Hypothesis about Ti vs. Te writing styles

[527468]

Definatly true for me.

I think the difference is: Ti likes to write down how we met our conclusions, what we thought is important and like to try and show how we got to our conclusions. Whilest Te is more concerned with the factual results and how other people will read it.

Maybe...

Then what can be said of speaking styles?

 

[Fluffywolf]

Funny you mention that.

Introvert people seem to have an impaired speaking style compared to extravert people. But I think that's mainly do to the fact that introvert people have trouble with speed of speech, and because Ti tends to wander around, the speech that come out might hamper and wiggle around a bit.

Whilest Te would have a more solid and easy to think structure, capable of bringing that out through speech more directly, profoundly and strongly. Then a Ti would be able to do.

The effect seems that:

Ti
Profound in writing style
Impaired in speech

Te
'Simple' in writing style
Profound in speech


Thoughts?

 

[527468]

Well simple meaning clear for Te. Clear writing, clear speech. I don't always have clear speech, but Te happens to be a safe bet resulting in my explanation.

 

[Fluffywolf]

So yes, I suppose Ti is more chaotic in nature. It isn't guided along structures, but just sort of flows uncontrollably within.

 

[chris1207]

I've been wondering the differences of Te and Ti for the longest time. I just having given much of a crap to researching the difference. I do have a solid grip on Fe vs Fi, so maybe I can make some kind of analogous comparison because they're all J functions. I need to think on this...

As for being a good writer, you don't need T to be one. I'm fantastic at writing. Of course that could be having a dominate extroverted judging function followed by Ni to consider the various points and Se to flesh those points out with examples. I own at analogies btw...

Hopefully you guys can help me figure these two functions out in terms of cognitive theory. I like to think that Fe is like an interconnected web as well, except that it represents social roles and rules rather than logic-based ideas and that certain actions that others do can upset my feelings greatly, in proportion to how much they pull on this web in a certain direction.

 

[527468]

I like to think that Fe is like an interconnected web as well, except that it represents social roles and rules rather than logic-based ideas and that certain actions that others do can upset my feelings greatly, in proportion to how much they pull on this web in a certain direction.

Te is that web, and Ti is exploring that web or wandering off into a potential expansion of that web.

Te is normally about how things aught to logically be. In normal situations, it quickly grasps what is efficient. It is about making sure the elements of static principle are clearly stated and ordered before proceeding into uncharted territory. Ti is much more about connecting or even blending meanings of logic using situational context and further strategizing. If something out of the ordinary happens, Ti will likely be the first to understand the purpose without verbalizing it.

With functions, E and I usually seem to be described as spacial and linear. An extraverted function covers more subject area but tends to overlook potential ideas, and an introverted function travels farther into the direction it seeks, but can miss out on important factors which can be quite essential to building on ideas.

 

[Fluffywolf]

Te is that web, and Ti is exploring that web or wandering off into a potential expansion of that web.

Te is normally about how things aught to logically be. In normal situations, it quickly grasps what is efficient. It is about making sure the elements of static principle are clearly stated and ordered before proceeding into uncharted territory. Ti is much more about connecting or even blending meanings of logic using situational context and further strategizing. If something out of the ordinary happens, Ti will likely be the first to understand the purpose without verbalizing it.

With functions, E and I usually seem to be described as spacial and linear. An extraverted function covers more subject area but tends to overlook potential ideas, and an introverted function travels farther into the direction it seeks, but can miss out on important factors which can be quite essential to building on ideas.

+1

Awesome wording. Was kinda looking for that.

 

[sade]

My ISTJ mother's writing looks and resembles that of a medical describtion. Very clear, no extras.

I have preferance for reading Te style text, and writing it, but producing it takes some editing.

 

[Poki]

Not sure about my style, I jump around so much on the writing that I am constantly rereading and adding things everywhere. My writing is one big edit starting with the first sentence.

 

[Cenomite]

I've never noticed this in myself

 

[phoenity]

Not sure about my style, I jump around so much on the writing that I am constantly rereading and adding things everywhere. My writing is one big edit starting with the first sentence.

I'm the same way.

I hate structured writing. That is, beyond the structure of a single paragraph of related information. I always had difficulty writing papers or essays in the traditional format, because it required me to think in a structured manner, which is unnatural for me. Writing a paper was always one long edit from start to finish. Sometimes I'd start with my conclusion. By the time I was done with my first draft, I was already set on it being my final draft.

I like it best when my thoughts just flow.

Hmm, looking at the above, I guess it's obvious.

 

[ygolo]

So for Ti you're basically saying it's not thought out or planned?

No, it is planned, sort of, except the planning process is in the work, kind-of a "plan-as-you-go." It is more "modular" however than Te structured writing.

If you know anything about proogramming...

Think about Ti writing as OO-style programming in a high-level language--very flexible, but often suffers from bloat of content, and some amount of inefficency. It defines a lot of things, and so inherently keeps things very general and portable, at the expense of brevity and efficiency.

