into smaller groups, while other humbers can't is also universal, however we may express this.APS Profile: Inclusion: e/w=1/6 (Supine) Control: e/w=7/3 (Choleric) Affection: e/w=1/9 (Supine)
Ti 54.3  Ne 47.3  Si 37.8  Fe 17.7  Te 22.5  Ni 13.4  Se 18.9  Fi 27.9
Temperament (APS) from scratch  MBTI Type from scratch
Type Ideas

04112009, 07:33 AM #3
I'll speculate that Ti is not the function that helps most with math in INTPs. Te may be good at following steps, but probably not coming up with new theories. I think Ne and Ni are the functions that make math skills possible. They simply give an intuitive, unexplainable "knowing" of how math problems work and enable us to pick them up quickly. If Ti and Te are the functions responsible for math functioning, then my question is how are ISTPs and ESTJs at math?

04112009, 08:13 AM #4
Even though I'm an ISTJ, I got upset with my teacher for not explaining the reasoning behind new concepts. I wanted to know why they worked the way they did. It was the best way for me to integrate it into my own knowledge. I know as an ISTJ, I can learn things just by memorizing the steps, but most of the time I hate that. It doesn't give me an intuitive understanding of the concept.
I know I'm very S, but I've ran into enough problems in the past that have shown me that I need an internal system for looking at multiple things rather than learning specific ways to do certain things. I have to be able to adapt to new situations, and learning specific skills doesn't do much with that. If you understand why a concept works, and how it works, then you can apply it to different variations of the problems that it pertains to rather than memorizing each variation of the problem.
rainybisto liked this post

04112009, 09:20 AM #5
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".

04112009, 09:40 AM #6

04112009, 04:29 PM #7
I think the main difference is that Te will accurately go through each step of an equation to reach a goal, while Ti makes jumps and will 'see' the inner workings of an equation.
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.
J types will need to become familiar with material so that their Pi can show the connections that Je can work with.
P types need to know what they are aloud to do so that Ji knows what boundaries of Pe to work within.
I like to think of it as Pi gives connections and Je decides which are relevent. Pe gives all the dots and Ji makes the connections.
S v N and F v T are somewhat irrelevant when it comes to this. The only difference is that N would have the advantage in learning abstract principles and creating new theories, and T would have more motivation to learn the cold facts of math.ENTJ LIE
3w4 sp/sx
3w4(4w5)5w6(6w7)9w8(1w9)

04112009, 05:10 PM #8
I've actually got a fairly big research project going, filming 6th graders to see how they approach the same math tasks. Biggest differences are on S and N. Biggest outbreaks of math anxiety are F's. Duh. Gladwell's Outliers has a whole chapter on math of which the upshot is in countries where math scores are higher, the prevailing view is that you get good at math by working hard. In the US and elsewhere the view is you either are or aren't good at mathand then we teach in ways that only reach half the students and say, "Oh well they just can't get it..."
Both S and N have gifts to bring to math but we hose them if we don't give them time to learn in their own styles. Both need to know whythe big ideas. Neither benefit from being taught rote procedures, but many of the S's will practice whereas the N's check out.
S's can do brilliant new math ideas, but often it's for a direct, practical purpose as opposed to just messing around with ideas.
When I get the study summarized I'll post a link to it.edcoaching

04112009, 06:14 PM #9
My father is ISTJ, and he was somewhat mathematically inclined. He seemed good at remembering and applying formulas (he was both an artist and an architect), while I came to get into the more abstract stuff, such as noticing the numerical principles and patterns of polygons, (like this: File:Regular Star Polygons.jpg  Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia) which he showed no interest in.
APS Profile: Inclusion: e/w=1/6 (Supine) Control: e/w=7/3 (Choleric) Affection: e/w=1/9 (Supine)
Ti 54.3  Ne 47.3  Si 37.8  Fe 17.7  Te 22.5  Ni 13.4  Se 18.9  Fi 27.9
Temperament (APS) from scratch  MBTI Type from scratch
Type Ideas

04112009, 06:24 PM #10GlycerineGuest
Even as a INFJ, I am fairly good at math. I make connections and look for patterns with my Ni and critically analyze to see if those patterns and new interpretations of those problems fit within the framework using my Ti.
Similar Threads

The Euthyphro  Ti vs. Te?
By Athenian200 in forum MyersBriggs and Jungian Cognitive FunctionsReplies: 0Last Post: 03082011, 08:19 PM 
Ti vs Te consistency
By Cimarron in forum MyersBriggs and Jungian Cognitive FunctionsReplies: 13Last Post: 05112009, 03:53 PM 
Hypothesis about Ti vs. Te writing styles
By ygolo in forum MyersBriggs and Jungian Cognitive FunctionsReplies: 49Last Post: 04232009, 10:42 PM 
Ti vs. Te <split>
By The_Liquid_Laser in forum MyersBriggs and Jungian Cognitive FunctionsReplies: 144Last Post: 08032008, 07:19 AM 
Ti vs. Te, do they trust each other?
By heart in forum MyersBriggs and Jungian Cognitive FunctionsReplies: 33Last Post: 02032008, 10:57 AM