While Te writing is much more like optimized assembly code--tailored to the tasks at hand-- could be an amzingly tight peice of code that runs brilliantly for the environment it was (initially) targeted for. However, portability and flexibility are usually sacrificed.

 

[527468]

I like that explanation, ygolo. Although it kind of reminds me how the image file types are designed. BMP for high quality, yet it takes up a lot of room, and PNG or JPG for an express load.

BMPs are designed for printing and showing off I guess, and PNG/JPGs are designed for quantities of web enhancements.

 

[nanook]

Ti=a monologue. descriptive. thats it, take it or leave it. if it's is little snippets in a forum, it can take dialoge form. and if you think of a series of essays in a scientific newspaper as dialoge then yes its can be seen as dialoge, but its essentially a monologe, missing theory of mind.

it tries to convince by being coherent and eventually even by mentioning some proofs, but it does not bother to integrate into different views that may be held by the reader. it does not try to compare, compete, synthesize. it tries to be an example.

it wants to be seen, but not by some one else's eyes, but tries to force you to see the whole thing through its own eyes. there is an arrogant version that jumps into the room "see here, super hawt new theory" and there is a modest, completely dry version like "some footnotes about boring stuff". both versions are not effective in their advertising.

both versions of presentation don't try to convince by pretending an imaginary, reacting dialoge, but by being what they are. again, descriptive.

this is very similar to Fi arguing about morals, by illustrating an example, rather than explaining, which given ways are coming from where and going to where, thus evaluating the best ways.
both Fi and Ti can be deconstuctive, which might seem a little bit more like a dialoge.

we all know the Ti guy, who studies jura, and tries to deconstruct the whole idea of laws, because he deems them fundamentally unjust or amorally, intruding human dignity or something. but it's monologe like in how he focuses on the system of his expertise, on what it does, rather than how it is embedded into the world, how the world is doing things with the system.
he tends to personify the law, either loves or hates it.
a TiNe guy, in that juvenile deconstructive phase is like a jurist who believes in being "an advocate of the law of anarchy", while an NeTi guy is an "anarchist who believes in the strategical (a)buse of the law of the system". only the Ti-dominant guy is a clear example for how Ti-values try to be an example, that rises over a given standart, that is deemed so low, that Ti hardly wants to pay any attention to it.
in comparsion, a TeNi guy, on that level, will want to get his hands dirty, go into dialoge with the existing system, modify it from the inside out, peace by peace, rather that reinventing it fully.
with NiTe guys or NiFe guys its ambigous, because, while their Te/Fe is the same, it's their dominant Ni that does sort or reinvent the whole system, by purifying the vision.
but the Te/Fe is still throwing it self into dialoge, in the process of applying. it will differentiate the purified vision from the corrupt vision, by dialoge/comparsion.

 

[Costrin]

it tries to be an example. it wants to be seen, but not by some one else's eyes, but tries to force you to see the thing through its own eyes.

Yup. Basically Ti writing tries to get the reader to see from the perspective of the writer. The assumption being that if only you could see what the author saw, then it would all be obvious how it works.

 

[nanook]

oh, one thing:

throwing random stuff/snippets/anecdotes into threads -- everyone does that.
hell, they are throwing with cakes these days. not a good example.
i mean, for the x-version of thinking.

 

[nanook]

it's odd. ti tends to think (value) that a monologe is strenght and a dialoge is weakness. if someone ask for dialoge, ti secretly feels threatened, paranoid, as if dialoge was an evil intrusion and then it acts offended about it. the hilarious thing about this type of paranoia is, that Ti will compulsively enter dialoges that have been requested publicly, just to act offended about them, without realizing, that the request for dialoge has not been directed to this particluar Ti inhabitant. this comes from the Ti's (unconscious) assumption that everyone is Ti, therefore it assumes that any invitation to dialoge can be appraised according to Ti values, meaning that Ti in a Ti-only world IS an intrusion, IS offensive. but it's not a Ti world. in a Te world, dialoge is demanded, and monologes are considered antisocial, monologes are considered as intrusions into the integrity of the web. pitty, that dominant Te will also consider NiTe as antisocial (or weak). in a Te world, dialoge is strenght, and monologe is weak. pretty much explains some issues, right?!

frequently dominant Ti and Te or Fi and Fe will pull at the same string, demanding new rules, more moderation, more order, without realizing, that they are not actually pulling at the same string at all. T values strength, F values boundaries. only after implementing political boundaries and laws and duties into every little aspect of everything, it will become apparent, that agency of I and communion of T are in war and have completely different agendas about why and how everything should be regulated. agency want boundaries and laws that prevent communion from working, communion wants boundaries and laws that prevent agency from working.

 

[Costrin]

it's odd. ti tents to think (value) that a monologe is strenght and a dialoge is weakness.

For clarification, what is your definition of dialogue and monologue?

 

[nanook]

i think the words are used in context. i mean, thus the whole text so far (2 postings) is defining it.

 

[Costrin]

i think the words are used in context. i mean, thus the whole text so far (2 postings) is defining it.

Well honestly, your posts are kinda hard to read, so I wanted to make sure I was interpreting you correctly.